Exactly how badly does UW need the money? And is the difference between Nike's offer and, say, adidas's so great that it's worth compromising your brand and promoting your arch rival?
I'd like to think the Ducks are our arch rival but I doubt that Oregon shares my point of view.
As a dad that has bought his share of cleats, both baseball and football, I can tell you that Nike makes the best cleats, and it's not close.
So you must be having a good belly laugh in the press box that Wisconsin and Auburn and Notre Dame and UCLA and Michigan and Maryland and Texas Tech and Texas A&M and Tennessee and Kansas and many others are all wearing gear that puts them at such a marked competitive disadvantage. This stunning insight must have made you a fortune in Vegas by now.
You could probably almost touch the rim in Air Jordans too, right?
there are no football cleats that come close to as good as nike.
Jack H. Lockner. The cleats? So Notre Dame, UCLA and others (who, unlike UW, actually play home games on grass) are wilfully putting themselves at some appreciable competitive disadvantage by signing up for adidas's inferior cleats? Fuck off.
I suspect UA can only afford to outbid Nike in a few places. Adidas is bigger but just appears to have a different collegiate marketing strategy: instead of being everywhere, they seem happy outfitting just a small number of higher profile schools. (Memo to UW: Win games, get on natl TV, and watch outfitters try harder to compete for your business.)
Again, most schools just go with the highest bidder, which tells me *they* think there's little difference in the quality of the gear.
I suspect UA can only afford to outbid Nike in a few places. Adidas is bigger but just appears to have a different collegiate marketing strategy: instead of being everywhere, they seem happy outfitting just a small number of higher profile schools. (Memo to UW: Win games, get on natl TV, and watch outfitters try harder to compete for your business.)
Again, most schools just go with the highest bidder, which tells me *they* think there's little difference in the quality of the gear.
higher profile schools? besides notre dame wbo is more high profile than usc ogio state alabama and texas? you do not know jack shit about tbe bids, contracts or even the numbers involved in this market. you just do not want nike involved with us because of oregon. who fuckibg cares? if we left nike right now it would not make a dent in uncle phils contributions
higher profile schools? besides notre dame wbo is more high profile than usc ogio state alabama and texas?
So do Michigan, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Tennessee rate as "higher" (as contrasted from "lower") profile football programs in your book? How about basketball programs like UCLA, Kansas and Indiana?
TTJ, what difference would it make if we didn't use Nike? The only difference I can come up with is we would get less money. If you can't understand that and are so simple minded to think we should avoid Nike because of Oregon, you deserve to get thrown head first into a fire. This thread sucks and is exactly what Cheers said... The epitome of doogtarded.
higher profile schools? besides notre dame wbo is more high profile than usc ogio state alabama and texas?
So do Michigan, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Tennessee rate as "higher" (as contrasted from "lower") profile football programs in your book? How about basketball programs like UCLA, Kansas and Indiana?
the schools i mentioned are overall much higher rated than your your list sucks. alabama over tennessee. texas over a and m. usc over ucla. fuck your list. we are talking about football. basketball players do not wear cleats fuck stick. i do not give a fuck abour basketball outside of the huskies. fuck basketball
TTJ, what difference would it make if we didn't use Nike? The only difference I can come up with is we would get less money. If you can't understand that and are so simple minded to think we should avoid Nike because of Oregon, you deserve to get thrown head first into a fire. This thread sucks and is exactly what Cheers said... The epitome of doogtarded.
what about gymnastics? i hear under armor makes the sickest leotards. maybe we should use them
Adidas has been a trainwreck for CFB uniforms. Every team that uses Adidas has worn some god-awful dreck at least once. They try to keep up with what Nike does with the Pro Combat series and fail miserably. Leave aside the Oregon hate, which is doogtarded. Under Armour hasn't been much better. Their alternate uniforms for Maryland were a laughingstock. I guess you could use Russell Athletic if you don't mind looking like a high school team from the 1980's.
