Sign in to follow this  
gosioux76

NBA switching to Nike in 2017

Recommended Posts

As much as I like some company not named Adidas having the contract, I wish UA got it. I really wanna see what they do with a big four league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more along the lines of the '80s and Run DMC with the "cultural value" of Adidas.

It's not the '80s anymore. Nike, UA and even foreign companies like Peak have long since dethroned them. Adidas is seen as making low quality sneakers and some people even think they make you more injury-prone than the other brands.

Well, I personally think that arguing in favor of putting a manufacturer logo on a jersey due to its supposed cultural value is silly, so you're arguing with the wrong guy. And I realize that Adidas isn't what it once was. And no, Peak hasn't dethroned anybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nike_curry.png

Gotta send logoman back home and stitch the Swoosh on the opposite side.

Most Nike affiliated NCAA teams do the same, with their conference logo on the left, Swoosh on the right.

That totally works for me. And when the Finals come around, just merge the trophy logo with the NBA logo like in '02 and bam, you're golden. It'll balance things out better than the current finals patch against the swoosh (the ball would just look too big and clunky against it, I think), and you won't have to clutter or move stuff around to get it to work. I'm totally down for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather see a miniscule 2-inch Swoosh than the alternate.....

draft_king_james.png

"The alternate"?

What on Earth makes you think it's an either/or? Or that adding the Nike swoosh now makes your vision even the tiniest bit less likely?

Not saying the NBA is 100% saying "no" to ridiculous soccer-style ads on their jerseys, but having Nike pay $2359275359 for a simple Swoosh definitely remedies the need to so do.

Jersey ads will definitely be on the table as the owners likely get to pocket that revenue for themselves as opposed to league shared revenue.

There's no way the players union would be OK with that.

To clarify, uniform ads would be considered local team revenue like other local sponsorships and would be subject to the the cba revenue sharing plan as such. From my recollection local revenues favor the owners more thus making it a proposition worth pursuing.

The inevitable lockout that's coming with the new TV deal will likely table the issue for a while though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy about the Nike logo being on the jerseys because that's one less place for an advertisement to go. I'd much rather see the swoosh than any other corporate logo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy about the Nike logo being on the jerseys because that's one less place for an advertisement to go. I'd much rather see the swoosh than any other corporate logo.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's going to happen you just have to accept it. It's like tax season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's going to happen you just have to accept it. It's like tax season.

Yup, as long as the ads are small like these it will be "tasteful". So, it will be Nike Swoosh on the right and 2 x 2 ad on the left:

463515444-victor-oladipo-of-the-orlando-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody think we'll see the Bulls and/or Hornets wearing the Jordan jumpman logo in place of the swoosh?

image.png?w=400&c=1

I bet 10 teams at least to have Jordan, the rest Nike. maybe D league wearing Converse (a subsidiary of NIKE now)

Interesting. I had brought up the point before elsewhere about some teams sporting Team Jordan logos and others Nike logos, but having the D-League sport Converse logos sounds like an awesome opportunity for Nike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Swoosh (or Jumpman) is going to be inevitable (or worse, guaranteed), where would you like to see it placed?

How about on the inside of the jersey.

Sure, but I doubt Nike would go for it seeing how much money they spent to "convince" the NBA to let them put a logo on it.

I always appreciated that there was no manufacturer logo on the NBA jerseys. It's the last domino to fall for the gateway level of logo creep. So it is as disappointing as something this non-surprising can be.

I am always stunned to see people happy about such things. To me there is no such thing as tasteful sponsorship; just less-egregious sponsorship. This is, of course, less egregious than a corporate roundel but it's in no way a positive.

But as the post asks, since it is inevitable, then I would say shorts. OK, fine...left shoulder. I did not leave the photos in the quote, but the one on the center of the jersey is definitely most jarring.

It's funny you mentioned the shorts, because back when Nike were contracted to make jerseys for ten teams, the "authentic" shorts sold on the NBA Store website always came with an embroidered Nike logo, even though the shorts worn on the court didn't have them.

wPhgmXH.jpg

Here's a good recap of what transpired up to this point in regard to the NBA jerseys.

http://championblogger.com/blog/2014/08/24/history-of-nba-jersey-licensing/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody think we'll see the Bulls and/or Hornets wearing the Jordan jumpman logo in place of the swoosh?

image.png?w=400&c=1

I bet 10 teams at least to have Jordan, the rest Nike. maybe D league wearing Converse (a subsidiary of NIKE now)

Interesting. I had brought up the point before elsewhere about some teams sporting Team Jordan logos and others Nike logos, but having the D-League sport Converse logos sounds like an awesome opportunity for Nike.

I don't think nike's given any indication that they want to bring a 3rd brand into their competitive basketball mix. Given that they tried and failed with dwade, I'd expect converse to stay in the fashion/retro arena where they are actually a significant player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB next?

I perviously wanted to ask that without hijacking the thread -- but since you just did the honors: What is the current status with MLB & Majestic? In other words "How soon can Nike invade America's pastime?!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB next?

I perviously wanted to ask that without hijacking the thread -- but since you just did the honors: What is the current status with MLB & Majestic? In other words "How soon can Nike invade America's pastime?!"

I don't see Nike wasting their time/money with the MLB. Its a dying sport in the US and internationally. I don't think merchandise sales are worth anything either, in the grand scheme of things. I think basketball and football is where they want to make their mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB next?

I perviously wanted to ask that without hijacking the thread -- but since you just did the honors: What is the current status with MLB & Majestic? In other words "How soon can Nike invade America's pastime?!"

I don't see Nike wasting their time/money with the MLB. Its a dying sport in the US and internationally. I don't think merchandise sales are worth anything either, in the grand scheme of things. I think basketball and football is where they want to make their mark.

There is far more revenue in MLB merchandise than NBA merchandise. And baseball, while maybe slowing in the US, isn't dying internationally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB next?

I perviously wanted to ask that without hijacking the thread -- but since you just did the honors: What is the current status with MLB & Majestic? In other words "How soon can Nike invade America's pastime?!"

I don't see Nike wasting their time/money with the MLB. Its a dying sport in the US and internationally. I don't think merchandise sales are worth anything either, in the grand scheme of things. I think basketball and football is where they want to make their mark.

There is far more revenue in MLB merchandise than NBA merchandise. And baseball, while maybe slowing in the US, isn't dying internationally.

Where did you find this information? And does this factor in MLB hats? Because Nike would not be seeing any of that money for making the uniforms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nike is happy to make the MLB undershirts, which display the swoosh prominently:

jeter-306-1406130724.jpg

Jonathan+Lucroy+Milwaukee+Brewers+Photo+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB next?

I perviously wanted to ask that without hijacking the thread -- but since you just did the honors: What is the current status with MLB & Majestic? In other words "How soon can Nike invade America's pastime?!"

I don't see Nike wasting their time/money with the MLB. Its a dying sport in the US and internationally. I don't think merchandise sales are worth anything either, in the grand scheme of things. I think basketball and football is where they want to make their mark.

There is far more revenue in MLB merchandise than NBA merchandise. And baseball, while maybe slowing in the US, isn't dying internationally.

Where did you find this information? And does this factor in MLB hats? Because Nike would not be seeing any of that money for making the uniforms.

Found this, but have not seen an updated article. With that said, the popularity of NBA merchandise still has not surpassed MLB merchandise. Take a look at selections of products at any online retailer and this is obvious.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/37692194

And granted, Nike won't make millions of dollars adding baseball jerseys and jackets to their current MLB apparel license. But they'd make the profit that keeps Majestic contracts alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this