Jump to content

any chance we leave Under Armour?


KerryThachWDE

Recommended Posts





I could be wrong but I expect Tim Cook has his hands full trying to keep Apple ahead of his competition . I can't see him out there trying to convert athletic teams to Nike apparel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a coaching/player perspective: Nike makes superior footwear, Under Armour makes superior apparel. The UA gear is great but cleats have been lacking up until the Cam cleat and the Apollo cleats came out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bust out the BK's

So I should disregard the rumor that the basketball team will be playing in Chucks this season instead of UA shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bust out the BK's

So I should disregard the rumor that the basketball team will be playing in Chucks this season instead of UA shoes.

Hear we're hopping to Kangaroo gear/shoes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with those that have said Nike has better footwear, and UA has better everything else. And UA is getting better at footwear.

I really like UA stuff and I don't want AU to change (especially since we have a lengthy contract with them)

Also, we are one of UA's flagship programs. They are putting a lot of $ into AU.

Why in the world would AU even consider leaving UA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UA is growing fast. The reason Nike is moving Tim into the position they are is because their sales are starting to tank. UA will over take them before long because they make superior stuff. WDE

I don't see Under Armor overtaking Nike. And I don't care what company AU chooses to use as long as they make tons and tons of money on the contract.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with those that have said Nike has better footwear, and UA has better everything else. And UA is getting better at footwear.

I really like UA stuff and I don't want AU to change (especially since we have a lengthy contract with them)

Also, we are one of UA's flagship programs. They are putting a lot of $ into AU.

Why in the world would AU even consider leaving UA?

We wouldn't, at least for the foreseeable future.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UA is growing fast. The reason Nike is moving Tim into the position they are is because their sales are starting to tank. UA will over take them before long because they make superior stuff. WDE

I don't see Under Armor overtaking Nike. And I don't care what company AU chooses to use as long as they make tons and tons of money on the contract.

This
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason AU people have ever been down on Under Armor is because of basketball recruiting. Now that that's fixed, I see no reasonable argument for leaving the brand.

Kudos to Jay on this one...he found a way around our "purported" UA / basketball problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would we want to do a silly thing like that? Under Armour is the brand of the future, hence the kids clamoring to wear it. My 11 year old son loves the brand as does all his friends. I think their quality is second to none. You get what you pay for and with Under Armour you get the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Tim Cook was over Apple not Nike.

He's the CEO of Apple, but sits on the Board at Nike. Common for many CEOs to sit on other company boards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with those that have said Nike has better footwear, and UA has better everything else. And UA is getting better at footwear.

I really like UA stuff and I don't want AU to change (especially since we have a lengthy contract with them)

Also, we are one of UA's flagship programs. They are putting a lot of $ into AU.

Why in the world would AU even consider leaving UA?

Maybe because they just gave UCLA a deal that makes our deal look like a chicken nugget happy meal in a nice steak restaurant. Not to mention that we are not even in the same stratosphere as some of the other contracts out there that have been signed recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with those that have said Nike has better footwear, and UA has better everything else. And UA is getting better at footwear.

I really like UA stuff and I don't want AU to change (especially since we have a lengthy contract with them)

Also, we are one of UA's flagship programs. They are putting a lot of $ into AU.

Why in the world would AU even consider leaving UA?

Maybe because they just gave UCLA a deal that makes our deal look like a chicken nugget happy meal in a nice steak restaurant. Not to mention that we are not even in the same stratosphere as some of the other contracts out there that have been signed recently.

No lie there. Gear for Sports (UA's parent company) is located in my city. It's very obvious, looking at their product when they run seconds sales and the like, that they used Auburn to get a foothold and then kicked us back to second class when they were able to land some of the more universally marketable names. I guess that's business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with those that have said Nike has better footwear, and UA has better everything else. And UA is getting better at footwear.

I really like UA stuff and I don't want AU to change (especially since we have a lengthy contract with them)

Also, we are one of UA's flagship programs. They are putting a lot of $ into AU.

Why in the world would AU even consider leaving UA?

Maybe because they just gave UCLA a deal that makes our deal look like a chicken nugget happy meal in a nice steak restaurant. Not to mention that we are not even in the same stratosphere as some of the other contracts out there that have been signed recently.

No lie there. Gear for Sports (UA's parent company) is located in my city. It's very obvious, looking at their product when they run seconds sales and the like, that they used Auburn to get a foothold and then kicked us back to second class when they were able to land some of the more universally marketable names. I guess that's business.

Yep it is business...which is what we probably told Russell after working with them forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with those that have said Nike has better footwear, and UA has better everything else. And UA is getting better at footwear.

I really like UA stuff and I don't want AU to change (especially since we have a lengthy contract with them)

Also, we are one of UA's flagship programs. They are putting a lot of $ into AU.

Why in the world would AU even consider leaving UA?

Maybe because they just gave UCLA a deal that makes our deal look like a chicken nugget happy meal in a nice steak restaurant. Not to mention that we are not even in the same stratosphere as some of the other contracts out there that have been signed recently.

No lie there. Gear for Sports (UA's parent company) is located in my city. It's very obvious, looking at their product when they run seconds sales and the like, that they used Auburn to get a foothold and then kicked us back to second class when they were able to land some of the more universally marketable names. I guess that's business.

Yep it is business...which is what we probably told Russell after working with them forever.

Good point, can work both ways.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...