Faustus said:

---

drakkies said:

---

Feels like Nike has taken over everything besides the handful of adidas. How long will adidas hang on?

---

As of 2021 Adidas had 37 of the 130 FBS schools (28.5%):

https://boardroom.tv/ncaa-football-apparel-brand-partners/

Quote:

---

• Arizona State, Arkansas State, Central Michigan, East Carolina, Eastern Michigan, FAU, FIU, Georgia Southern, Kansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Louisiana-Monroe, Louisiana Tech, Louisville, Massachusets, Miami (FL), Miami (OH), Mississippi State, NC State, Nebraska, Nevada, Northern Illinois, Ohio, Rice, Rutgers, San Jose State, South Alabama, South Florida, Southern Miss, Texas A&M, Texas State, Troy, Tulsa, UTSA, Washington, Western Michigan, Wyoming

---

And what seemed like at the time 100% of the 80s rap market.

---

Bunch of heavy hitters in that list.

45-70Ag said:

---

Auburn athletics signs 10-year apparel deal w/Nike, beginning July 2025. Auburn had been w/Under Armour for past 18 years

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) April 9, 2024

---

Great, I hope their happy!

WES2006AG said:

---

TX_COWDOC said:

---

A shoe is just a shoe until you put it on. That said, I don't wear anything Nike because I don't do woke and choose to stand for our National Anthem.

---

Which non-woke brand do you wear then?

---

Mostly Beck Cowboy Boots made in Amarillo, Texas, USA. I also realize there are many levels of 'woke'. Amongst the shoe makers, Nike is the worst (just my take). I do not spend anything / or wear that brand.

short memory? We were a Nike school. Swirly maroon neckbands and mis-colored uni's where the jerseys and helmets never matched. Ring a bell?

I loved the Adidas striped updates and hated when we went backward to the high school unis we have now. The Manziel era uniforms kept things interesting.

Ringo88 said:

---

short memory? We were a Nike school. Swirly maroon neckbands and mis-colored uni's where the jerseys and helmets never matched. Ring a bell?

I loved the Adidas striped updates and hated when we went backward to the high school unis we have now. The Manziel era uniforms kept things interesting.

---

Agreed. Wish we kept the shoulder stripes and ditched the high school style "Texas A&M" across the chest. Everyone knows who we are, just see the helmet.

Nike is the most overpriced and the most woke. I'd take Adidas or UA any day as a sponsor over them.

Faustus said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

WES2006AG said:

---

TX_COWDOC said:

---

A shoe is just a shoe until you put it on. That said, I don't wear anything Nike because I don't do woke and choose to stand for our National Anthem.

---

Which non-woke brand do you wear then?

---

PF Flyers.

Hoka, Brooks and On Cloud have no college programs, but they are selling a ton of shoes to us olds.

---

I like Hoka too. Really comfortable shoes.

---

Hokas are great if you've ever had a turf-toe (plantar fasciitis) injury, either if you've recovering or trying to avoid re-injuring your foot. They're the only sneaker I wear now.

Under Armor hasn't been in for a long while now..the agreement to stock compensation was a bonehead move

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

Nike is the superior product. I wish we were a Nike school.

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

McInnis80 said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

---

In 1997 we played for the Big 12 Championship, plus we put a beat down on the sips. If that's what wearing ugly uniforms will do for us, i am ready to make go full Penn State.

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

TX_Aggie37 said:

---

Nike is the superior product. I wish we were a Nike school.

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

---

The uniforms in the late 90's are what we should always wear. Loved the crazy looking collars. Maroon facemask looked great, but white works too. Shiny material on the jerseys and pants and the pants matched the jerseys. Dark shade of maroon. black cleats We looked sharp. Would love to see the crazy collars come back, shiny material, just ditch the name across the chest in favor of an A&M logo on the chest.
Somewhere after 2000 it looked like Nike switched our maroon to a lighter shade and of course we switched to white cleats. Not the best look but wasnt bad. Every look was better than the awful Adidas uniforms of 2008 and 2009, those pants with the weird stripes of various sizes were atrocious. The grey pants that were a shade between khaki and grey looked like something that got washed on accident. Since then Adidas has done a really good job. Our current uniforms need some work, the font of the numbers are bad but the color is good.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Ringo88 said:

---

short memory? We were a Nike school. Swirly maroon neckbands and mis-colored uni's where the jerseys and helmets never matched. Ring a bell?

I loved the Adidas striped updates and hated when we went backward to the high school unis we have now. The Manziel era uniforms kept things interesting.

---

Agreed. Wish we kept the shoulder stripes and ditched the high school style "Texas A&M" across the chest. Everyone knows who we are, just see the helmet.

