UT back to Adidas in '26.

[VOLINVONORE]

Being the Adidas flagship program should give us an advantage at recruiting the top Adidas athletes.

Nike does not see us as a high tier program. I don't see any recruiting advantage among athletes who prefer Nike. Staying with Nike makes 0 sense.

Nike likes their west coast teams and provides them with a lot of cash. Nike will never treat us equal to their local buddies.

 

[Vols14!]

From Swoosh to Stripes.

 

[Vols14!]

Here's some more thoughts and opinions. Great info!

Will West and John Pennington -



BLKOUT Jones -



Frank Rock -

 

[89 VOLS grad]

Nike lost me a long time ago.

I agree 100! Nike lost me when they supported Kaepernick! I haven't bought hardly any UT apparel since Nike pulled that asinine stunt! I will be buying extra Adidas stuff for as long as that contract lasts. Because I suspect UT goes back to Nike (they outbid Adidas) after the Adidas contract ends!

 

[DeerPark12]

Nike likes their west coast teams and provides them with a lot of cash. Nike will never treat us equal to their local buddies.

What West Coast teams? The only West Coast school in the top 10 of Nike deals is UCLA. And the yearly figure their contract has is actually misleading, because a big chunk of it was an upfront payment rather than an average annual value.

 

[Volfan2012]

Adidas hasn't been a very good product in terms of football. They are great at soccer apparel and uniforms. As I look at the landscape of Adidas college football uniforms...it's really underwhelming. Unless they do some major renovations when it comes to Tennessee brand...I'm a bit disappointed. I thought Nike did a really good job. I think this will be the case for every sport at Tennessee...

Tennessee does all the designing is part of the deal so what you see will be what Tennessee designed.

 

[madtownvol]

For the players, if they want to have input on design, features, or materials that they'll play and practice in, they'll be able to walk over to the UTAD and make those requests. I don't know if that's been the case under Nike.

Since this thread is in the Lady Vols Forum, there is one aspect I can think of that might be relevant to female players and recruits:

IIRC, Nike at some point came out in support of transgendered men playing in women's college sports. Apologies if that's not accurate. But if it is, I'm guessing that most female athletes might not appreciate that stance, and it could be made another selling point to some recruits in favor of an Adidas school.

(And I don't know... Adidas might have expressed similar support under the DEI pressure that BlackRock's CEO Larry Fink was exerting over corporations a few years back.)

I am going out on a limb here but I am guessing most college athletes are most concerned with how their gear fits, performs, and looks than culture war conflicts.

And, I am also gonna guess that when AD departments cut these deals their top priority is not culture war politics, or even athlete preferences but $$$$$$ and promotion value. When Wisconsin dropped Adidas in favor UA, many UW athletes were not that happy because UA cleats and shoes are a cut below Adidas and Nike but UA was willing to ante up more $$$.

 

[nickp91]

Think it is great that Vols creative team has control over designs

 

[Vols14!]

 

[BruisedOrange]

I am going out on a limb here but I am guessing most college athletes are most concerned with how their gear fits, performs, and looks than culture war conflicts.

And, I am also gonna guess that when AD departments cut these deals their top priority is not culture war politics, or even athlete preferences but $$$$$$ and promotion value. When Wisconsin dropped Adidas in favor UA, many UW athletes were not that happy because UA cleats and shoes are a cut below Adidas and Nike but UA was willing to ante up more $$$.

For us fans it's culture wars, yes.

But for the woman athletes who are out there actually competing...
it is/was a reality I'm sure they've all discussed and would resent.

 

[madtownvol]

For us fans it's culture wars, yes.

But for the woman athletes who are out there actually competing...
it is/was a reality I'm sure they've all discussed and would resent.

Okay, lets go with this. Nike has been the official apparel and gear sponsor of UTAD since 2015. So, when Kellie was struggling in HS recruiting, it really was not about a lack of NIL support or the state of the program, but recruits going, "Gee I would love to be a LV but Nike ran this ad in 2021 that briefly featured a transgender athlete in a montage. So, I gotta go to Uconn, LSU, Texas or U of Southern California" -- [Oops, those schools are also sponsored by Nike. I guess that is why they haven't been able to land any good recruits.]

So, poor Kellie got screwed by Nike's "woke" advertising and everyone owes her a big apology but why did no recruited athlete ever mention this issue as a deal breaker?
And how do you think CKC has been able to overcome this massive disadvantage?

