clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Cal fans, thoughts on the Under Armour deal?

CGB's thoughts on the new Under Armour contract

Nelson Chenault-USA TODAY Sports

What are your thoughts on Cal's deal with Under Armour? Do you prefer the Under Armour look to Nike?

Nik Jam: I don't know what to think. I love all the uniforms we have and hope they don't change much if at all. The increase in revenue is so high it could really save Cal Athletics and hopefully result in more renovations to our stadiums (looking at baseball, softball, soccer, field hockey particularly). This will hopefully also keep teams like baseball and gymnastics alive for good. I'm scared this could turn off recruits and i'm seeing players and recruits from a variety of Cal teams unhappy with this, but I'd be surprised if it were that big of a factor in a player's decision to come here. But hopefully the jerseys and alternates look very good and it's moot.

A.W. Johnston:  Love the Under Armour deal and can't wait to see the impact it has on our programs. I'm sure the basketball team is a bit bummed to see the Jordans leave, but seeing some Cal-brand Steph Currys will be awesome. As long as they don't turn the football team uniform into the California state flag, I'll be quite happy.

KWBears: I am beyond stoked for Cal to team-up with UA. Beyond stoked! UA presents an image that all athletes want--tough, sleek, modern, victorious. Nike represents the establishment, while UA represents what can be and continuing innovation to fight for that dream--athletes everywhere can buy into that. Plus, I am a firm believer that when you look good, you feel good--and if you feel good, you play good. The image that UA presents will translate into Cal athletes internalizing that and (hopefully) lead to improved performances. Plus, all the sweet add-ons that UA is providing to the Cal campus and students is pretty amazing--I wish I were still a student and got an internship with UA....

boomtho: I'm 100% on board with the UA deal. I'm a Warriors fan, so any association with the rocket ship that is Steph Curry (and Bazmore!) is awesome in my mind. I love the idea of Cal being UA's West Coast flagship account--it feels like it should get us more attention and potentially cooler gear. I am a little sad to be leaving Jordan, only because we were pretty unique nationally in having that relationship. Lastly, the money doesn't hurt at all! I've been playing in Kobes for like 8 years, but may have to see if I can cop some SC3 lows in blue/gold when they come out now...

Leland Wong: The deal makes sense financially, but I'm not a big fan aesthetically just yet... My Cal fandom began in the days of DeSean Jackson and I've been a fan of all the uniforms since then, but the current set might be my favorite. Plus, whenever I think of UnderArmour's football uniforms, Maryland immediately comes to mind and I'm terrified to picture how large of a bear they'll plaster on our players.

But going back to our current Nike deal, the timing of switch to UnderArmour surprises me a tad because it feels like we just had that whole re-branding initiative... and we're already going to lose it. I don't hate the roaring bear as much as most of our commenters--in fact I just bought a hat with that image (although that was mostly because it was on clearance). Plus, I think having a distinct font is a nice touch that's unique and ties together all of our sports.

That being said, I am being won over by UnderArmour's statements about recognizing key characteristics of each of their client universities and the prospect of bringing back the Block C.

Ruey Yen: Personally, I prefer Nike as a brand over Under Armour, but I am happy that the University of California, Berkeley (and not just Cal Athletics) got the much-needed money and benefits from this deal. I think the fact that rec sports can get free gear will go a long way for them. In a similar vein, I was surprised (after it was pointed out by a band alum friend) that the Cal Band didn't also get some Under Armour apparel from this deal, but maybe that can be worked out later.

Me being a graduate student at Maryland when they had all the crazy uniforms (maybe not completely Under Armour's fault given how University of Maryland does claim all four colors of the Maryland flag as their color--red, white, black, and gold), I also did see how much free Under Armour swag was given to the students at football and basketball games. Here in CGB, we have complaint about how the Cal color outs for Memorial or Haas were all terribly executed. Should Under Armour really want us to be their flagship west coast school, all that may be changing soon. To be precise, while Under Armour is often the primary sponsor for a lot of the Maryland sporting events where free shirts were distributed, true (a.k.a. high-quality) Under Armour shirts were often given to a small percentage of the student populations while the rest of the student sections get the cheaper and more generic shirts with the same printing.

benwemer: Personally, I don't love the new deal. Switching from Nike to Under Armour is a downgrade. Although financially you have to love this deal--86 million over 10 years is great. It's going to be interesting to see all the jerseys and hopefully what they do with the block C. All the talk about recruits not wanting to come here because of the deal I just don't believe. I'm sure the brand has some influence, but in no way does it come close to fully making or breaking a kid's decision to attend Cal.

What do you think about the new deal?