I think the new AD has to look at the brand that helps bring more quality recruits to Lincoln - when it comes to Adidas or Nike, it’s as simple as that.
it matters much more for basketball thsn football. certain kids get reeled in by one or the other and it has a huge impact on recruiting...or used to in favir of nike schools. i remember seeing a graphic several years ago showing a disproportionate number of nike schools at the top of college basketball and the correlation to recruiting was pretty clear. obviously adidas got that memo.I think the AD needs to worry about fixing the football program which is the main issue facing the athletic department. If the football team is winning at a high level, Nebraska fans will buy plenty of shoes even if the shoe agreement is with Crocs.
it matters much more for basketball thsn football. certain kids get reeled in by one or the other and it has a huge impact on recruiting...or used to in favir of nike schools. i remember seeing a graphic several years ago showing a disproportionate number of nike schools at the top of college basketball and the correlation to recruiting was pretty clear. obviously adidas got that memo.
yepAs we all know...Nebraska just signed an extension with Adidas so all of this speculation about changing the shoe/apparel brand is purely a waste of time.
To quote an 18 year old here in DC when I asked him why I see so many kids wearing adidas now. "NIKE is what my parents wear. I am not that old." So your 16, 17 and 18 year old comment as I have stated before is wrong.Nike AD, Suh (who is a Nike guy), and Phil might change the landscape. Seems like the timing is right.
Can you imagine a Nebraska “Niketown” across from Memorial? I bet 16, 17 and 18 year-olds would love that.
You are hilarious. You talk to ONE 18 year old in DC and he now represents the entire 16, 17 and 18 year old age bracket across the US. Wow.To quote an 18 year old here in DC when I asked him why I see so many kids wearing adidas now. "NIKE is what my parents wear. I am not that old." So your 16, 17 and 18 year old comment as I have stated before is wrong.
Again WRONG. I have said for the last two years. I work with a lot of youth. I have noticed more and more wearing Adidas so I asked ONE two questions to verify my observations. Am i seeing more kids wearing Adidas and his answer was heck yeah. Then I asked him why and he said Nike is what my mom wears. I have relayed the story so many times on here that I did not feel the need to keep repeating it. Adidas is coming up. Walk around any major city and you will see a lot more adidas than ten years ago. ESPEcIALLY on the high school and college age kids. The exception which someone already mentioned is basketball players. However UA is getting their fare share of them.You are hilarious. You talk to ONE 18 year old in DC and he now represents the entire 16, 17 and 18 year old age bracket across the US. Wow.
I merely asked the question because I heard yesterday that the Louisville AD executed the Adidas deal without administration approval (I believe ESPN). I know we just inked a new deal, but I also know there is an escape clause in the contract that allows NU to terminate the agreement if Adidas does not perform within certain boundaries.
I can easily see a new AD terminating the deal and signing a similar deal with Nike, to change and spice things up (see Leach’s comments), at NU.
I’m not sure Nike did what Adidas did - but time will tell.
Again WRONG. I have said for the last two years. I work with a lot of youth. I have noticed more and more wearing Adidas so I asked ONE two questions to verify my observations. Am i seeing more kids wearing Adidas and his answer was heck yeah. Then I asked him why and he said Nike is what my mom wears. I have relayed the story so many times on here that I did not feel the need to keep repeating it. Adidas is coming up. Walk around any major city and you will see a lot more adidas than ten years ago. ESPEcIALLY on the high school and college age kids. The exception which someone already mentioned is basketball players. However UA is getting their fare share of them.
I tend to believe that part of that from Gen Y on watch a lot more soccer than boomers and Gen X. Adidas owns soccer. but keep believing the fantasy that kids only go to Nike schools. Actually what tends to happen is once a school starts to win big Nike swoops in and offers truck loads of money. If you are not currently a winning team they under bid. Nike would have paid us 1/3 or less of what we got from three stripe.
I don't think I'd want a recruit that made a choice based solely upon the brand of shoe the team is affiliated with.I think the new AD has to look at the brand that helps bring more quality recruits to Lincoln - when it comes to Adidas or Nike, it’s as simple as that.