Golfman25

Plus anyone who knows the apparel biz, it's very fickle. Lots of "looser" products for every big winner.

Unfortunately, other than Cheaney and/or Hulls I can believe it.

No clue what they are talking about. IU team store has tons of stuff. You can even get a jersey sporting a walk on. https://shop.iuhoosiers.com/collections/adidas

These guys clearly disagree with you https://www.crimsonquarry.com/2023/6/23/23767818/indiana-basketball-football-adidas-nike

From what I can gather, the top deals today are in the $8-$10 million per year range. My expectation would be IU’s next deal would be in line with those numbers and probably a bit more.

You clearly don't. LT deal is signed -- becomes one of the most lucrative. Value then dwindles as time moves forward as other schools negotiate new deals. Rinse and repeat.

You do understand how long-term deals work, don't you.

Ok great. When IU signed with Adidas in 2015 it was top 5 largest deals. https://indianahq.com/5-things-you-didnt-know-about-ius-contract-with-adidas/

Do you have a source for all these contact numbers you're throwing around?

Even women don't care about the WNBA. :)

OH, the WNBA. I'm sold. :)

Cart before the horse my friend. Are they "preferred" by more people because they sign more "stars" or because they make better stuff? Last spring, I went a bought a bunch of golf apparel. I ended up with Adidas stuff because the Nike stuff just plain sucked, didn't fit, etc.

There is simply no logic to your posts on this. You're basing it on your opinions because you like Nike for whatever reason. Adidas sees value in a partnership with IU athletics. Thus they pay a crap load of money for that partnership. Nike not so much. You think we can make up the difference by selling more shirts. Good luck with that.

You're just pulling that out of your rear end. I don't buy IU apparel based on the brand. I buy it because the team is kicking a$$ and I want to be part of that. When they are good, I buy more. When they suck, not so much. I imagine most others are the same way.

So what does IU make "per shirt." It's relative peanuts. They are currently paying us more than Nike would. What is the value of those lost earnings? You need to do a lot more math to make those claims.

Just wait for the Cig Cigar when real football returns. :)

Based on what? Some fictional result in the future. Money talks and BS walks my friend.

Uhg. Talking about uniforms again. Unless the uniforms come with instructions on how to hit the three, they won’t make a damn bit of difference.

Much of my reply isn't directly to you, as we have a lot different things going on regarding the portal. But in general, sounds like we agree -- mass portal additions each year ain't going to work. If you think about it, if your classes are perfectly balanced you're looking a 3 incoming freshmen per year. So you're right. A few HS kids each year and fill any holes with the portal. Which is what I have been saying -- the portal fills holes. As for next season -- there are 13 spots. You have 8 filled -- not going to count a kid who hasn't even committed yet. Which leaves 5 open spots. That is still a ton of spots to fill. And if you loose 2-3 others, the floodgates open. It's not a good place to be going into year 4. Woodson has under performed at this aspect of his job.

Do the math We have three graduating this year (X, Walker, Leal). One (Ware) likely going pro according to most. Then 2 or 3 possible "disgruntled" guys move on. Plus an open spot. So you likely have 4-5 spots to fill and possibly as many as 7-8 spots to fill. With 1 signed. That's a really bad spot to be in by any measure.

Right, but the three different articles are a bit misleading. Those 69 where apparently transfers over several years. That is a big difference from "win now, use the portal." It is very likely that teams will have 1-2 transfers each year. Good programs will have kids go pro earlier than expected - and will need to fill that hole. Other kids will leave because they don't fit. The portal makes it easier for kids to leave and easier to fill the open spots. No problem. But the idea that you're going to turn over your roster every year and "win now" is a pipe dream.

Yeah I only went back a year. Most people are only looking year to year saying “win now.” Could you build a roster with 1 or 2 longer term transfers each year. Sure. But that’s closer to the high school recruit timeline, not acceptable to the “win now” crowd.

party pooper.

I am all for stability, but you said it right there -- we lose McNeely. That's it????? Woodson has been here for 3 years recruiting at the HS level. And while he has some success with guys like Renue, JHS, MM -- he only has one incoming for next year. That is not getting it done by any measure.

I think your numbers may be off. I count 30 transfers in last year's Sweet 16 teams. Which is 1.8 per team. Only Uconn, Kansas state and Ark had 3 or more. Granted, Uconn won the whole enchilada. IMO the idea that you're going to be successful year over year with a bunch of transfers is a fallacy.