echeese
Premium Members
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2013
- Messages
- 2,474
UCLA has signed a $280 million, 15 year deal with Under Armor. . . .
http://canmua.net/texas/ucla-signs-recordsetting-apparel-deal-with-under-armour-836407.html
Now several has speculated that TEXAS should have negotiated with UA instead of resigning with Nike. . .on the surface it appears we could have gotten more. . . . .but there are 3 sides to every story, just as their are 3 sides to a coin.
One of the OB posters offered a rebuttal to some of the knee jerk. . . .not sure where I land but thought this counter argument pretty compelling.
hate to be the a-hole here to the "shoulda negotiated, we shoulda got under armor" crowd, but one little detail of this deal caught my eye:
Clothing/Footwear/Equipment provided to University athletes:
UCLA(who has about 6-8 different football uniform combinations)-$7.4 million a year
Texas-(2 football uniform combinations)-$4.53 million a year.
Basically, UCLA gets $111 million in Under Armour Uniforms for athletes to wear. Texas gets $67.95 million in Nike uniforms for athletes to wear. So when you back out uniforms, which judging by the fire sale at the spring game, we are in no way hard up for, our deal is much better.
UCLA-$280 million deal. $169 million in real money actually paid to the school.
Texas-$250 million deal. $182.5 million in real money actually paid to the school.
+our own signature KD line of apparel
+4 yearly paid internships with Nike for 4 students(2 athletes, 2 non-athletes).
Gimme Nike all day. We're still getting the most money, UCLA can have the headlines.
http://canmua.net/texas/ucla-signs-recordsetting-apparel-deal-with-under-armour-836407.html
Now several has speculated that TEXAS should have negotiated with UA instead of resigning with Nike. . .on the surface it appears we could have gotten more. . . . .but there are 3 sides to every story, just as their are 3 sides to a coin.
One of the OB posters offered a rebuttal to some of the knee jerk. . . .not sure where I land but thought this counter argument pretty compelling.
hate to be the a-hole here to the "shoulda negotiated, we shoulda got under armor" crowd, but one little detail of this deal caught my eye:
Clothing/Footwear/Equipment provided to University athletes:
UCLA(who has about 6-8 different football uniform combinations)-$7.4 million a year
Texas-(2 football uniform combinations)-$4.53 million a year.
Basically, UCLA gets $111 million in Under Armour Uniforms for athletes to wear. Texas gets $67.95 million in Nike uniforms for athletes to wear. So when you back out uniforms, which judging by the fire sale at the spring game, we are in no way hard up for, our deal is much better.
UCLA-$280 million deal. $169 million in real money actually paid to the school.
Texas-$250 million deal. $182.5 million in real money actually paid to the school.
+our own signature KD line of apparel
+4 yearly paid internships with Nike for 4 students(2 athletes, 2 non-athletes).
Gimme Nike all day. We're still getting the most money, UCLA can have the headlines.
