• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Under Armour tells UCLA it's terminating contract - what will this do to NU and others?

Megatron

Recruit
5 Year Member
Adidas isn’t going anywhere and UA just made a very stupid marketing move.
Agreed, but I do think if UA gets out of the contract, it sets a precedent moving forward. I have no idea how much Nebraska gear is sold annually, but it has to be a ton, to even break even, on their investment into NU Athletics.
 

HUSKER HOT SAUCE

Be Yourself - Everyone Else Is Already Taken
5 Year Member
UA can just shove off. Wouldn't hurt my feelz at all if they just folded. I had this great hiking app, and UA bought them out, and then promptly locked me out of the app I had had for some time. I emailed them as to why and never received a reply back. They wanted access to everything including all of my contacts, Mom, Dad, Son, friends, all of my photo's my music, everything. I deleted my account and will essentially never buy anything they sell, EVER! UCLA would be better off ditching UA impo.
 

Huskerthom

All Big 10
5 Year Member
Agreed, but I do think if UA gets out of the contract, it sets a precedent moving forward. I have no idea how much Nebraska gear is sold annually, but it has to be a ton, to even break even, on their investment into NU Athletics.
This will end in a settlement then Nike will step in and low ball them. They may end up back with Adidas.
 

Megatron

Recruit
5 Year Member
Then don’t hand out stupid contracts.
I think they thought the UCLA agreement was a great opportunity to enter the LA market - and they bet on the success of their basketball program with football upgrading - knowing all well USC was never going to move away from Nike. Still, the amount they paid was ludicrous, based on the past performance of that program.
 

Husker In Oklahoma

All Big 10
15 Year Member
I think they thought the UCLA agreement was a great opportunity to enter the LA market - and they bet on the success of their basketball program with football upgrading - knowing all well USC was never going to move away from Nike. Still, the amount they paid was ludicrous, based on the past performance of that program.
Yep, hence a stupid contract. Dumb. Make them pay it!!
 

LarstheRed

Travel Squad
5 Year Member
I do not think UA Wins this lawsuit. Under performing athletically is not cause. As long as they are fielding all of the teams they promised and all those
If they don't win, then I wouldn't be surprised to see the file for some form of bankruptcy that allows them to reorganize and shed some debt responsibility. This is a great example of how this virus is truly creating a much larger tipping point than some people realize. You have a lot of moving parts in a situation like this, and if it were simply the virus, it would be challenging enough. Toss in some of the social disruption (demands for renaming teams, stadiums, etc.), as well as the economic challenges faced by many of the everyday fan, and you realize this could spin out of control for some of the businesses quickly. The funny thing about people is we tend to think somethings are irreplaceable...until we actually don't have them. Then we see that life can go on without them.
 
I guess it depends on how the contract is written. If UA doesn't have a contractually defined reason to terminate, it would seem UCLA would be owed damages.

Note: I couldn't read the LA Times article because it's behind an ad-block wall.
Yep. In the article UA said they were terminating based on a clause that allowed them to if UCLA didn't meet certain criteria on their side. UCLA's response was kind of odd, and didn't really contradict that point - mostly playing the PR side.

No specifics given, and who's on solid legal ground is not something most folks could say who haven't specifically seen this contract.

From pure inference, it'd seem like UA has a case they feel pretty confident about in the courts, and UCLA probably thinks so as well, which is why they responded like they did. As to how this hurts UA, my guess would be that it somewhat depends on if it's boilerplate language and UA is trying to jump ship because UCLA has sucked, or if it was something specific to the UCLA deal. Either way, university attorneys will probably be reviewing these contracts even more closely going forward.
 

Huskerthom

All Big 10
5 Year Member
Yep. In the article UA said they were terminating based on a clause that allowed them to if UCLA didn't meet certain criteria on their side. UCLA's response was kind of odd, and didn't really contradict that point - mostly playing the PR side.

No specifics given, and who's on solid legal ground is not something most folks could say who haven't specifically seen this contract.

From pure inference, it'd seem like UA has a case they feel pretty confident about in the courts, and UCLA probably thinks so as well, which is why they responded like they did. As to how this hurts UA, my guess would be that it somewhat depends on if it's boilerplate language and UA is trying to jump ship because UCLA has sucked, or if it was something specific to the UCLA deal. Either way, university attorneys will probably be reviewing these contracts even more closely going forward.
You may be right but I would bet no P5 school other than MD will ever sign with them again. Why would you sign with a company that will dump you after a few bad years. MD will stick with them only because they give them the best deal and the founder is a MD alumni.
 
You may be right but I would bet no P5 school other than MD will ever sign with them again. Why would you sign with a company that will dump you after a few bad years. MD will stick with them only because they give them the best deal and the founder is a MD alumni.
Maybe. UA also won't be trying to sign any big deals in the near future.

Also, UA is attempting to pull out of a similar deal with Cal: https://www.ft.com/content/52d24220-968f-4a7d-b2ae-4d43c7871f14

They spent a lot of money trying to make a splash, particularly on the west coast, and bet on some bad horses (also at a bad time).
 
Top