---

Bingo! Always hated the "Texas A&M" on the front

Adidas needs to Keep It Simple, Stupid. Nike has been actively dismissive with their equipment deal offers and the school likes the positioning Adidas offers. It won't change as long as we need differentiation which we do.

McInnis80 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

---

In 1997 we played for the Big 12 Championship, plus we put a beat down on the sips. If that's what wearing ugly uniforms will do for us, i am ready to make go full Penn State.

---

---

Are you insinuating that the look of a uniform increases the odds of having a successful season?

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

---

In 1997 we played for the Big 12 Championship, plus we put a beat down on the sips. If that's what wearing ugly uniforms will do for us, i am ready to make go full Penn State.

---

---

Are you insinuating that the look of a uniform increases the odds of having a successful season?

---

A good looking uniform makes the product of football a little more enjoyable. The sloppy play and mediocre uniforms of Jimbo from 2021-2023 or the putrid play and look of 2007-2009 make one want to listen to the radio. Obviously uniforms have no bearing on the result but a good looking uniform sure cant hurt the efforts.

I for one don't understand why everyone wants us to switch to Nike. What did Nike give us when we had them? Purple jerseys and the bevel, which was just a copied, worse version of what they have Tech before that? Why would we go back. I love our basketball and especially baseball uniforms right now, and the football unis are decent. For baseball specifically, most Nike schools unis just look like a copy and paste of each other, while ours are super sharp.

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

---

In 1997 we played for the Big 12 Championship, plus we put a beat down on the sips. If that's what wearing ugly uniforms will do for us, i am ready to make go full Penn State.

---

---

Are you insinuating that the look of a uniform increases the odds of having a successful season?

---

A good looking uniform makes the product of football a little more enjoyable. The sloppy play and mediocre uniforms of Jimbo from 2021-2023 or the putrid play and look of 2007-2009 make one want to listen to the radio. Obviously uniforms have no bearing on the result but a good looking uniform sure cant hurt the efforts.

---

He brought back shiny helmets. I would have never guessed Ags thought those uniforms were "mediocre"
I liked them. I haven't seen bad uniforms since the Jimbo era. I suspect Elko will have our guys looking sharp

BLSmith04 said:

---

I for one don't understand why everyone wants us to switch to Nike.

---

Because the average age of the texags user here is to old to realize that Nike isn't the only popular brand. More than half probably have children, and grandchildren wearing something other than JUST, Nike.

This isn't the 80s and 90s anymore. Adidas is a huge brand here in the USA

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

McInnis80 said:

---

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

In 1997 Nike gave us the ugliest uniforms in the history of the program.

Hard pass

---

In 1997 we played for the Big 12 Championship, plus we put a beat down on the sips. If that's what wearing ugly uniforms will do for us, i am ready to make go full Penn State.

---

---

Are you insinuating that the look of a uniform increases the odds of having a successful season?

---

A good looking uniform makes the product of football a little more enjoyable. The sloppy play and mediocre uniforms of Jimbo from 2021-2023 or the putrid play and look of 2007-2009 make one want to listen to the radio. Obviously uniforms have no bearing on the result but a good looking uniform sure cant hurt the efforts.

---

He brought back shiny helmets. I would have never guessed Ags thought those uniforms were "mediocre"
I liked them. I haven't seen bad uniforms since the Jimbo era. I suspect Elko will have our guys looking sharp

---

The shiny helmet is cool. I think the font of the numbers and the silly name across the chest need a serious upgrade. Remove the name on the chest and replace with just an A&M logo. The current look is average, nothing great but not bad either.

Ringo88 said:

---

short memory? We were a Nike school. Swirly maroon neckbands and mis-colored uni's where the jerseys and helmets never matched. Ring a bell?

I loved the Adidas striped updates and hated when we went backward to the high school unis we have now. The Manziel era uniforms kept things interesting.

---

Those old Nike uniforms are like 20 years old. You may be one of the only people I've ever heard say they prefer the striped jerseys to what we wear now.

Nike is a superior product.

Aggie Class of 2026 said:

---

BLSmith04 said:

---

I for one don't understand why everyone wants us to switch to Nike.

---

Because the average age of the texags user here is to old to realize that Nike isn't the only popular brand. More than half probably have children, and grandchildren wearing something other than JUST, Nike.

This isn't the 80s and 90s anymore. Adidas is a huge brand here in the USA

---

I just like Nike gear better than Adidas gear. I played at a Nike school. I prefer Nike gear now as a 32 year old. It's just better in my opinion.

Also, for what it's worth (not much) I think only Notre Dame, Cincinnati, and Washington are the only non-Nike schools to ever make the playoff. May be wrong.

