New Apparel and Shoe Deal

[NDohio]

Nothing about Notre Dame's history suggests NIL is going to be a part of the Under Armour deal. I'm really curious why a few beat writers keep bringing it up. I guess in that way it's intriguing if true, but it goes against so much common sense realities about Notre Dame.

Is this football NIL money only? Notre Dame won't let that happen.

How much NIL money are we talking about? Some people are throwing out frankly some absurd numbers.

How would the logistics of this work? Even if you jump through the numerous illogical hoops of Notre Dame's approach to money has anyone described an effective way this could work?

On top of all of this...Under Armour doesn't have that much money.

They are already paying $9 million per year (part of that in apparel) for ND to wear their brand. They've had numerous corporate jobs cut recently, and massive restructuring since we first signed the deal back in 2014. Their stock has tanked. How can anyone pitch to their board that right now what they need is to spend even more on Notre Dame in a murky NIL relationship without guarantees it will amount to anything valuable to their brand?

They've been trying to right the ship for several years and now they're going to throw millions at fickle high school football players at a school noted for struggling to break through?

I just can't think of anything that UA could do (if they were stupid enough to over-spend on ND, to be frank) that wasn't illegal, that would work under Notre Dame's code of ethics (for a lack of a better term), and that would truly be beneficial for both parties.

I don't think it is a situation where an athlete is gonna be given money from UA to attend ND. The vision that I see where UA gives ND players a significant advantage over other companies when it comes to NIL is in commercial endorsements. Last year Braden Lenzy was on the UA website. Expand that concept. Put ND athletes in commercials, have them be in ads both in print and on the web, put them on billboards, etc. This is where being under UA could be at a little bit of an advantage as they don't have as many schools so ND athletes can be a higher priority in UA's advertising.

I used to live just outside Columbia, SC. The USC women's basketball team is heavily featured in UA advertising all over the place in SC. ND can be that but nationally.

 

[Rocket89]

I don't think it is a situation where an athlete is gonna be given money from UA to attend ND. The vision that I see where UA gives ND players a significant advantage over other companies when it comes to NIL is in commercial endorsements. Last year Braden Lenzy was on the UA website. Expand that concept. Put ND athletes in commercials, have them be in ads both in print and on the web, put them on billboards, etc. This is where being under UA could be at a little bit of an advantage as they don't have as many schools so ND athletes can be a higher priority in UA's advertising.

I used to live just outside Columbia, SC. The USC women's basketball team is heavily featured in UA advertising all over the place in SC. ND can be that but nationally.

Okay, but how does Braden Lenzy (or a comparable football player) help Under Armour's advertising?

Additionally, UA advertising isn't worth that much. ND football players don't move the needle nationally. Yes, someone like Sam Hartman might be worth it, but not many others.

Business-wise, it doesn't make sense.

EDIT: Plus, if all this is from UA's perspective is "trying" to make some top ND football players more prominent in their advertising and throwing some extra money that is absolutely not worth picking UA over Nike.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Okay, but how does Braden Lenzy (or a comparable football player) help Under Armour's advertising?

Additionally, UA advertising isn't worth that much. ND football players don't move the needle nationally. Yes, someone like Sam Hartman might be worth it, but not many others.

Business-wise, it doesn't make sense.

EDIT: Plus, if all this is from UA's perspective is "trying" to make some top ND football players more prominent in their advertising and throwing some extra money that is absolutely not worth picking UA over Nike.

If they want to get money to student athletes it doesn't need to be complicated.

Sponsors can pay student athletes to wear sponsor's clothing in the student athletes' media appearances. This money can can come from a carve out from ND's apparel deal. Every student athlete should get to participate though values would certainly be different.

The potential roadblock is whether ND/sponsor are allowed to specify this in an agreement between themselves or whether each individual student athlete has to be an arms-length transaction in order to avoid being construed as pay for paly under the NCAA's rules.

Unless and until such time as the NCAA clarifies those rules, there's no reason to worry about it. I double dog dare the NCAA to rule that the schools can get money from apparel deals but the student athletes required to wear the gear cannot.

 

[NDohio]

Okay, but how does Braden Lenzy (or a comparable football player) help Under Armour's advertising?

Additionally, UA advertising isn't worth that much. ND football players don't move the needle nationally. Yes, someone like Sam Hartman might be worth it, but not many others.

Business-wise, it doesn't make sense.

EDIT: Plus, if all this is from UA's perspective is "trying" to make some top ND football players more prominent in their advertising and throwing some extra money that is absolutely not worth picking UA over Nike.

