Auburn's Under Armour Apparel Deal

[metafour 4,969]

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Viewership and attendance are nice, but the problem is that Auburn is a regional brand for the most part which is going to cap any apparel deal. You can go into nearly any Foot Locker in Canada and you're going to find Notre Dame shirts on sale....that is the difference, and that is why their deal is so much bigger. I'd be willing to bet that AU merchandise sales outside of the South/Southeast is minimal at best. A brand like ND is national.

[cooltigger21 0]

Here are the 2013-2014 rankings for merchandise sales. Texas is 1st. Auburn is 11. http://www.clc.com/N...gs-2013-14.aspx

[RunInRed 16,409]

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Viewership and attendance are nice, but the problem is that Auburn is a regional brand for the most part which is going to cap any apparel deal. You can go into nearly any Foot Locker in Canada and you're going to find Notre Dame shirts on sale....that is the difference, and that is why their deal is so much bigger. I'd be willing to bet that AU merchandise sales outside of the South/Southeast is minimal at best. A brand like ND is national.

Fair point. I'm just hoping AU can use this precedent as leverage going forward ...

Also worth noting, if we continue making big post-season football appearances, and Bruce Pearl gets things going, our 'national' brand could be on the upswing.

[cooltigger21 0]

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Viewership and attendance are nice, but the problem is that Auburn is a regional brand for the most part which is going to cap any apparel deal. You can go into nearly any Foot Locker in Canada and you're going to find Notre Dame shirts on sale....that is the difference, and that is why their deal is so much bigger. I'd be willing to bet that AU merchandise sales outside of the South/Southeast is minimal at best. A brand like ND is national.

Fair point. I'm just hoping AU can use this precedent as leverage going forward ...

Also worth noting, if we continue making big post-season football appearances, and Bruce Pearl gets things going, our 'national' brand could be on the upswing.

Auburn jumped 7 spots from the previous year so if they keep up the consistent success I believe that will happen.

[augolf1716 21,157]

My eyes are old but I did not see Ky. in the top 75??????? BB alone should make them top 15. UNC at #10 is BB

Also poor Miss. St not in top 75

[WEagle24 56]

Here are the 2013-2014 rankings for merchandise sales. Texas is 1st. Auburn is 11. http://www.clc.com/N...gs-2013-14.aspx

Are you sure that's accurate?

Hard to believe that Ohio state isn't in the top 75

[cooltigger21 0]

Here are the 2013-2014 rankings for merchandise sales. Texas is 1st. Auburn is 11. http://www.clc.com/N...gs-2013-14.aspx

Are you sure that's accurate?

Hard to believe that Ohio state isn't in the top 75

From what I read it is the rankings of all universities they represent. Evidently they don't represent UK or Ohio State. I too would think they would be in there. I kept looking for any other source but found none. In the report for the previous year UK was listed 5th. I don't know what the deal is.

[WarEagle84 0]

My eyes are old but I did not see Ky. in the top 75??????? BB alone should make them top 15. UNC at #10 is BB

Also poor Miss. St not in top 75

Are you sure that's accurate?

Hard to believe that Ohio state isn't in the top 75

I had the same thoughts about Kentucky and Duke. According to the link, this list is from "The Collegiate Licensing Company (CLC), the licensing affiliate of IMG College." I'm guessing those other schools are not represented by CLC/IMG.

[JDUBB4AU 5,121]

We need to go starter or champion. So we can afford apparel . haha. UA better pony up or Nike here we come

[autiger88 3,777]

UA IS NOT BEHIND NIKE SORRY NIKE IS FALLING BEHIND UA and plus UA is all American unlike Nike that's why it cost more but I'm willing to pay it plus UA is a big sponser for Wounded warrior project for the US military I hope we never go for nike and stick with UA for good! They are getting better in a lot of areas and it's worth it!

[CR 2,442]

Seems like it would at worst make no difference football wise and really make things easier for the basketball program to go with Nike. Basketball recruiting is better than I can ever remember but lets not kid ourselves, AU is getting a once in a lifetime chance to have a coach who would never come here under ordinary circumstances. He leaves and basketball recruiting returns to normal. I would never want to hurt football in any way, but I dont think that would happen here, and the basketball program would really benefit. If Nike would come even close to matching UA financially I hope the athletics folks will listen when the contract comes up next time.

[WEagle24 56]

UA IS NOT BEHIND NIKE SORRY NIKE IS FALLING BEHIND UA and plus UA is all American unlike Nike that's why it cost more but I'm willing to pay it plus UA is a big sponser for Wounded warrior project for the US military I hope we never go for nike and stick with UA for good! They are getting better in a lot of areas and it's worth it!

UA is starting to get bigger but Nike is clearly head and shoulders above everyone else.

edit: Btw UA manufactures their items from all over the world. Not everything is made here.

