Marcus Jordan - Adidas Situation

[Kyyle23]

yeah I gotta say, Adidas is lookin pretty s***ty.

 

You think so? I think if anyone comes out looking s***ty it is UCF here. If this situation were reversed, I imagine Nike would do the same thing as Adidas, they dont want their direct competitor sharing the court either.

[Balta1701]

You think so? I think if anyone comes out looking s***ty it is UCF here. If this situation were reversed, I imagine Nike would do the same thing as Adidas, they dont want their direct competitor sharing the court either.

Really? If UCF was told by Adidas that it was ok and then someone at Adidas overruled that decision, that isn't exactly the school's fault.

[Kyyle23]

Really? If UCF was told by Adidas that it was ok and then someone at Adidas overruled that decision, that isn't exactly the school's fault.

 

 

Has anything ever been said to be official? All I have read is UCF said that the Adidas rep gave the OK and corporate then stepped in and said "dont think so", and Adidas is saying that nobody ever gave the OK and it was recruiting tactics by UCF.

 

I doubt either entity would admit they were wrong

[zenryan]

You think so? I think if anyone comes out looking s***ty it is UCF here. If this situation were reversed, I imagine Nike would do the same thing as Adidas, they dont want their direct competitor sharing the court either.

 

 

 

Adidas is only making this an issue because they wanted to get a Jordan wearing their shoe.

[Kyyle23]

Adidas is only making this an issue because they wanted to get a Jordan wearing their shoe.

 

Im sure thats why they signed the deal 5 years ago, with the grand idea to get Marcus Jordan to eventually wear their shoes.

 

Its business plain and simple. You dont sponsor anything and let that company showcase your direct competitor's brand.

[bmags]

it's shoes. Who the hell looks. He's wearing everything else adidas. Instead they have a GREAT PR story...

[zenryan]

Im sure thats why they signed the deal 5 years ago, with the grand idea to get Marcus Jordan to eventually wear their shoes.

 

Its business plain and simple. You dont sponsor anything and let that company showcase your direct competitor's brand.

 

 

 

Adidas has let players on teams with adidas contracts wear other shoe brands before, including 2 UCF football kickers who didnt like the adidas football cleat. No way were the adidas higher ups going to let a Jordan wear a Nike shoe when the school had an adidas contract. Adidas probably told their local reps to ok the the agreement in hopes of strong arming UCF and Jordan once he signed his LOI.

[Dick Allen]

Adidas has let players on teams with adidas contracts wear other shoe brands before, including 2 UCF football kickers who didnt like the adidas football cleat. No way were the adidas higher ups going to let a Jordan wear a Nike shoe when the school had an adidas contract. Adidas probably told their local reps to ok the the agreement in hopes of strong arming UCF and Jordan once he signed his LOI.

And Marcus wore unmarked Nikes and had adidas ankle braces above the shoe. If you were to stare at his feet, the only brand you would see is adidas. .

[SuperSteve]

When I wrestled at Michigan State, we were expected to wear the Adidas shoes that were provided for us. If we didn't want to wear those shoes, we had to wear a different pair of Adidas shoes. From the start of the season until the end of the season you wore Adidas.

 

I have to side with Adidas on this one. They're providing UCF with free merchandise, those kids should be expected to wear that merchandise. Jordan put Adidas in a no win situation with this. If they let him wear other shoes, it opens up a can of worms where other athletes might try to take advantage of this.

 

I think Jordan is completely wrong on this. He separated himself from his teammates from day one. He should have accepted the final decision by Adidas and then tried to be part of the team. He's too focused on himself individually. Regardless if UCF told him he could wear the shoes, sometimes decisions change. To me he comes off like a spoiled brat.

[Soxbadger]

The scenario is that Adidas told Jordan it would be okay before he committed.

 

If Adidas had told him he had to wear Adidas from the start he would have never gone to UCF.

 

Adidas pulled a jackass move, there is just no defending it. They changed their mind after Jordan already committed to UCF. The NCAA wasnt going to allow Jordan to transfer for this and not have to sit out a year.

 

How can you defend a corporation like Adidas purposefully lying to Jordan and UCF about the situation?

 

If you notice, Jordan was willing to make huge concessions to Adidas, Adidas was willing to make no concessions.

 

 

[SuperSteve]

The scenario is that Adidas told Jordan it would be okay before he committed.

 

If Adidas had told him he had to wear Adidas from the start he would have never gone to UCF.

 

Adidas pulled a jackass move, there is just no defending it. They changed their mind after Jordan already committed to UCF. The NCAA wasnt going to allow Jordan to transfer for this and not have to sit out a year.

 

How can you defend a corporation like Adidas purposefully lying to Jordan and UCF about the situation?

