I will say this, should we do the prudent thing and become a Jumpman school, the effects for the basketball program will be sizeable. More so than Adidas or any other brand, and it's not close.

I know people have different views on Nike shoes, etc. But when it comes to basketball, they are king.

They are also pretty good for football uniforms. Again, I appreciate we all have opinions on the gear, and the shoes for every day, running, etc.

But for athletics, especially basketball (and somewhat for football) Nike is king.

Or Adidas, for that matter? Is the perception that much higher?

It always seemed like an odd fit to me for football. It’s a basketball brand, and football drives the bus at ND, we all know that.

I wonder if schools would have TW branding if Woods hadn’t imploded.

UM may have most favored nation clause with them which means if Jumpman signs us to a big deal, UM can demand a big increase. Jumpman may want no parts of that. More than likely they’d try to steer us towards being a regular Nike school.

If true, should we take less than UM to get with Jumpman?

Based on the UCLA stuff. They had it for Adidas, but not sure for Jordan/Nike.

Haven't followed this all that closely so just asking. Who besides Michigan wears it?

Unfortunately, that school north of us (Jeter I believe) was the first football school, followed closely by Jordan's own UNC. If Michigan does not have a most favored nation clause, especially after UCLA switched over, I'd say this is a no-brainer given the brand & global reach.

Of the others, it is a strange mix:
-Florida: They were one of Nike's "Elite" schools due to winning in football and basketball, and the Jumpman promotion makes sense
-Oklahoma: The plains are a strange fit for a global brand, but I suppose Blake Griffin + that gadget offense, and both football & basketball have been good
-UCLA: Likely the most prestigious sports school on the West Coast, although I'm surprised MJ didn't go for the glamour of Southern Cal

I think they have Marquette (Dwayne Wade?) and Houston for basketball, and their partnership with QSG soccer has unfortunately been good.

The issue hasn't been Adidas or Under Armor.

I would guess the shoes are worth more than everything else combined as the most identifiable branding on uniforms. Historically, anyway, you can tell the shoe brands from a wide tv shot in every frame. Maybe that has changed to a degree as cobblers design shoes specifically for teams, including custom color schemes that may be as identifiable as the logos.

If the shoes are still as big of a deal as I'd think they'd be, I would be shocked to see ND sacrifice money in that fashion either for the good of athletes or in the interest of a recruiting draw for athletes. I suppose if the lost revenue is in the range of what ND would otherwise be willing to spend in NIL ventures anyway, sure, maybe they would. But I tend to doubt that's the case.

Perhaps, however, a non-exclusive shoe deal would still offer a large amount of the total otherwise, though, if half the team still had the issued gear.

...but not sure what the lesser lights on the teams will do if there's not an official provider.

confident they will be happy to provide free shoes to whatever staff member or player that needs them.

That's what I did as a non-scholarship member of the track team. That and over to Midwest Athletic (?), where orders for my equipment were placed by the athletic department.