UCLA Apparel Hot Takes – Adidas, Nike, or Under Armour?

I, for one, welcome our new Under Armour overlords.

With the announcement of UCLA‘s new apparel deal imminent, here’s a look at the pros and cons of each of the three contending bidders: Adidas, Nike, and Under Armour.

UCLA has been an Adidas school since 1999, long enough that Adidas has seemingly become an integral part of the UCLA visual identity. However, the Athletic Department allowed Adidas’ exclusive negotiating period to lapse on April 2, and now it’s a three-company race. UCLA has fielded bids from Adidas, Nike, and Under Armour.

If the rumors are true, Under Armour looks to be the new outfitter of Bruins sports. There is some buzz that the deal will be announced on Tuesday, May 17.

If you’re going to talk pros and cons to this type of deal, money is the most straight-forward part to track. Three companies are vying to pay for the privilege of outfitting UCLA’s athletes, and one of those companies will be offering the most money to do so. If all else is equal, the comparison is simple.

The question comes when all else is not equal. Which brand would do a better job of outfitting the teams? Which would make the best uniforms? Have the best equipment? Sell the most merchandise? Market the programs the best?

Is one outfitter likely enough to do a superior job to make it worth taking less money? Or, regardless of money, who should fans hope wins the bidding, for the reasons listed above?

Fan opinion appears roughly equally distributed between the three, but what follows is the definitive breakdown: UCLA fans should be thrilled that Under Armour is rumored to have landed this deal. To the tape!

Next: Die Weltmarke mit den 3 Streifen

Die Weltmarke mit den 3 Streifen

When Adidas took over the UCLA apparel contract in 1999, it signaled the Bruins’ entry into the high-stakes branding world. Previously, UCLA had been outfitted by Reebok and, before that, Champion, but now UCLA was getting big shoe money.

And it showed. The uniforms got more modern and stylish. There were more merchandise options in stores. It was a good move.

More from Go Joe Bruin

• UCLA Football: It’s time for the nation to meet Dante Moore
• UCLA Football: Where are they ranked heading into week 4
• UCLA Football: Position battle breakdown for Utah showdown
• UCLA vs. Utah: Location, time, prediction, and more
• UCLA Football: Highlights from Chip Kelly’s appearance on the Jim Rome Show

Even better, UCLA was now aligned with the biggest rival of Nike, outfitters of UCLA’s bitter rival, USC. A lot of Bruin fans developed an Adidas brand loyalty from that fact alone.

But that was almost 20 years ago. Nike’s involvement in the college game has exploded, along with the football success of its flagship program, Oregon.

Adidas, which ten years ago was an island of classic sanity compared to Nike’s flashy experimentation, has attempted to match Nike’s cachet with ill-considered brand-wide gimmicks of its own, from the Zubaz nightmares and the cummerbunds in basketball to unreadable fonts and pointless business in football.

Consequently, Adidas has become a laughingstock in college sports over that last couple of years and is shedding contracts left and right. Previous flagship programs have left for Nike (Michigan, Tennessee) and Under Armour (Notre Dame, Wisconsin).

Adidas has managed to lose the loyalty of UCLA fans by repeatedly tarnishing some of the most widely respected uniforms in sports with desperate visual stunts. I will caveat that the blame for that lies at least equally with the Athletic Department. The AD or the coaches have the right and obligation to opt UCLA out of the gimmicks and demand a uniform that respects UCLA’s visual tradition. But if they can’t be trusted, then it’s at least time to limit the damage by moving away from Adidas.

Next: The Swoosh

The Swoosh

Now, the thought of signing on with the company that has been making USC’s uniforms for as long as I can remember is gross.

But for those who need a less sentimental reason, consider that UCLA would essentially be a nameless, faceless account number for Nike. How much energy is Nike going to put into crafting UCLA’s visual brand, marketing the program, distributing merchandise to out-of-market retailers?

It simply doesn’t make business sense for Nike to expend the effort to grow UCLA’s market share so that they can sell more Bruins gear. The margins involved, relative to Nike’s other apparel clients, are just too small.

No, Nike would put UCLA into one of its pre-existing uniform templates, feed Bruins merchandise into its local retail networks, and move on to the next client. So UCLA should move on to the next bidder.

Next: We Must Protect This House

We Must Protect This House

The fact that Under Armour has a proven record of respecting clean, classic looks is encouraging. The fact that Under Armour is rumored to have posted the highest bid is also encouraging. But the chief reason to go with Under Armour is that they will be motivated to work for UCLA.

If you haven’t read Ethan Strauss’ piece for ESPN on how Nike lost Steph Curry to Under Armour, you really need to go do that. But the applicable theme here is that Under Armour is moving heaven and earth to sign premier athletes and teams and to compete with Nike in the endorsement business.

UCLA has the chance to be a part of Under Armour’s innovative and aggressive push to become a national brand. To be the prize fish in a rapidly growing pond. To be the showcase example of what Under Armour can do for a team.

I know there are vague concerns about the quality of Under Armour’s cleats and whether they might increase risk of injury. I also know this very thing was something we suspected about Adidas back when Ben Olson and every other offensive lineman was going down with foot/ankle injuries.

Likewise, I know some people are worried about Nike and Adidas’ presence in the prep and AAU world, and that cutting those ties might make it harder to get top high school talent to look at UCLA. I would refer those people to one Myles Click-Clack Jack.

Next: Football Recruiting: Where Does UCLA Look to Now?

Regardless of who wins this contract, the first hurdle was letting Adidas’ exclusive window lapse so that the process could drive up the ultimate contract and so that the Athletic Department could see just how much leverage the shoe companies think UCLA has. There’s a windfall coming, and the uniforms are unlikely to get any WORSE.