[IronMan70 3,277]

As much as we like to think it is so, Auburn does not have the national following that ND has. They have a fan base that far exceeds any other school.

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Total Viewers:

1. 80.1 mm- Alabama

2. 78.2 mm- Auburn

3. 77.1 mm- Ohio State

4. 72.3 mm- Florida State

5. 60.8 mm- Texas A&M

Average Viewers per game:

1. 7.4 mm- Alabama

2. 7.1 mm- Auburn

3. 6.4 mm- Ohio State

4. 6.1 mm- Michigan

5. 5.7 mm- Michigan State

http://mgoblog.com/d...ollege-football

http://www.sportsmed...l-tv-ratings/2/

Live Attendance:

1. 1,204,185- Auburn

2. 1,191,436- Ohio State

3. 1,174,360- Michigan

4. 1,156,256- Alabama

5. 1,096,097- Nebraska

http://blogs.ajc.com...l-team-in-2013/

well if they can get it more power to them. That is only one year. Also we have some 20,000 more seats than ND in our stadium. What are the merchandise figures? That is a big part of what they look at. If Auburn continues their success then UA will be glad to up the ante. Could Auburn command a solo deal from a network or send 30,000 fans across the ocean to watch a game?

You can take that view and discount it.. I prefer to take the glass half full view that Auburn has the momentum going in their direction, the wind at their back and "putting" themselves "in a good negotiating position" (with Under Armour). Most people aren't even aware of the stats I posted.

[atlauburngirl 0]

_{If you look at that list, not only are Ohio State and Kentucky not on it, neither is USC. In the past couple of years, there have been several companies that are competing against the CLC to represent colleges. Even Jerry Jones has gotten into the business - I know that his group represents USC and that they were going after Ohio State. So not sure if there woudl be a way to compare all schools. As part of my job, I have had to get approvals from different schools for promotional materials with their logos, and I can tell you that the hardest schools to work with are Ohio State, Notre Dame, Duke and USC.}

[aubfaninga 16]

The new line of UA football cleats are as good or better than anything Nike has out right now. Those of you complaining about their "terrible cleats" are literally years behind. Their basketball shoes still need work, but the football equipment is a complete non-issue.

I have no idea about their basketball shoes but I have switched from Nike to UA in my everyday casual footwear. Comfort and appearance are not noticeable but the UA shoes that I have bought seem to last and keep far longer than any Nike that I have ever owned. (On a side note, If comfort is what your after try Saucony. Mine feel like walking on air) I prefer UA athletic clothing (shirts,thermals,shorts,etc...) over anything on the market. Comfortable, fits well, and very durable. My Auburn jerseys that were sold by Nike could not stand to be in the same room with a washer and dryer. My oldest UA jersey could be put back on the rack and sold in the store right now. Like metafour said, football equipment is mute. (Example: We wear Schutt helmets) So we have cleats left. If you do anything that might require you to wear cleats, like pick up football games, and you are on the "heavy" side I highly recommend trying UA's "Spine Brawler". I am 285 lbs right now and have always had ankle problems. This cleat supports my ankles like a cast but I feel like I am wearing a sock. When I played D-line in school I lived by Nike's landshark cleats and have stuck with them until this year. I bought a pair of spine brawlers this year and I will never turn back. Back to basketball... I wish someone could do a blind study on basketball shoes. Nike is the preferred choice but they have cornered the market. There is 1000 different Jordans to go along with the other platforms, plus all the endorsed names that come with them. Like cleats, this may be more about the popular and norm rather than quality. Maybe someone that plays basketball could chime in. I would have never bought UA cleats if Dicks had my normal preference Nike on the day I went in. Now I am hooked.

[Rednilla 5,391]

Seems like it would at worst make no difference football wise and really make things easier for the basketball program to go with Nike. Basketball recruiting is better than I can ever remember but lets not kid ourselves, AU is getting a once in a lifetime chance to have a coach who would never come here under ordinary circumstances. He leaves and basketball recruiting returns to normal. I would never want to hurt football in any way, but I dont think that would happen here, and the basketball program would really benefit. If Nike would come even close to matching UA financially I hope the athletics folks will listen when the contract comes up next time.

I doubt it. Pearl is the first head basketball coach we've hired since opening Auburn Arena, which, combined with the Wellness Center and other such facilities, makes Auburn a major draw for big time coaches. Bringing in Pearl was undoubtedly a HUGE deal, but provided he builds the program even close to as well as expected (and that the PTB continue to make basketball a priority), then Auburn is going to be a plum job for bigger coaches.

