Is there any downside to choosing Under Armour for Pitt if they pay more?

[mdpitt]

This is not a uniform question but if we choose not to go with NIKE, is there any downside whatsoever with taking more money from Under Armour? We should not kid ourselves thinking we are getting a similar deal as Ohio State or Notre Dame. We actually have half the sports to clothe but Football drives 70% of a shoe contract with Basketball the other 30%.

I will tell you that I feel Adidas is a negative. Many think of them as old school but I just don't see those shoes on many 18 year olds. NIKE is by far the Global shoe leader but Under Armour has a lot of pull with kids.

Kevin Plank the CEO of Under Armour is a U Maryland Grad and Mark Parker, the CEO of Nike is a Penn State Graduate. Mark Parker couldn't care less about Maryland but he went to school seeing Pitt as a Rival. It would actually be smart to sign Pitt with a bad deal if you are in fact a fan of Penn State. Maryland hates Penn State and views them as the Rival they need to have. Pitt is the enemy of the enemy, so to speak and it actually makes a lot of sense to enrich Pitt as we just don't compete with Maryland for a lot of athletes.

Maybe I'm overthinking this but CEOs actually look at these mega deals ( in our minds ) and this might just be a small thorn in their side. The Pitt deal is a minute value of importance for NIKE but the money is more meaningful for Under Armour as their balance sheet is tighter.

I hope we can use any leverage we have. I personally like Nike but I would gladly take more money from UA. The Steelers might add some extra leverage if that allows NIke to throw that logo all around Heinz and the Practice facility.

 

[Pittnerski]

I think the UA would give us more exposure and we would be a bigger fish in the UA pond. Look at catalogs like Eastbay. I've rarely seen Pitt in them before. With Nike it's always the blue bloods Unc, Kansas, Duke, Cuse, etc.

I cringe at what product UA would give us, but bottom line you take the most money.

 

[Fk_Pitt]

I don't think so. But I am also not 18. If the uniforms aren't over the top bad, then who cares. The apparel of the worlds two biggest companies in the business and then Under Armour are all fine IMO. If UA tried to give us something bad for uniforms, which I doubt, I would think that our admin would nix it. Can they make our teams wear something that Pitt doesn't Like?

 

[9nationalchampionships]

*See Steve Pederson era

I don't think so. But I am also not 18. If the uniforms aren't over the top bad, then who cares. The apparel of the worlds two biggest companies in the business and then Under Armour are all fine IMO. If UA tried to give us something bad for uniforms, which I doubt, I would think that our admin would nix it. *Can they make our teams wear something that Pitt doesn't Like?

 

[Fk_Pitt]

Hahaha.

*See Steve Pederson era[/QUOTE
Haha. .

Yes. I thought of him as I typed that. Point taken

 

[pittdan77]

I can't see UA making a deal to hurt Pitt, just to hurt Pitt. If they want to really compete against the Nike's of the world, they will do their best to make Pitt look good in order to make more money.

Just my two cents but UA is huge with the younger crowd.

 

[PSU_Nut]

*See Steve Pederson era

What that Aereopostale deal he signed was ground breaking. Lol

 

[9nationalchampionships]

PITT is now in good hands with the Chancellor Gallagher and AD Barnes

What that Aereopostale deal he signed was ground breaking. Lol

 

[pittbb80]

PITT is now in good hands with the Chancellor Gallagher and AD Barnes

Money Talks everything else is irrelevant. Barnes et al will sign the best deal they can get that generates the most cash for the department. As far as the look of the uniforms etc.....the AD controls that....I feel confident we wont have any goofy looking dino beagle crap or fugly combat uniforms any longer.........although I must admit I wasn't that thrilled with the Pink script Pitt for the UNC game.....LOL

 

[King Of All Message Boards]

There was a big deal made when they switched from adidas to Nike especially on the hoops side. The Nike brand, particularly the schools that got Jordans, were attractive to kids. Under Armour is certainly on the rise but they don't offer much in the way of shoes do they? Admittedly I'm not a young guy but I could be wrong. I'm a golfer and Spieth is UA and I don't think I've ever seen a retail UA golf shoe.

 

[H2P-2007]

I will personally buy much less Pitt swag if Pitt switches from Nike to any other brand. Nike is the gold standard as far as I'm concerned. Idk, maybe I'm out of touch too (I'm 30), but I buy 95% Nike 5% UA 0% of anything else (Reebok, Adidas, Puma, etc.).