Buying shoes for 3 teen sons, I can unfortunately burst your bubble and state Nike is not superior. The shoes are disposable after 6 months max. Bad investment; I have them look at Adidas or other, even though the youngest is addicted to swoosh clothing he gets as gifts.
Lots of people liked the distinctive Manziel era unis, which were a throwback blend of the 50s -80s. Your version of "classic" began with Slocum; they're not historic by any means, and not distinctive in any way. As many have said, they look high school.

We should return to the Manziel era unis and alternate options ASAP. Having dabbled in the memorabilia market, i know the helmets sold extremely well. Can't find a matte maroon helmet for sale anywhere now, nor the official alternates. So much more marketing & retail sales opportunities.

Ringo88 said:

---

Buying shoes for 3 teen sons, I can unfortunately burst your bubble and state Nike is not superior. The shoes are disposable after 6 months max. Bad investment; I have them look at Adidas or other, even though the youngest is addicted to swoosh clothing he gets as gifts.
Lots of people liked the distinctive Manziel era unis, which were a throwback blend of the 50s -80s. Your version of "classic" began with Slocum; they're not historic by any means, and not distinctive in any way. As many have said, they look high school.

We should return to the Manziel era unis and alternate options ASAP. Having dabbled in the memorabilia market, i know the helmets sold extremely well. Can't find a matte maroon helmet for sale anywhere now, nor the official alternates. So much more marketing & retail sales opportunities.

---

This!! There was an edit floating around of a mockup that had the Manziel era stripes but with no Texas A&M on the chest and with solid white pants, it looked perfect. It was rumored to be in the mix for the new uniform in 2021 but was ultimately scrapped in favor of the current look.

Ringo88 said:

---

Buying shoes for 3 teen sons, I can unfortunately burst your bubble and state Nike is not superior. The shoes are disposable after 6 months max. Bad investment; I have them look at Adidas or other, even though the youngest is addicted to swoosh clothing he gets as gifts.
Lots of people liked the distinctive Manziel era unis, which were a throwback blend of the 50s -80s. Your version of "classic" began with Slocum; they're not historic by any means, and not distinctive in any way. As many have said, they look high school.

We should return to the Manziel era unis and alternate options ASAP. Having dabbled in the memorabilia market, i know the helmets sold extremely well. Can't find a matte maroon helmet for sale anywhere now, nor the official alternates. So much more marketing & retail sales opportunities.

---

You're probably right on shoes. I actually prefer adidas golf shoes because they are far cheaper and fit my foot better. For athletic shirts, shorts, etc. though I'll always lean Nike.

I like the unis we wear now 100x more than what we had in the Sumlin/Manziel era. We're all entitled to our opinion.

Faustus said:

---

WES2006AG said:

---

TX_COWDOC said:

---

A shoe is just a shoe until you put it on. That said, I don't wear anything Nike because I don't do woke and choose to stand for our National Anthem.

---

Which non-woke brand do you wear then?

---

The gold Never Surrender High-Top Sneaker has a, err, solid endorsement. These bad boys deliver an electric shock if they detect anyone crouching, kneeling, or doing anything other than standing at attention during patriotic interludes.

https://www.allstarelite.com/products/hgc45-trump-shoe-1-gold

---

Didn't he literally Surrender to the Fulton County Police?

Runners need to change shoes based on usage and it's usually way more frequent than extrinsic months. Some of the neeer shoes for runners last exactly one race. I have family members who with on concrete at a familiar big box retail store. They buy two pairs every 3-4 months.

Kaepas were heavy leather and the uppers lasted a long time but most tennis players felt they were too heavy. But I'm sure as someone doing the outlay the trade off between style and substance includes a key economic factor.

I usually hate displaying brands. But I do have some Nike wear (their Texas Rangers WS hoodies that the team wore are amazing), Some UA particularly socks and their lighter sweats, adidas, New Balance (better width choices for my fallen arches), even Reebok (underwear as it turns out.)

The one manufacturer I really dislike is New Era who acquired Majestic. But Nike took over their baseball uni contract and those unis are fine.

but I believe that Adidas is about the same size as Nike, and it serves more sports, better

Faustus said:

---

I like Hoka too. Really comfortable shoes.

---

I bet they look great with your outfit from Anthropologie.

New Balance and Saucony make pretty good shoes but I like "Texas Aggies " only on my shirts and the dark maroon color. None of the light maroon or that dark red looking crap.

Nike is superior product.

Good move by Auburn. Nike is the premiere shoe maker simply is. Not saying it's great. But it's miles better than the ugly under armor and Adidas looks better but still isn't iconic Nike.

If you think Adidas or under armor are better quality or aren't "woke," I'm not sure what to tell you. They all are awful quality stuff made by slave labor. Nike is just more iconic. Adidas is a soccer brand.

Aggie92ss said:

---

but I believe that Adidas is about the same size as Nike, and it serves more sports, better

---

Dude, Nike owns Adidas in pretty much every financial metric.