Cincinnati Bearcats officially join Under Armour

[TheStoicPaisano]

UM has an exceptionally plum deal with Adidas that won't be matched by Nike/UA, yet they're actively looking to switch. That should tell you a lot.

[WavePunter]

I've said it before, but we just switched from UA to Adidas, as UA is absolute garbage compared to Adidas.. The uniforms fit better, the sizing runs truer, we get more bang for our buck, and honestly I like the look of the Adidas uniforms much better.. Granted, our old design was a bit more "traditional", the look of the new uniforms is far superior.. Someone mentioned that the sizing is off/inconsistent with Adidas, but with UA, we had 230 lb LB's wearing 2XL shorts and Small game pants.. To me, that is inconsistent.. With Adidas, there is MUCH less discrepancy between sizes, and that issue is virtually non-existent.. Made it very tough to order UA, but Adidas is a breeze.. Any team that stitches to UA will switch again asap (although USC and Auburn are coming from Russell, so they may not know better)

[Midway]

Adidas simply has poor marketing at this point in comparison to UA. I can see how that doesn't cut it anymore for a large sports entity like Michigan but Adidas also has a consistent tendency to churn out some craptastic designs. Not to mention the fact that their current football template warps striping on even the most traditional of uniforms e.g UCLA, Nebraska. As a uniform supplier, that tells me you're not capable or caring enough to fix what should be minor issues for your client.

It's not a mystery anymore why UA is now the no. 2 athletic gear supplier stateside behind only the swoosh.

[coogrfan]

I've said it before, but we just switched from UA to Adidas, as UA is absolute garbage compared to Adidas.. The uniforms fit better, the sizing runs truer, we get more bang for our buck, and honestly I like the look of the Adidas uniforms much better.. Granted, our old design was a bit more "traditional", the look of the new uniforms is far superior.. Someone mentioned that the sizing is off/inconsistent with Adidas, but with UA, we had 230 lb LB's wearing 2XL shorts and Small game pants.. To me, that is inconsistent.. With Adidas, there is MUCH less discrepancy between sizes, and that issue is virtually non-existent.. Made it very tough to order UA, but Adidas is a breeze.. Any team that stitches to UA will switch again asap (although USC and Auburn are coming from Russell, so they may not know better)

Who is "we"?

[Ben5]

I've said it before, but we just switched from UA to Adidas, as UA is absolute garbage compared to Adidas.. The uniforms fit better, the sizing runs truer, we get more bang for our buck, and honestly I like the look of the Adidas uniforms much better.. Granted, our old design was a bit more "traditional", the look of the new uniforms is far superior.. Someone mentioned that the sizing is off/inconsistent with Adidas, but with UA, we had 230 lb LB's wearing 2XL shorts and Small game pants.. To me, that is inconsistent.. With Adidas, there is MUCH less discrepancy between sizes, and that issue is virtually non-existent.. Made it very tough to order UA, but Adidas is a breeze.. Any team that stitches to UA will switch again asap (although USC and Auburn are coming from Russell, so they may not know better)

That is inconsistent with my experience. I don't think UA is going to lose any teams soon.

[WavePunter]

"We" is Newberry College.. D2 school in South Carolina.. Just went from UA to Adidas in the past few months.. The transition will probably span this upcoming year as well, to cover all of our teams.. Not sure what your experience involves, but I'm an assistant with two teams as well as the head athletic equipment manager, and I can say Adidas blows UA out of the water in nearly every example I've seen.

[frosty06306]

By my count, here is the list of (soon-to-be) power program affiliations:

ADIDAS (10)

ACC (3/15): Louisville, Miami, NC State

B12 (1/10): Kansas

B1G (2/14): Indiana, Nebraska

PAC12 (2/12): Arizona State, UCLA

SEC (2/14): Mississippi State, Texas A&M

UNDER ARMOUR (9)

ACC (2/15): Boston College, Notre Dame

B12 (1/10): Texas Tech

B1G (3/14): Maryland, Northwestern, Wisconsin?

PAC12 (1/12): Utah

SEC (2/14): Auburn, South Carolina

RUSSELL (1)

ACC (1/15): Georgia Tech

NIKE (45)

ACC (9/15): Clemson, Duke, Florida State, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

B12 (8/10): Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, TCU, West Virginia

B1G (9/14): Illinois, Iowa, Michigan?, Michigan State, Minnesota, Penn State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers

PAC12 (9/12): Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, USC, Washington, Washington State

SEC (10/14): Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, LSU, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Pretty easy to see who's still king of the mountain.

Wisconsin and Michigan are adidas thru June 2016.

Some of the contracts that also expire after the coming 2015-16 school year that we should hear something about soon: Texas, South Carolina, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan State, Virginia and Auburn. Most of those will make an announcement by August to get under the one-year cycle.

adidas has money to spend and is going to get more schools. They're not going to pack it in like it seems some here would like. I don't see it as a foregone conclusion that they lose Michigan, either.

I'm rather offended you left NC State off your little list - I believe there was a fliration with UA prior to Adidas agreeing to outfit all teams on a 4 year deal from 2012-13 to 15-16 and to my knowledge no extension of the deal has been made so we should be on the lookout for news as well.

[CLEstones]

I'm not really a fan of the new stripe. I get wanting to be consistent and I get where it originated from. But it just doesn't look good. To be honest, it looks like UnderArmor trying to do an impression of Nike. It just seems way too contrived and I don't think its going to translate well to uniform or to TV.