 

[mdpitt]

I will personally buy much less Pitt swag if Pitt switches from Nike to any other brand. Nike is the gold standard as far as I'm concerned. Idk, maybe I'm out of touch too (I'm 30), but I buy 95% Nike 5% UA 0% of anything else (Reebok, Adidas, Puma, etc.).

I honestly think anyone over 30 feels similar to you but if you found out UA offered 20% more, you might just buy that Pitt Script Logo shirt that is huge with the small UA logo. Just a hunch.

 

[Swervin27]

besides appearance, No.

 

[Panther Holla]

Pitt will never be a NIKE A-list school. And that's not so bad in that we get the associated brand equity without having to look like cutting-edge clowns. Pitt FB wears a simple NIKE template much like Clemson's. Basketball typically has one of NIKE's new stock designs every year or two, with new features like the school-centric patterned jersey backs. I'd call Pitt a B-lister on the sartorial scale, but we have a lot of company there.

So maybe a switch to UA will be in Pitt's best interests. I would not expect Pitt to go off the rails crazy -- the Pederson cutting torch Dinocat experiment ought to be enough of a cautionary tale. But if we roll out some alternate unis, so what? Aside from Bama and Club 409, everybody does.

But UA begs this question: A poster on this board once opined of State Penn's Anthony Morelli that he was the "kind of kid who wears UA to the (night)club." So.... if Pitt goes Under the Armor, does UA become acceptable?

 

[JS School]

I'm a golfer and Spieth is UA and I don't think I've ever seen a retail UA golf shoe.

One of the world's great mysteries. My daughter works at UA headquarters in Baltimore and hasn't been able to find out why they don't have a golf shoe on the market yet. They had a limited release last year of a $ 200 shoe that Speith was supposed to wear, but he didn't like it and the reviews of it were bad. With the year he had last year, they really missed the boat not having a shoe ready. Supposedly something is coming this year.

We have ND alumni and fans on my wife's side of the family. My daughter keeps them stocked with gear. It would be nice if she was able to do that for the Pitt fans in the family.

 

[Panther_in_Kentucky]

This is not a uniform question but if we choose not to go with NIKE, is there any downside whatsoever with taking more money from Under Armour? We should not kid ourselves thinking we are getting a similar deal as Ohio State or Notre Dame. We actually have half the sports to clothe but Football drives 70% of a shoe contract with Basketball the other 30%.

I will tell you that I feel Adidas is a negative. Many think of them as old school but I just don't see those shoes on many 18 year olds. NIKE is by far the Global shoe leader but Under Armour has a lot of pull with kids.

Kevin Plank the CEO of Under Armour is a U Maryland Grad and Mark Parker, the CEO of Nike is a Penn State Graduate. Mark Parker couldn't care less about Maryland but he went to school seeing Pitt as a Rival. It would actually be smart to sign Pitt with a bad deal if you are in fact a fan of Penn State. Maryland hates Penn State and views them as the Rival they need to have. Pitt is the enemy of the enemy, so to speak and it actually makes a lot of sense to enrich Pitt as we just don't compete with Maryland for a lot of athletes.

Maybe I'm overthinking this but CEOs actually look at these mega deals ( in our minds ) and this might just be a small thorn in their side. The Pitt deal is a minute value of importance for NIKE but the money is more meaningful for Under Armour as their balance sheet is tighter.

I hope we can use any leverage we have. I personally like Nike but I would gladly take more money from UA. The Steelers might add some extra leverage if that allows NIke to throw that logo all around Heinz and the Practice facility.

The fact that the CEO of Nike is a Nitwit is enough reason to change to Under Armour, even if the money were the same.

 

[RINGGOLD94]

UA clothes are the most comfortable on the market. UA shoes are by far the worst. I don't get why they can't make a shoe that fits. I feel like Cinderella shopping there

 

[Saboteur]

This is not a uniform question but if we choose not to go with NIKE, is there any downside whatsoever with taking more money from Under Armour? We should not kid ourselves thinking we are getting a similar deal as Ohio State or Notre Dame. We actually have half the sports to clothe but Football drives 70% of a shoe contract with Basketball the other 30%.

I will tell you that I feel Adidas is a negative. Many think of them as old school but I just don't see those shoes on many 18 year olds. NIKE is by far the Global shoe leader but Under Armour has a lot of pull with kids.

