Jump to content

Let the Apparel Negotiations Begin

toddc

By toddc
in AU Football Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts





  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Nedson4
Nedson4

At least we would be able to recruit my father-in-law. 18-year-olds maybe not so much.

aubiefifty
aubiefifty

i miss the dang ol 100 percent cotton shirts that do not look like they have been spray painted on you.

AuCivilEng1
AuCivilEng1

Bring em back! Terry Bowden style! 

Posted Images

toddc Founding Father

toddc 13,194

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Cohen doing ‘due diligence’ on Under Armour deal

LAGRANGE | Auburn could be in the market for a new apparel deal in less than four months.

The exclusive negotiating window with Under Armour is set to expire Sept. 1, which would allow Auburn to seek a new partner for the first time since 2006.

“We're going to enter a stage on Sept. 1 where we're allowed to speak openly about this subject, but we will do a lot of research,” said athletics director John Cohen before an appearance at the LaGrange AMBUSH alumni meeting.

“We'll do our due diligence, and we'll be ready to have conversations about the future of Auburn and our apparel partner, and I have had some discussions with Under Armour. They've been terrific, and we'll see where it takes us in the future.”

Auburn originally signed with Under Armour in December of 2005, with the deal going into effect for the 2006-07 season. The agreement was extended for $78.1 million in 2015 and runs through June of 2025.

The extension included $10 million in Under Armour (UAA) stock, which was worth just $1.8 million by July of 2020 according to a report by Sportico.

The UAA share price has further dropped from $9.91 to $7.62 since Sportico published its story.

In May of 2021, Under Armour was charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission for misleading investors on revenue growth and paid a $9 million fine.

Under Armour paid UCLA $67.5 million to settle a lawsuit in 2022 after Under Armour attempted to terminate its 15-year sponsorship deal with the Bruins.

Under Armour CEO Patrik Frisk resigned in May of 2022 and was replaced by Stephanie Linnartz, formerly the President of Marriott, in January of 2023.

NIKE is the market leader in NCAA apparel deals outfitting 39 Power 5 schools followed by Adidas (11), Under Armour (7), Air Jordan (6) and New Balance (1).

Notre Dame allowed its negotiating window with Under Armour to expire earlier this year and its free to sign with another brand at the end of the 2024 season.

Along with Auburn and Notre Dame, the other prominent schools still partnering with Under Armour include Wisconsin, South Carolina, Utah and Maryland.

“I've only been at Auburn for six months, so my knowledge of the history of this relationship is a little bit limited,” said Cohen. “Although, I'm getting information from our coaches, from our student-athletes. Obviously, our fans, as in most cases, have an opinion. So we're doing a lot of research.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toddc Founding Father

toddc 13,194

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

They have to know that Auburn is about to explode in apparels sales with CHF running this thing up to where it should be. Not to mention what CBP is already doing.

Edited by toddc
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dual-Threat Rigby Founding Father

Dual-Threat Rigby 8,768

Posted
Posted

"“I've only been at Auburn for six months, so my knowledge of the history of this relationship is a little bit limited,” said Cohen. “Although, I'm getting information from our coaches, from our student-athletes. Obviously, our fans, as in most cases, have an opinion. So we're doing a lot of research.”"

 

Good news to me

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aubiefifty Founding Father

aubiefifty 16,957

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, woodford said:

ANYTHING but Nike. Their City Connect MLB uniforms this year are absolute garbage lol 

New Balance would be killer

those guys made shoes for handicapped folks. lets not jinx the team..............lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aubiefifty Founding Father

aubiefifty 16,957

Posted
Posted

i miss the dang ol 100 percent cotton shirts that do not look like they have been spray painted on you.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NCTiger1982 Collaborator

NCTiger1982 171

Posted
Posted

1) Nike has the best selection, great designs and is available everywhere. Since they started with running shoes they have always had the best footwear. They would be great for basketball since they own the AAU gig and all the influence $$$$ they have. That said, they are SELLOUTS with virtue signaling which we did NOT need in sports. The BS with the NBA and China is so hypocritical. The crimson turds are Nike obviously. While I like Michael Jordan the ONLY image I want on an Auburn FB Jersey is Bo Jackson, period  

2) Adidas specialty and history is mainly soccer and track & field. Their runner & player apparel in the 70s & 80s was top notch. As Nike started branching out to more sports with innovation Adidas became a follower. Sure, they now have their cloud products but they just knockoff or try to knockoff the best technology others come up with. Thanks though for staying out of politics Adidas 🫡

3) New Balance- No freaking way 

4) Under Armour- These guys took on Nike with better, cutting edge innovation in apparel forcing the gorilla of sports apparel to play catch-up. UA raised the price levels in the market from the quality and innovation of their apparel. I don’t want to pay more but what UA did here was incredible. They still need to work on their shoes which is a crucial need in all sports. While UA does offer rainbow apparel designs I thank them for keeping a low profile on politics. I hope we renegotiate a stellar deal with UA. 
 