Real athlete's wearing your product...that's where a majority of every sports shoe/apparel companies advertising dollars go. It's a benefit for both parties. BL gets some money towards his NIL package and UA gets to use a real athlete in their ad campaign.

I feel like everybody wants this one big NIL bag to come rescue the ND NIL conundrum. That's not how this is going to work. It's gonna be death by a thousand paper cuts. If whatever apparel/shoe company ND ends up with can provide some of those paper cuts then that is progress.

 

[Rocket89]

If they want to get money to student athletes it doesn't need to be complicated.

Sponsors can pay student athletes to wear sponsor's clothing in the student athletes' media appearances. This money can can come from a carve out from ND's apparel deal. Every student athlete should get to participate though values would certainly be different.

The potential roadblock is whether ND/sponsor are allowed to specify this in an agreement between themselves or whether each individual student athlete has to be an arms-length transaction in order to avoid being construed as pay for paly under the NCAA's rules.

Unless and until such time as the NCAA clarifies those rules, there's no reason to worry about it. I double dog dare the NCAA to rule that the schools can get money from apparel deals but the student athletes required to wear the gear cannot.

ND athletes are already wearing UA right now for their appearances and it's not costing them anything "extra."

I guess my point is, what is the value for UA? They are rumored to be taking out a risky loan to pay for an apparel deal that's going to set aside $5 million (or whatever) to pay ND athletes in a nation-wide advertising campaign?

 

[Rocket89]

Real athlete's wearing your product...that's where a majority of every sports shoe/apparel companies advertising dollars go. It's a benefit for both parties. BL gets some money towards his NIL package and UA gets to use a real athlete in their ad campaign.

I feel like everybody wants this one big NIL bag to come rescue the ND NIL conundrum. That's not how this is going to work. It's gonna be death by a thousand paper cuts. If whatever apparel/shoe company ND ends up with can provide some of those paper cuts then that is progress.

I think we agree w/r/t the one big NIL bag. That's a large part of my overall point. I get the sense many are expecting that and it's not going to happen.

I have a ton of questions about the reality of any NIL deal with UA or Nike. I would need to see it in action to really believe it. But, if it's really UA offering 10% more, to me, it's not worth it.

 

[notredomer23]

I think we agree w/r/t the one big NIL bag. That's a large part of my overall point. I get the sense many are expecting that and it's not going to happen.

I have a ton of questions about the reality of any NIL deal with UA or Nike. I would need to see it in action to really believe it. But, if it's really UA offering 10% more, to me, it's not worth it.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

ND athletes are already wearing UA right now for their appearances and it's not costing them anything "extra."

I guess my point is, what is the value for UA? They are rumored to be taking out a risky loan to pay for an apparel deal that's going to set aside $5 million (or whatever) to pay ND athletes in a nation-wide advertising campaign?

The presumed value to UA is that it's part of a sponsorship deal with ND. They don't need an advertising campaign to fulfill this requirement and it doesn't need to be viewed as a particular benefit to UA. If ND is willing to do a deal worth about $10 million per year (I believe the free equipment is about half the value) then UA/ND could strike an agreement for the equipment and that UA will spend $5 million/year on student athlete sponsorships with some specific parameters.

ND effectively converts $5 million that would go to the university to $5 million that would go to the student athletes (which would, in turn, create some ROI in recruiting when you can show student athletes that they will be compensated right out of the gate). If the rumor is that UA is offering more $ but has a less desirable product then this is a way for them to leverage that extra $ into a benefit to their client ND.

 

[Rocket89]

Not surprising.

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

Not surprising.

"not terribly significant...but GREAT for my son!"

 

[NDdomer2]

"not terribly significant...but GREAT for my son!"

does this make it a bad deal for ND or are we just not liking JS?

 

[SoIll]

I'll leave it at this....... Start sending your emails now..

swarbrick.1@nd.edu

 

[FightingIrishLover7]

subject line
Nepotism:

 

[benneboy]

The most important change in college football and recruiting in his entire tenure and an opportunity to swing that to some extent in your favor is.... not terribly significant?!! What the shit?

 

[TheProspector]

does this make it a bad deal for ND or are we just not liking JS?

My guess is it will be the largest apparel deal ever, probably a couple million more per year than Nike. However, the trade off is your entering a long term relationship with a partner that literally no one wants. Not the players, coaches or fans. You’re also partnering up with a company that has struggled mightily financially in the recent past and just terminated their last large agreement of this size and had to pay back $70 million to UCLA.

So yes, ND will make a few million more from UA, assuming UA doesn’t renege or go belly up, but why not partner with the market leader who is a much more stable company who everyone wearing the apparel actually wants while still making a ton of money?