Kevin Plank the CEO of Under Armour is a U Maryland Grad and Mark Parker, the CEO of Nike is a Penn State Graduate. Mark Parker couldn't care less about Maryland but he went to school seeing Pitt as a Rival. It would actually be smart to sign Pitt with a bad deal if you are in fact a fan of Penn State. Maryland hates Penn State and views them as the Rival they need to have. Pitt is the enemy of the enemy, so to speak and it actually makes a lot of sense to enrich Pitt as we just don't compete with Maryland for a lot of athletes.

Maybe I'm overthinking this but CEOs actually look at these mega deals ( in our minds ) and this might just be a small thorn in their side. The Pitt deal is a minute value of importance for NIKE but the money is more meaningful for Under Armour as their balance sheet is tighter.

I hope we can use any leverage we have. I personally like Nike but I would gladly take more money from UA. The Steelers might add some extra leverage if that allows NIke to throw that logo all around Heinz and the Practice facility.

I don't care where their CEO went to school. I care about putting money in the Pitt athletic department.
End of discussion.

 

[Saboteur]

What that Aereopostale deal he signed was ground breaking. Lol

When I moved back to Pittsburgh I looked for Pitt gear and was told by an employee of another store about the Aereopstale deal. I thought there were only 12 of them...but it turns out we cut a deal with the 13th Apostle.
Leave it to Smiley to find the guy almost 2000 years later!! Of course, the clothes were circa 33 AD.

 

[drunkinoakland]

UA clothes are the most comfortable on the market. UA shoes are by far the worst. I don't get why they can't make a shoe that fits. I feel like Cinderella shopping there

I actually love UA cross trainers, but I'm not a fan of the Steph Curry basketball shoes.

 

[DPthePhenom]

I have two pairs of the Curry one low basketball shoes, and I actually find them very comfortable. Also they fit true to size. I haven't tried the high tops, which is probably what most people play in, if you use them for basketball. But they are the only UA shoes I've ever had. I bought some of the UA coldgear turtlenecks to wear under a polo on cold golfing days, and they are phenomenal. Other than that, I have no UA gear. Nike is definitely more mainstream, but UA is rising and definitely has some starpower endorsers, some of which are among the top 10 athletes on the planet right now (Stephen Curry, Jordan Spieth, Tom Brady, Cam Newton, Clayton Kershaw, Bryce Harper)

 

[rpost3]

But UA begs this question: A poster on this board once opined of State Penn's Anthony Morelli that he was the "kind of kid who wears UA to the (night)club." So.... if Pitt goes Under the Armor, does UA become acceptable?

lol that might've been me. Years ago, in fact it was right around the time Morelli spurned Pitt which was all over the news at the time, one of my buddies was getting his balls busted for wearing Under Armor loose gear on a night out by another one of our other buddies in one of those hysterical you-had-to-be-there moments. "The kinda kid who wears Under Armor to the club" became a description we tended to use to describe people.

Great memories. Hard to believe the ball buster is now high up in the exec level at one of the biggest banks in the world and the Under Armor wearer is one of the most successful college coaches in the country in a different sport.

 

[Pittx9]

I also would be terrified to see what Under Armour would put out there. They really have made some strange uniforms. I'd prefer Nike and a simple, traditional uniform but it's not the end of the world if there's a change.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

I also would be terrified to see what Under Armour would put out there. They really have made some strange uniforms. I'd prefer Nike and a simple, traditional uniform but it's not the end of the world if there's a change.

Under Armour catches flack for the monstrosities they've outfitted Maryland in, but I think the school has been as responsible for those as much as the company. (I certainly expect Pitt to exhibit better judgment in its input). UA has been outfitting my other alma mater for the past couple of years, and there has been a noticeable upgrade in uniform identity (but that's not something that Pitt has been as lacking in).

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Under Armour catches flack for the monstrosities they've outfitted Maryland in, but I think the school has been as responsible for those as much as the company.

Ultimately the school is completely responsible, because while Under Armour (or Nike for that matter) can suggest any goofy thing they like at the end of the day the school has to sign off on it. If UA comes to Pitt with a design as ugly as some of those Maryland designs and Pitt doesn't say no then at the end of the day it's Pitt's fault, not UA's.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

Ultimately the school is completely responsible, because while Under Armour (or Nike for that matter) can suggest any goofy thing they like at the end of the day the school has to sign off on it. If UA comes to Pitt with a design as ugly as some of those Maryland designs and Pitt doesn't say no then at the end of the day it's Pitt's fault, not UA's.

Exactly. I think Maryland actually wanted those state flag-oriented designs that made their team look like the Jack of Diamonds or an entourage straight out of Medieval Times.