War Damn Eagle ! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CR Founding Father

CR 2,446

Posted
Posted

Under Armour is on life support, who knows if theyll have the money to pay as theyve already proven. Bruce and Freeze are fantastic recruiters, but going with Nike would do nothing but make things easier for them. The money involved should be secondary to the impact of the provider in helping to acquire talent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eaglenest Proficient

eaglenest 332

Posted
Posted
On 9/2/2023 at 8:50 AM, NCTiger1982 said:

1) Nike has the best selection, great designs and is available everywhere. Since they started with running shoes they have always had the best footwear. They would be great for basketball since they own the AAU gig and all the influence $$$$ they have. That said, they are SELLOUTS with virtue signaling which we did NOT need in sports. The BS with the NBA and China is so hypocritical. The crimson turds are Nike obviously. While I like Michael Jordan the ONLY image I want on an Auburn FB Jersey is Bo Jackson, period  

2) Adidas specialty and history is mainly soccer and track & field. Their runner & player apparel in the 70s & 80s was top notch. As Nike started branching out to more sports with innovation Adidas became a follower. Sure, they now have their cloud products but they just knockoff or try to knockoff the best technology others come up with. Thanks though for staying out of politics Adidas 🫡

3) New Balance- No freaking way 

4) Under Armour- These guys took on Nike with better, cutting edge innovation in apparel forcing the gorilla of sports apparel to play catch-up. UA raised the price levels in the market from the quality and innovation of their apparel. I don’t want to pay more but what UA did here was incredible. They still need to work on their shoes which is a crucial need in all sports. While UA does offer rainbow apparel designs I thank them for keeping a low profile on politics. I hope we renegotiate a stellar deal with UA. 
 

War Damn Eagle ! 

It's ok for you to have your say in politics but a corporation can't ?? ok moving on WOW.....

  • Haha 2
  • Dislike 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Butthead Mentor

Butthead 525

Posted
Posted

Jumpman would be the best option assuming a fair number.  Great for basketball too.  UA is just dead.  I went to an Academy Sports a couple of weeks ago -- UA had nothing there that even resembled AU colors.  You would think they would stock some Auburn specific stuff, but nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TigerHorn Veteran

TigerHorn 1,354

Posted
Posted

UA and New Balance - I'd have to see a strategic vision that really shows something to sign with either. I don't see that turnaround on the horizon for UA, but NB is new to this, and has an image that they probably want to change. How motivated and serious are they? And do they have the technical muscle to catch up with the others?

Nike - They are on the brink of being a monopoly. A school like AU is never going to fare well under a monopoly. Their concern is increasing their earnings and tightening their grip on athletics. AU would have no leverage, and do you really think they would steer players toward us when they can steer them to much bigger names and markets? No. 

Addidas and Jordan - show us your plans for the future, with maybe a bit lower bar than UA and NB have. What's it worth to you to have a SEC Big Six program? Is Jordan actually part of Nike anyway? I don't know the industry well. 

We have to think 10 years out on this decision. We did that the last time, and it almost worked. This time, we can't just assume Nike is the no-brainer and sign for whatever crumbs the monopoly will give us. One of those four also-rans might have a plan and vision for the future that puts them a lot closer to equal footing with Nike. That's who we need to pick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aucom96 Mentor

aucom96 1,632

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, TigerHorn said:

Nike - They are on the brink of being a monopoly. A school like AU is never going to fare well under a monopoly. Their concern is increasing their earnings and tightening their grip on athletics. AU would have no leverage, and do you really think they would steer players toward us when they can steer them to much bigger names and markets? No. 

 

Plus it would just gall me to have Auburn in bed with the largest of third-world sweatshop virtue signalers. I can see the need for change, but I hope Nike isn't the best we can do. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...