As for Notre Dame, they do indeed have a national brand...but Auburn isn't exactly regional. Sure, we have a much higher concentration of fans in the southeast than elsewhere, but don't forget the number of Auburn graduates who have left the area after college to get away from Alabama, and the fact that we've won the best conference in the country more times over the last decade (including two undefeated seasons and another year with a national title appearance) means that not only are we a trendy pick, even just as a second team for those who detest Alabama (and I've got multiple friends in California who have become fans for that very reason), but we're on the upswing.

I'd say we probably wait a year or two and let Malzahn and Pearl show the country more of what "Auburn Fast" really means, then renegotiate. The reason UA would do so is that they are going to want to keep us happy so that we don't go elsewhere after 2017, because we are still going to be the team making the biggest headlines, at least in football (Maryland might grab headlines in basketball, but it'll likely be close), and the product recognition in and of itself from having the logo on the uniforms in bigger games makes a huge difference.

Now, we may not have the clout to pull the same kind of deal as Notre Dame (there's a reason they have been able to remain dissociated with any football conference for so long), but rest assured that the difference will be made up to a great extent.

[aubfaninga 16]

One more thing about a big money contract that has not been brought up. UA pays big money for exposure. The best way to get exposure is be seen and even better, TALKED ABOUT. I am sure before any ink was put to paper UA made sure they got to throw in some "eye candy" alternate uniforms during big marquee matchups like FSU. Is Auburn willing to let UA dress us out for a few games during a contract??????????????

[cooltigger21 0]

As much as we like to think it is so, Auburn does not have the national following that ND has. They have a fan base that far exceeds any other school.

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Total Viewers:

1. 80.1 mm- Alabama

2. 78.2 mm- Auburn

3. 77.1 mm- Ohio State

4. 72.3 mm- Florida State

5. 60.8 mm- Texas A&M

Average Viewers per game:

1. 7.4 mm- Alabama

2. 7.1 mm- Auburn

3. 6.4 mm- Ohio State

4. 6.1 mm- Michigan

5. 5.7 mm- Michigan State

http://mgoblog.com/d...ollege-football

http://www.sportsmed...l-tv-ratings/2/

Live Attendance:

1. 1,204,185- Auburn

2. 1,191,436- Ohio State

3. 1,174,360- Michigan

4. 1,156,256- Alabama

5. 1,096,097- Nebraska

http://blogs.ajc.com...l-team-in-2013/

well if they can get it more power to them. That is only one year. Also we have some 20,000 more seats than ND in our stadium. What are the merchandise figures? That is a big part of what they look at. If Auburn continues their success then UA will be glad to up the ante. Could Auburn command a solo deal from a network or send 30,000 fans across the ocean to watch a game?

You can take that view and discount it.. I prefer to take the glass half full view that Auburn has the momentum going in their direction, the wind at their back and "putting" themselves "in a good negotiating position" (with Under Armour). Most people aren't even aware of the stats I posted.

Oh I fully understand that. I do believe we are a program with massive potential. All I'm saying is we are not there yet and we're not in a position to demand that the contract be redone. In due time it will all work out.

[Rednilla 5,391]

One more thing about a big money contract that has not been brought up. UA pays big money for exposure. The best way to get exposure is be seen and even better, TALKED ABOUT. I am sure before any ink was put to paper UA made sure they got to throw in some "eye candy" alternate uniforms during big marquee matchups like FSU. Is Auburn willing to let UA dress us out for a few games during a contract??????????????

Don't expect it, especially not for a big game (unless it's a regular season non-conference matchup at a neutral site type of deal)...but don't expect to see much of it at Notre Dame, either.

[WarTiger 3,901]

Seems like it would at worst make no difference football wise and really make things easier for the basketball program to go with Nike. Basketball recruiting is better than I can ever remember but lets not kid ourselves, AU is getting a once in a lifetime chance to have a coach who would never come here under ordinary circumstances. He leaves and basketball recruiting returns to normal. I would never want to hurt football in any way, but I dont think that would happen here, and the basketball program would really benefit. If Nike would come even close to matching UA financially I hope the athletics folks will listen when the contract comes up next time.

I doubt it. Pearl is the first head basketball coach we've hired since opening Auburn Arena, which, combined with the Wellness Center and other such facilities, makes Auburn a major draw for big time coaches. Bringing in Pearl was undoubtedly a HUGE deal, but provided he builds the program even close to as well as expected (and that the PTB continue to make basketball a priority), then Auburn is going to be a plum job for bigger coaches.

As for Notre Dame, they do indeed have a national brand...but Auburn isn't exactly regional. Sure, we have a much higher concentration of fans in the southeast than elsewhere, but don't forget the number of Auburn graduates who have left the area after college to get away from Alabama, and the fact that we've won the best conference in the country more times over the last decade (including two undefeated seasons and another year with a national title appearance) means that not only are we a trendy pick, even just as a second team for those who detest Alabama (and I've got multiple friends in California who have become fans for that very reason), but we're on the upswing.