 

If you notice, Jordan was willing to make huge concessions to Adidas, Adidas was willing to make no concessions.

A few things:

 

1. According to this thread, a Adidas PR rep told UCF he could wear Nike but was overruled by Adidas higher ups. Maybe the PR rep overstepped their authority. UCF should have gotten an amendment written in their contract for Jordan but since they didn't UCF has no recourse against Adidas.

 

2. How is Adidas a jackass by using smart business practices? You're making the assumptions that Adidas simply lied to Jordan. If the PR rep believed Jordan would be able to wear the shoes but was overruled, it falls on UCF and Jordan to find a new solution. They did and now they no longer have Adidas, but it was the choice they made.

 

3. NCAA athletics entitled you to compete for four years in a five year span. Jordan would just need to be released by his coach and he would be able to compete next season, using his redshirt this season. If he were to transfer before the end of this semester and be enrolled next semester, he should be eligible to compete the second half of next season regardless of a release. (I'm not sure the game limits for basketball but it should be similar to wrestling). I have to believe the coach would grant Jordan his release.

 

4. What concessions did Jordan make? He separated himself from his teammates and hurt the other sports at UCF. I wonder how the football team feels about this?

 

 

So basically what we have is Jordan breached a contract UCF has with Adidas and everyone is mad with Adidas? Did Jordan have the right to wear Nike in his scholarship? Did UCF have their contract with Adidas amended? I don't think we have enough information but the blame IMHO doesn't fall on Adidas. Maybe one Adidas employee sure, but it actually falls on UCF.

[Soxbadger]

There is no breach of contract, which is why Adidas wont be suing. If anything there is a good argument that Adidas broke their deal with UCF.

 

In the law if some one has "apparent authority" and you rely on that authority, it can be binding against the principal. In this situation, the Adidas representative held himself out as having the authority to make this decision. If he did not have that authority it was up to the Adidas employee to tell UCF:

 

"I do not have the authority to make this decision, I will speak with the higher ups and make sure what I am saying is right"

 

Furthermore, it is the responsibility of Adidas to make it clear who does or does not have authority. If Adidas fails to make it clear, its Adidas who is responsible (in the laws eyes) not UCF. (Unless it specifically states in the contract that XYY must approve all changes.)

 

Adidas did not do this. UCF legitimately relied on the statements made by Adidas, Adidas changed their mind after the fact. There are a few different causes of action against Adidas that I can think of right now, detrimental reliance, fraud, etc.

 

If you as a business its your responsibility to make sure that other people know who has what authority. If you fail to do this, its your problem not the other persons. There was no duty for UCF to check further (unless by contract), it is entirely Adidas' responsibility (at least according to US law.)

 

1. As stated above, false. If you and I have a contract and it says "You wont refer to me as Badger on the boards and if you do, you owe me $100" and you come to me and I say "Hey Supersteve go ahead and call me Badger, Im fine with it", you would not have a case for breach of contract. Or, potentially I could win on breach, but you would win on either fraud or detrimental reliance.

 

2. If an Adidas rep lied to the school and Jordan, it should be up to Adidas to find a solution, not UCF. We do not let liars benefit in the law, its called fraud.

 

3. How are those reasonable to Jordan? He was lied to and so he is punished? That does not seem very fair to me. Why should he sit out because Adidas lied? Shouldn't the party who is most at fault (Adidas) suffer the consequences of their action.

 

4. Jordan agreed to wear white Nikes that had no visible logo with an Adidas ankle wrap above the shoe. Jordan was wearing the Adidas logo.

 

Maybe one Adidas employee sure, but it actually falls on UCF.

 

The problem with that statement is as ive explained, the Adidas employee appeared to have the authority to make the statements that he did. You are acting like they went to Footlocker and asked if they could do it. This rep is probably the regional head of Adidas and probably promised UCF over and over again that it was fine. A school doesnt just do something like this unless they are given an explicit okay.

 

Why should UCF and Jordan be punished for a business using fraud and deceptive practices?

 

There is a legitimate argument that could be made that Adidas purposefully lied to Jordan so that he would go to UCF, and then once they were there they would try and strong arm him into wearing Adidas.

 

From the facts, that is the most likely scenario in my mind. Its either that, or complete negligence by the Adidas representative in not clearing it through the proper channels. But if that was the case, you would have heard that the Adidas representative was fired for over stepping his authority. Clearly there has been no indication that Adidas is upset with their own person, so to me that indicates that Adidas was fine with the situation at one point, but later changed its mind.

 

While it may have been smarter for UCF to ask for the contract to be amended, it some times is just not practical. We dont know how big the contract is or how the clauses are written. This may have been as simple as an amendment or rider to the contract, it may have been as difficult as rewriting the entire contract which may have called for an extension or the contracted being renegotiated.