Maybe this is more your agenda than that of the typical 18 year old college recruit.....

ADDENDUM:

OH NO!! Adidas is "woke" too!! Might as well shut down the LV programs for the next ten years, No recruit is coming here!!

Adidas has featured and partnered with transgender athletes. Adidas has collaborated with basketball player Layshia Clarendon, who identifies as trans, to support trans wellness and mental health. Additionally, Adidas has been vocal about its commitment to LGBTQIA+ inclusion in sports and has partnered with organizations like Athlete Ally to promote inclusivity and equity for all athletes. They also created an NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) network for student-athletes at D1 partner schools, including women, non-binary, and trans athletes, according to University of Washington Athletics.

 

[sigmundoooz]

I'm ambivalent when it comes to team uniforms. I always thought the Nike apparel was trash unless you purchase the higher end stuff. When you lay out $100.00 you get a great quality $45.00 item. When you spend $45.00 you get a t-shirt made out of tissue paper.

 

[ShortyMac10]

For or against? Share your thoughts.

 

[BruisedOrange]

Okay, lets go with this. Nike has been the official apparel and gear sponsor of UTAD since 2015. So, when Kellie was struggling in HS recruiting, it really was not about a lack of NIL support or the state of the program, but recruits going, "Gee I would love to be a LV but Nike ran this ad in 2021 that briefly featured a transgender athlete in a montage. So, I gotta go to Uconn, LSU, Texas or U of Southern California" -- [Oops, those schools are also sponsored by Nike. I guess that is why they haven't been able to land any good recruits.]

So, poor Kellie got screwed by Nike's "woke" advertising and everyone owes her a big apology but why did no recruited athlete ever mention this issue as a deal breaker?
And how do you think CKC has been able to overcome this massive disadvantage?

Maybe this is more your agenda than that of the typical 18 year old college recruit.....

ADDENDUM:

OH NO!! Adidas is "woke" too!! Might as well shut down the LV programs for the next ten years, No recruit is coming here!!

Then my original post stands. [color added for emphasis]

Since this thread is in the Lady Vols Forum, there is one aspect I can think of that might be relevant to female players and recruits:

IIRC, Nike at some point came out in support of transgendered men playing in women's college sports. Apologies if that's not accurate. But if it is, I'm guessing that most female athletes might not appreciate that stance, and it could be made another selling point to some recruits in favor of an Adidas school.

(And I don't know... Adidas might have expressed similar support under the DEI pressure that BlackRock's CEO Larry Fink was exerting over corporations a few years back.)

Despite my best efforts to keep my post factual and non-political, and offer no judgements of my own, my impression is that you read into it and overreacted.

It is possible for us to discuss controversial topics objectively and calmly here, but we all have to limit our responses to the words each other actually posts, not what biases or agendas we might suspect underlie them.

Since evidently Adidas also offered support to biological males competing against women in women's sports, that possible selling point to recruits is moot.

 

[madtownvol]

Then my original post stands. [color added for emphasis]


Despite my best efforts to keep my post factual and non-political, and offer no judgements of my own, my impression is that you read into it and overreacted.

It is possible for us to discuss controversial topics objectively and calmly here, but we all have to limit our responses to the words each other actually posts, not what biases or agendas we might suspect underlie them.

Since evidently Adidas also offered support to biological males competing against women in women's sports, that possible selling point to recruits is moot.

Well, it is not an over reaction to assess if a post holds up to logical scrutiny. The core premise of your post was an assertion about the impact a specific type of advertising might have upon recruits. That assertion is inconsistent with known facts. In terms of factual statements, the term transgender male refers to a person who is assigned female at birth but identifies as a male. So factually, there are no transgender men playing in D1 women’s sports.

 

[37620VOL]

How will madtown's alien invaders react to our partnership with adidas? Are they more likely to destroy a nike or adidas school? Has Danny White considered the ramifications of this? Was Josh Dobbs consulted? The people need to know.

 

[madtownvol]

How will madtown's alien invaders react to our partnership with adidas? Are they more likely to destroy a nike or adidas school? Has Danny White considered the ramifications of this? Was Josh Dobbs consulted? The people need to know.

Well, they are not really “my alien” invaders though if they are monitoring our communications, “I welcome our alien overlords!” But your question is an excellent fact based consideration. I believe that it would be a recruiting advantage if the aliens were only coming to destroy Nike and UA schools. I think it is pretty obvious that Danny White is ahead of the curve here (again) and that is why he made the change to Adidas!