 

[sfk324]

I'll leave it at this....... Start sending your emails now..

swarbrick.1@nd.edu

The people whose opinion he cares about have his phone number and "real" email address. Beyond those select few, he hasn't cared what anyone has thought for 15 years, why will he care now that he has one foot out the door?

 

[DCDomer]

& with my final trick... ta dah!

 

[calvegas04]

Should we be bumping the "State of the program" thread between this brand dead and the recruiting situation

 

[Ndaccountant]

This why nobody should ever be against NIL and transfer portals. The deals that would be worth nothing if not for the players will enrich the undeserving. The only card the players have they play. I don't blame them at all. Until the rest of the infrastructure of the sport starts acting in a collective interest versus self interest, the players should maximize their profit however they see fit.

 

[SDIrishFan]

My guess is it will be the largest apparel deal ever, probably a couple million more per year than Nike. However, the trade off is your entering a long term relationship with a partner that literally no one wants. Not the players, coaches or fans. You’re also partnering up with a company that has struggled mightily financially in the recent past and just terminated their last large agreement of this size and had to pay back $70 million to UCLA.

So yes, ND will make a few million more from UA, assuming UA doesn’t renege or go belly up, but why not partner with the market leader who is a much more stable company who everyone wearing the apparel actually wants while still making a ton of money?

Again, another instance of ND likely saying, "Do as I say, not as I do."

 

[Wild Bill]

As long as Jack's son is taken care of all is well.

My concern as well. This family needs to catch a financial break.

 

[Crazy Balki]

If NIL is not a significant part of the deal, then there is zero reason to stick with UA.

I can't imagine it even if UA offered more money. Seriously, why would you gamble on a company with so much instability right now? It's a high risk-low reward proposition. At least with Nike, you have the stability of the top brand. UA is circling the drain.

 

[FDNYIrish1]

I hope it’s UA. They’re desperate. Like that old steamer at the end of the bar sucking down a rusty nail with a pack of lucky strikes in front of her and the bartender just switched the lights on and off. Take the easy money and then move on when the company breaches the contract and goes tits up. I hope there’s a lot going on behind the scenes to take care of the players. This is such a big opportunity I hope Jack doesn’t screw it up.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I hope it’s UA. They’re desperate. Like that old steamer at the end of the bar sucking down a rusty nail with a pack of lucky strikes in front of her and the bartender just switched the lights on and off. Take the easy money and then move on when the company breaches the contract and goes tits up. I hope there’s a lot going on behind the scenes to take care of the players. This is such a big opportunity I hope Jack doesn’t screw it up.

Yeah, the conclusion I'm arriving at here is UA needs ND waaaayyyyy more than Nike needs ND.

 

[greyhammer90]

You guys realize that the contract will say that ND can go elsewhere if UA goes bankrupt, right? It's not like we have to go down with them. They'll pay us what they promise until they can't (assuming that eventually happens), and then we leave the contract and allow the bidding to commence between Nike/Adidas/whoever. All this concern over UA potentially going under is weird.

 

[pumpdog20]

How can you sit there and notice all the team contracts they had to buy out and think, yeah that's a company I want to commit to?

 

[ColinKSU]

If Nike really wanted Notre Dame, they’d hire Jack’s kid.

 

[SDIrishFan]

You guys realize that the contract will say that ND can go elsewhere if UA goes bankrupt, right? It's not like we have to go down with them. They'll pay us what they promise until they can't (assuming that eventually happens), and then we leave the contract and allow the bidding to commence between Nike/Adidas/whoever. All this concern over UA potentially going under is weird.

To me it has more to do with one more way the admin is choosing to hamstring the coaches in recruiting. They should be removing hurdles, not adding them.

 

[Ndaccountant]

How can you sit there and notice all the team contracts they had to buy out and think, yeah that's a company I want to commit to?

Hard to say no to your son is about all I got.

 

[Crazy Balki]

You guys realize that the contract will say that ND can go elsewhere if UA goes bankrupt, right? It's not like we have to go down with them. They'll pay us what they promise until they can't (assuming that eventually happens), and then we leave the contract and allow the bidding to commence between Nike/Adidas/whoever. All this concern over UA potentially going under is weird.

I'm sure everybody realizes that.

The problem isn't whether ND would go down with the ship with UA, but that with the very real possibility that UA continues on their trajectory...then why re-sign with them? What is the incentive?

It's like staying in a relationship with a loser. Sure, he promises a lot, but at the end of the day, he's been out of work for months and because of that, he needed to default on his mortgage and pull the kid out of private school.