Objectively speaking, Adidas sucks at football.
Objectively speaking, Adidas North America is still based in Portland, and is probably stocked with Oregon alums anyway.
Under Armour isn't much better.
Picking a uniform supplier based on your hatred of Oregon just means you should get comfortable with combustibles.
Exactly how badly does UW need the money? And is the difference between Nike's offer and, say, adidas's so great that it's worth compromising your brand and promoting your arch rival?
Ten or so years ago, on dawgman, right around the time Oregon was pimping Harrington for the Heisman with the Manhattan posters and related campaign goodies, there was this little dipshit Duck poster who would come over and use the word "brand" left and right.
We used to make fun of him for that mercilessly.
Now, today, guys like you, hanging paper while wrapped in the clothing of UW uber fandom, use it too, and oddly enough, in an original bitch session about Nike. Very rich.
"Brand" in college football doesn't require a Kellog MBA to understand. Winning is brand. Losing is brand. Hovering just above 500 is brand. That's about it.
UW doesn't have a brand, unless you want to suggest that slugging it out with UCLA to lay claim to [distant] second best in conference history is a "brand". And even if it did have a brand, making $$ from Nike wouldn't offend it.
Nike is a successful American company handing the Euro-trash, Nazi-founded fags, their asses. Fuck, they even have to deal with Nike in soccer, which they should own, but don't. What kind of an American are you anyway? Do you wear a dish towel on your head during the day?
Exactly how badly does UW need the money? And is the difference between Nike's offer and, say, adidas's so great that it's worth compromising your brand and promoting your arch rival?
Ten or so years ago, on dawgman, right around the time Oregon was pimping Harrington for the Heisman with the Manhattan posters and related campaign goodies, there was this little dipshit Duck poster who would come over and use the word "brand" left and right.
We used to make fun of him for that mercilessly.
Now, today, guys like you, hanging paper while wrapped in the clothing of UW uber fandom, use it too, and oddly enough, in an original bitch session about Nike. Very rich.
"Brand" in college football doesn't require a Kellog MBA to understand. Winning is brand. Losing is brand. Hovering just above 500 is brand. That's about it.
UW doesn't have a brand, unless you want to suggest that slugging it out with UCLA to lay claim to second best in conference history is a "brand". And even if it did have a brand, making $$ from Nike wouldn't offend it.
Nike is a successful American company handing the Euro-trash, Nazi-founded fags, their asses. Fuck, they even have to deal with Nike in soccer, which they should own, but don't. What kind of an American are you anyway? Do you wear a dish towel on your head during the day?
UW's brand is "Oregon's Annual Plunger Rape Victim".
Comments
Can't think of a more deserving fan base.
You could probably almost touch the rim in Air Jordans too, right?
Again, most schools just go with the highest bidder, which tells me *they* think there's little difference in the quality of the gear.
Objectively speaking, Adidas sucks at football.
Objectively speaking, Adidas North America is still based in Portland, and is probably stocked with Oregon alums anyway.
Under Armour isn't much better.
Picking a uniform supplier based on your hatred of Oregon just means you should get comfortable with combustibles.
We used to make fun of him for that mercilessly.
Now, today, guys like you, hanging paper while wrapped in the clothing of UW uber fandom, use it too, and oddly enough, in an original bitch session about Nike. Very rich.
"Brand" in college football doesn't require a Kellog MBA to understand. Winning is brand. Losing is brand. Hovering just above 500 is brand. That's about it.
UW doesn't have a brand, unless you want to suggest that slugging it out with UCLA to lay claim to [distant] second best in conference history is a "brand". And even if it did have a brand, making $$ from Nike wouldn't offend it.
Nike is a successful American company handing the Euro-trash, Nazi-founded fags, their asses. Fuck, they even have to deal with Nike in soccer, which they should own, but don't. What kind of an American are you anyway? Do you wear a dish towel on your head during the day?
Case closed.