 

Whatever the case, it was up to Adidas to make sure what they said to UCF was correct. The proof of this is that Adidas only canceled the contract and didnt sue UCF. If Adidas was in the right, I guarantee that there is a clause in there that has liquidated damages and that Adidas would be suing UCF for money. The problem is that Adidas has unclean hands so they could never recover. The clause for canceling the contract is probably pretty specific and they used something in that to break the contract.

 

The facts really show that there is just no way that UCF feels Jordan did anything wrong. They could have told him if he didnt agree theyd take his scholarship, or that they wouldnt play him etc. UCF has stood behind Jordan that suggests that they believe Jordan is in the right. My guess is that there is some restrictive covenant that states UCF cant have a different sponsor for x amount of time so the school is waiting on that. I also expect that either Nike or MJ himself will find a way to give UCF the money that they lost on the contract.

 

At the end of the day, either the school, adidas or both mislead Jordan. He shouldnt suffer, of all the parties he is the most innocent. He told them what it would take for him to commit and they said that it was fine.

 

And Jordan never breached any contract, he doesnt have privity of contract with Adidas. Only UCF can break the contract and they could have refused to let Jordan play.

[SuperSteve]

Orlando Sentinal

 

Hasn't gone to court yet. There very well may be a lawsuit filed as UCF breached their contract.

 

You're making assumptions. What looks like happen is someone with Adidas said he could wear them and then someone higher up said no. When UCF found this out, they decided that since they had promised Jordan he could wear the shoes, they wanted to honor their promise. Regardless if it cost them their deal with Adidas or not.

 

It was well known before Jordan wore the shoes that Adidas said don't do it. UCF tested the teeth of their comment and it bit them. I see no negligence from Adidas.

 

You say that you don't think it was worthwhile to amend their contract? Well it's $3m plus the costs of new clothes and shoes now. I think that's worth it for UCF.

 

What happens if UCF ends up cutting other programs because they can't get a new deal?

 

 

Please, please, please back up your statements blaming Adidas with negligence. I'm yet to see any news source blaming Adidas here.

[Soxbadger]

You have a very strange interpretation of the facts:

 

UCF officials say they reached an agreement with adidas regional representatives to allow Jordan to wear Nike shoes despite the school's exclusive adidas contract. Higher-level adidas corporate officials later objected to Jordan being allowed to wear a competitor's shoes. UCF stood by the promise it made to Jordan that he could wear his father's shoes.

 

Higher-level adidas corporate officials later objected to Jordan being allowed to wear a competitor's shoes.

 

 

Notice the time line:

 

A) Adidas makes a statement.

 

B ) UCF and Jordan rely on that statement to their detriment.

 

C) Adidas changes their position after the others have relied on that statement.

 

Lets go to a legal source for some guidance here: http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/detrimental-reliance/

 

* A promise was made

* Relying on the promise was reasonable or foreseeable

* There was actual and reasonable reliance on the promise

* The reliance was detrimental

* Injustice can only be prevented by enforcing the promise

 

As for negligence, you have misinterpreted how I was using the word.

 

Its either that, or complete negligence by the Adidas representative in not clearing it through the proper channels.

 

The negligence is on the person who works for Adidas who told UCF it was okay, without following the proper procedure. IE They had a duty to follow procedure, through negligence they failed to follow procedure, as a result they caused damage to UCF/Jordan.

 

Please, please, please back up your statements blaming Adidas with negligence. I'm yet to see any news source blaming Adidas here.

 

Back it up with a source?

 

The newspaper is not a lawyer, so far there has not been 1 article cited that has quoted a lawyer on this. Why do I care what "Iliana Limón" has to say on this subject?

 

Is she licensed to practice law? Unlikely

 

Has she passed the bar in any state? Unlikely

 

Has she even taken L1 level law classes? Unlikely

 

In fact the whole article is poorly written and makes no sense with the headline. "Headline states: Might End in Court", but the only information about a court is: "A potential court date looms for UCF and adidas.", notice how neither party suggests that there is a potential lawsuit being filed. You dont have a "court date" before a complaint is filed.

 

From Adidas side, while its true that UCF may have breached the contract, that does not mean Adidas has a cause of action against UCF. One of the elements for Breach of Contract is "damages". Unless there is a liquidated damages clause in the contract, its unlikely that Adidas has suffered any "real" damages (monetary) and therefore its not worth the time to sue UCF. The only way that Adidas would sue UCF is if there was a restrictive covenant in the contract that prevents UCF from getting another sponsor within X period of time. If Adidas breached that clause, then its likely Adidas would sue for an injunction preventing Adidas from using the other sponsor.

