- Joined
- Dec 19, 2013
- Messages
- 32,527
so tell your boys at nike to offer Miami a deal with fronting the buyout. Miami was getting shafted by nike at the end esp w team equipment. I care more about that.
trust me, idgaf about what logo is on a shirt. whichever helps the school pay for **** matters to me more. if its nike so be it. if its Russell so be it.
From my understanding, some old heads on Nike’s board was not cool w/ the latter end of our deal & how it concluded….ESPECIALLY losing us to an arch rival in Adidas.
Let’s be clear, however…The University of Miami has done zero favors for itself. F the apparel companies, I told u all that the NIL deals would not benefit us. Why? B/c of the product. Miami has shot itself in the foot w/ so many opportunities, yet they have rested on their laurels & the ghost of our past. Nike is a business. Adidas is a business. Under Armor is a business. Adidas took a chance on us b/c they were “hoping” to rebrand themselves w/ a power school. We have not done that, and they r suffering.
Like some of u think very narrow minded. Do u think Adidas is in the business of just giving out free money? They made the deal to punch Nike in the gut by stealing one of their babies, and capitalize off the brand from a merch & on-field product standpoint. Their merch is marked down, meaning they r trying to make as much money as possible b/c they r taking L’s, & since they’ve been our sponsor, we’ve suffered egregious losses! U think that’s what they paid for?
At the end of the day, Miami bamboozled Adidas & The ACC. Some of ya’ll romanticize business deals. It’s funny b/c we give props for a dude bouncing from a failed marriage b/c she turned out to be a lazy bytch, but criticize a company leaving a failed partner b/c the partner was lazy. Lol