I'd say we probably wait a year or two and let Malzahn and Pearl show the country more of what "Auburn Fast" really means, then renegotiate. The reason UA would do so is that they are going to want to keep us happy so that we don't go elsewhere after 2017, because we are still going to be the team making the biggest headlines, at least in football (Maryland might grab headlines in basketball, but it'll likely be close), and the product recognition in and of itself from having the logo on the uniforms in bigger games makes a huge difference.

Now, we may not have the clout to pull the same kind of deal as Notre Dame (there's a reason they have been able to remain dissociated with any football conference for so long), but rest assured that the difference will be made up to a great extent.

Technically Tony Barbee was hired the year we opened the arena. Barbee never coached a game in the ole Beard-Eaves arena.

[Rednilla 5,391]

Technically Tony Barbee was hired the year we opened the arena. Barbee never coached a game in the ole Beard-Eaves arena.

I stand corrected...I could have sworn he was there for a year before it happened.

Nevertheless, I think the point stands, because provided Pearl doesn't fall flat on his face (which I consider highly unlikely), it will still make an impact.

[IronMan70 3,277]

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Viewership and attendance are nice, but the problem is that Auburn is a regional brand for the most part which is going to cap any apparel deal. You can go into nearly any Foot Locker in Canada and you're going to find Notre Dame shirts on sale....that is the difference, and that is why their deal is so much bigger. I'd be willing to bet that AU merchandise sales outside of the South/Southeast is minimal at best. A brand like ND is national.

My points had nothing to do with Notre Dame or their own deal with UA. It had to do with Auburn and how they are leveraging their own position.

UA deals are predominately based on the exposure a team brings to their brand. That entails much more than the merchandise sales of any one school. National viewership is very high on the list of considerations with this just as it is when they decide where they will spend their advertising dollars.

[IronMan70 3,277]

As much as we like to think it is so, Auburn does not have the national following that ND has. They have a fan base that far exceeds any other school.

Except for this:

Auburn was #2 in total viewers, #2 in average viewers per game and #1 in live attendance for the 2013 season. I would say we are putting ourselves in a good negotiating position.

Total Viewers:

1. 80.1 mm- Alabama

2. 78.2 mm- Auburn

3. 77.1 mm- Ohio State

4. 72.3 mm- Florida State

5. 60.8 mm- Texas A&M

Average Viewers per game:

1. 7.4 mm- Alabama

2. 7.1 mm- Auburn

3. 6.4 mm- Ohio State

4. 6.1 mm- Michigan

5. 5.7 mm- Michigan State

http://mgoblog.com/d...ollege-football

http://www.sportsmed...l-tv-ratings/2/

Live Attendance:

1. 1,204,185- Auburn

2. 1,191,436- Ohio State

3. 1,174,360- Michigan

4. 1,156,256- Alabama

5. 1,096,097- Nebraska

http://blogs.ajc.com...l-team-in-2013/

well if they can get it more power to them. That is only one year. Also we have some 20,000 more seats than ND in our stadium. What are the merchandise figures? That is a big part of what they look at. If Auburn continues their success then UA will be glad to up the ante. Could Auburn command a solo deal from a network or send 30,000 fans across the ocean to watch a game?

You can take that view and discount it. I prefer to take the glass half full view that Auburn has the momentum going in their direction, the wind at their back and "putting" themselves "in a good negotiating position" (with Under Armour). Most people aren't even aware of the stats I posted.

Oh I fully understand that. I do believe we are a program with massive potential. All I'm saying is we are not there yet and we're not in a position to demand that the contract be redone. In due time it will all work out.

I agree.

[aubfaninga 16]

One more thing about a big money contract that has not been brought up. UA pays big money for exposure. The best way to get exposure is be seen and even better, TALKED ABOUT. I am sure before any ink was put to paper UA made sure they got to throw in some "eye candy" alternate uniforms during big marquee matchups like FSU. Is Auburn willing to let UA dress us out for a few games during a contract??????????????

Don't expect it, especially not for a big game (unless it's a regular season non-conference matchup at a neutral site type of deal)...but don't expect to see much of it at Notre Dame, either.

Notre Dame let Addidas have their day in the clovers in 2013... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W09j2RcBkQ They are letting UA have their day as well this year....

[Taiyushka 0]

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but has anyone noticed that nearly every team sponsored by Nike has semi-see through jerseys? I don't know when this started, but I've noticed it with UAT, UGA, Arkansas, and a few others. You can easily see through the jerseys, exposing the pads and sometimes even the brand names on the pads. I really don't like it. Auburn and other teams with Under Armour don't seem to have this problem. An insignificant matter, but one I've been noticing.