Ace
aka, Hoss
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2011
- Messages
- 15,679
- Likes
- 36,304
Also, there are way more options than there used to be, small locally owned companies like volunteer traditions, and large corporations like Peter Millar have great stuff.I get it, to some degree. Most casual fans are thinking about:
A. They remember the way our uniforms looked
and/or
B. How the fan apparel was that they could buy
Both were terrible. So I get why people would be a little iffy about going back, although I'm sure it's better than it was then.
Disclosure. I’m a homer 90% of the time.
Also, I’m four jalapeno margaritas deep.
That said, I really believe the addidas deal is a watershed moment for our Vols and we’re about to join the ELITES in college football.
So Danny orchestrated a deal that has on top of the SEC with our apparel deal?? Ah, feels good to be king again.It's hard to get completely accurate numbers on this but this seems to be close. Had to get AI to help.
How much each SEC team makes from its apparel provider:
- Tennessee: $22 million
- Adjusted upward from $20 million due to the Adidas deal announced on August 13, 2025, which includes $10 million annually starting 2026-36, with an immediate NIL boost of $20.5 million for 2025 (per SI.com). The 2025 figure likely includes front-loaded NIL incentives, pushing the effective apparel deal value higher this year.
- Texas: $18 million
- Increased from $16 million, reflecting Texas’s move to the SEC in 2024 and its large market appeal. Nike, a key partner, is likely to enhance the deal post-expansion, aligning with trends of top programs securing 10-15% annual increases (Journal of Sports Economics, 2023).
- Texas A&M: $10 million
- Up from $9 million, as A&M’s strong fan base and Nike partnership could see a modest bump, though no major renegotiation is indicated recently.
- Auburn: $8.5 million
- Slightly up from $8 million, assuming a steady Nike deal with minor adjustments for inflation and NIL-related perks.
- Kentucky: $7.5 million
- Up from $7 million, reflecting its basketball dominance and a likely Nike contract tweak to compete with rising SEC football markets.
- South Carolina: $7.5 million
- Up from $7 million, as Under Armour may adjust terms following recent SEC performance gains.
- LSU: $6.2 million
- Up from $5.8 million, with Nike potentially increasing support due to LSU’s national championship pedigree.
- Alabama: $12 million
- Significantly up from $5.25 million, as the 2013 Nike deal (al.com, 2018) is outdated. Alabama likely renegotiated post-2023, leveraging its brand to match or exceed top-tier deals, especially with competition from Adidas and Under Armour heating up.
- Ole Miss: $4.5 million
- Up from $4 million, with Nike possibly adjusting for Lane Kiffin’s program growth.
- Missouri: $3.5 million
- Up from $3.2 million, reflecting modest Nike deal improvements.
- Florida: $3.5 million
- Up from $3 million, as Nike may bolster support despite recent on-field struggles.
- Georgia: $10 million
- Up from $2.8 million, a major adjustment due to back-to-back national titles (2021-2022) and a likely renegotiated Nike deal to reflect its elite status.
- Mississippi State: $2.5 million
- Up from $2.2 million, with a modest Adidas increase.
- Arkansas: $2.5 million
- Up from $2 million, as Nike adjusts for Razorback fan enthusiasm.
- Oklahoma: $10 million
- Up from $1.8 million, a significant jump post-SEC entry (2024), with Nike or a new partner likely capitalizing on its brand.
- Vanderbilt: $2 million
- Unchanged from $1.8 million/undisclosed, as its academic focus limits apparel deal growth.
Absolutely agree, and I think there’s an overlap with two others types of posters:There is a certain segment of Vol "fans" that loathe Tennessee more than a lot of opposing fans. They look for reasons to knock UT. I'm no psychologist, but there seems to be a self-loathing component to this mentality.
Of course you can make statements like that. Quit being dramatic.You're not allowed to bring up the fact that we have struggled at CB WR and OL recruiting and development.
Gibson is being developed. GBOOur portal CB's are good. I would rather see us recruiting and developing our own. Our Oline does have two five stars. One of which played last year and looked awful most of the year. Then we will hear he was injured, but where is the depth behind him if the coach has been through 5 recruiting cycles. You think our pass blocking is great? And WR's, we will find out this year if it was Nico or the receivers last year. These are the three underperforming groups. They'be been here long enough to know. If we can upgrade, we should if things aren't drastically improved in these three areas. Everyone of these coaches have been through at least 3 classes. We've been on the upswing for four years. Where would we be at if these three positions were recruited and developed as well as the rest of the team? How in the heck are we not landing top level wr's in this offense?
I am really really hoping that Nico was the problem with the wr production and pre snap alignments. If this is the case, these coaches should look a lot better this year. If not, how much longer of a history do you need?