 

UCF on the other hand seems to be taking the approach of trying to work things out without litigation. This suggests that there is some sort of restrictive covenant and that UCF is trying to negotiate with Adidas to remove the covenant in exchange for UCF not suing them.

 

Obviously Ive never read the contracts myself, and there is really no need for me to find another source, unless that source is as an actually attorney who has read the contract and could give me specific information on the clauses in question, and/or if I could read the deposition transcript of the Adidas representative. Outside of that its merely someone's opinion based on a set of circumstances.

Edited December 7, 2009 by Soxbadger

[Texsox]

Here is where Adidas really f***ed up. Jordan was going to bring attention to the entire program, thus to the other hundred athletes happily wearing their shoes. Everyone should expect Jordan to wear his dad's shoes. It would have been no big deal and I doubt anyone would have considered it a slap to Adidas.

[zenryan]

UCF signs apparel deal with Nike for all sports. Guess this officially closes this saga.

 

UCF signs shoe contract with Nike

Knights reach five-year agreement with Nike after parting ways with adidas over Marcus Jordan’s shoe selection

 

 

UCF is officially a Nike school.

 

The university has reached an agreement with Nike to provide shoes and apparel for all sports.

 

"We had explored a number of different options with a number of different manufacturers and equipment providers, and ultimately we have reached an agreement with Nike," said David Chambers, UCF executive associate athletic director.

 

Chambers credited UCF Athletic Director Keith Tribble, who is currently on the road leading the school's search for a men's basketball coach, for locking up the best possible deal with Nike.

 

Nike has a nondisclosure agreement tied to all shoe and apparel contracts, so UCF declined to release details of the deal first reported on OrlandoSentinel.com.

 

"I wish we could say more, but I can say that we are very happy with the agreement," Chambers said.

 

The deal is believed to be a five-year term with multiple options for extensions.

 

UCF previously had an exclusive apparel and shoe contract with adidas. Representatives from the international shoe company based in Germany agreed to let freshman basketball player Marcus Jordan, son of NBA legend Michael Jordan, wear his father's Jordan Brand shoes. Adidas later changed its mind when Marcus Jordan got national attention for wearing Air Jordans and ended a long-time partnership with UCF in November.

 

UCF's search for a new contract began in earnest in December when adidas and the university reached an agreement to end the relationship. The Knights had many offers and were rumored to be in talks with Nike, Russell and Under Armour.

 

"We are very excited about our new partnership with Nike," Tribble stated in a news release issued by UCF athletics Friday. "Most importantly, our student-athletes will be thrilled to wear the Nike brand. We look forward to a long relationship with Nike."

 

Nike director of sports marketing Kit Morris stated in the UCF news release, "Nike is excited to become the official supplier of athletic footwear, apparel and equipment for the Knights, and we especially look forward to outfitting all of UCF's student-athletes and coaches from its 16 sports programs."

 

UCF's contract with adidas ends June 30, and the Nike agreement officially begins July 1.

 

However, Nike officials are expected to visit the UCF campus next week to discuss the school's specific uniform, equipment and apparel needs and begin placing orders for fall sports. Chambers said the school should be able to get all of its products in time for the start of the fall season because UCF uses common colors — black, white, gold and gray.

 

Nike will be working with UCF officials to design new uniforms in each sport, including football.

 

"No question, we will see a new jersey," Chambers said. "A new uniform. It will be exciting."

 

Chambers isn't sure how quickly the new uniforms will be unveiled. He said those estimates will likely be available next week after meetings with Nike representatives.

 

UCF recently did an inventory of all its adidas shoes, equipment and apparel. Chambers said every item down to socks for each athlete were accounted for so that UCF would be in a position to explain to Nike officials exactly was needed for every sport.

 

Once new Nike equipment arrives, Chambers said UCF will clear out its adidas inventory.

 

"We're gathering options right now," he said. "I think some of it will go to charity. Some of it has the ability to be provided to some schools in cases where it's not going to present an NCAA problem for us. We'll have to watch that very carefully. Some of it, depending on the condition, may end up having to be disposed of if we can't find a place for them."

 

Chambers said UCF currently has no plans to auction off adidas gear to fans, preferring instead to promote the new agreement with Nike.

 

"We're mostly going to be donating it to charity," he said. "At this point, we've made the transition to Nike. So I have to think our focus would be on the Nike product and our partnership with Nike versus putting out equipment from another manufacturer."

 

UCF becomes the fourth school in the state of Florida to reach an agreement with Nike, joining Florida, Florida State and Miami. USF has a contract with Under Armour, while FAU and FIU signed agreements with adidas.

 

Read Iliana Limón's blog at OrlandoSentinel.com/knightsnotepad and e-mail her at ilimon@orlandosentinel.com. Subscribe to our College Sports email newsletter at http://www.orlandosentinel.com/newsletters.