Report: IU agrees to extension with Adidas

Indiana and Adidas will remain partners for the foreseeable future.

The university and the apparel company have reached an agreement on a contract extension worth $53.6 million over eight years, IU confirmed to the Indianapolis Star Monday night. With the current deal set to expire after the upcoming school year, IU’s newest apparel contract is expected to be among the five most lucrative deals in the nation.

According to the Portland Business Journal’s contract database, the expected $6.7 million yearly payout would rank IU behind only Michigan and UCLA during the 2014-15 school year. Michigan recently left Adidas for a 15-year, $169 million deal with Nike — the most lucrative contract in the nation.

Indiana has partnered with Adidas since 2004. Its current $21 million contract was signed as part of an eight-year extension in 2008. IU is expected to officially announce the new deal Tuesday.

Indiana athletic director Fred Glass did not return messages left by The Herald-Times.


  1. It sickens me that there is that kind of money being tossed around for a college to wear a certain frickin’ kind of athletic apparel.

    It’s obscene.

  2. How is that revenue used? I mean, does it go to the athletic department, to general expenses, general scholarship fund, reduction in student fees &tuition (oops, what was I thinking)?

  3. The whole sports scene on so called pro level and college level is sickening….and no it is not what the market will bear because it is rigged = sports addiction to sports fans which make up a large portion of society….has gone crazy focusing on things in reality that do not belong to them other than a black light, lava lamp illusion. Yes, I am a member of that addicted society on the college level….I pretty much stop there.

  4. A large chunk of the value of the contract is the equipment and practice/game apparel itself that the teams will use, so not all of the 6.7 mil is “revenue”

  5. Why does a multi-billion dollar company paying IU millions of dollars to advertise/promote their brand sicken you, Chet? Does the fact that the average cost of college tuition and housing across the U.S. going up at a rate well above the rate of inflation for many consecutive years sicken you? How about some college professors, not department heads, but just regular professors, getting paid $200,000 per year to teach for three hours a day, two days a week? How about the fact that most college graduates today would flunk U.S. History and Civics tests commonly given to High School students decades ago? In the realm of higher education in America, the advertising revenue IU gets from Adidas is not even on the radar screen.

  6. Podunker – That professor that gets $200k isn’t getting it to teach that three hour class, he/she is getting that salary for their research and potential thereof. The cost of tuition isn’t all that hard to figure out – it is the inverse of the disinvestment on the state and federal level in higher ed coupled with a huge increase in demand for college with nearly no new schools coming on line. Its sort of like building a 5,000 house subdivision without adequately providing school services (you know – because the McMansion would be too expensive if you also had to pay for your kids school, and besides the kid will go to the private school so they don’t have to mix in with any of those undesirable folks). The cost of housing isn’t hard to figure out either – simple supply and demand. With more and more states/cities following low growth/zero growth models that benefit the incumbents in housing at the expense of the strivers, this problem will only be exacerbated as time goes on. Throw in all of the states implimenting Prop 13 (California) type property tax laws, which impacts all three things of which you speak – and you have the recipie for extreme inequality and all the problems that come along with that. But that doesn’t change the fact that the amount of money spent on college sports apparel is obscene. All of these things can be true at the same time.

  7. This isn’t hard to figure out as we as fans pay for this deal when we buy Adidas apparel with the IU pitch fork displayed. Whatever Adidas does not recoup from those sales is considered advertising cost. It is simply commerce practicing the law of supply and demand. I consider the real obscenity to be $169m for that team up north. Of course another obscenity could be a rich guy giving tons of his $ away to a school, like the swoosh.

  8. How about ponying up $100 to buy a pair of shoes that cost $2 to make?

    The cost of making shoes hasn’t gone up in 30 years. In fact, due to off shoring, it has gone down. Way down. Nothing beefs up the bottom line quite like slave labor or its twin sister, poverty wages.

    I wonder if IU got it’s money’s worth from the IU professor that developed monoflourophosphate (dental flouride used in toothpaste) while bring home a cool $12,000/year?

  9. I was a faculty member in the UNC system for 12 years. I never knew anyone pulling down that kind of scratch. State educational salaries are pretty well set in stone most places and it’s nothing to brag about.

  10. Hell there were no jobs available for those people before the US showed up. The folks with those jobs are the highest paid laborers in that town. The economy in those areas has nothing that you could spend the money from a $20.00 an hour job on. The introduction of commerce will build opportunities for an evolution of the region and country.

  11. Chet just so you have some solid facts to help you understand commerce: since NAFTA the incomes from labor jobs in Mexico provided by US corps has increased 6 times. Being employed by a single opportunity is not slave labor. It is the only opportunity in town.

  12. I have my (-) thoughts about NAFTA too. But I also know we would all enjoy or already do enjoy making 6x what we used to. Everything evolves because everything starts out less than it will be. By the way I’ve never spent c-note on a pair of shoes, tennis or otherwise.


    Thinking we did alright with Adidas. Every year we were with Nike I would enter Assembly Hall to students handing out pamphlets about how I should boycott Nike. Also, Nike had less than half of the sports clothing to choose from than Adidas has. You walk in to any Indiana shop in town…the mall, Assembly Hall, TIS, the shop on corner of Indiana and Kirkwood…the amount of different clothing has been impressive over Adidas time with IU. Not having a flashy uniform on the court is fine by me!

  14. OldIUGymnast made some of the points I wanted to, but I’d also add that the professors making 200k+ are also likely supporting their own salary by being awarded grant money from outside institutions to do said research.

  15. According to an article I read last week (I wish I could paste in to the Scoop), the claims about professors’ salaries based on the important research conducted is no longer valid in many cases. Chet’s comment about his salary while a faculty member at UNC makes my point. He deserved more, and I’ll bet he gave much better value to his students than many of the professors at the wealthiest universities. Higher education in America has become a racket. It’s a run-away train, and the majority of the country’s young people and many professors are getting screwed. The top ten universities possess hundreds of billions of dollars in endowments while still receiving huge subsidies, in the form of research grants, from the federal government. For example, Harvard and Yale’s combined endowment was over $53 billion in 2012, but together they received over $1.26 billion in federal support that year. Assuming a 4% annual payout from their endowments, plus the federal grant money, that’s about $96,000 per student per year before tuition and room and board. So Harvard and Yale are receiving about $156,000 per student. Give me a break! Or how about the fact that the eight wealthiest Ivy League Schools have over 21% of the total endowment assets while serving less than one percent (<1%) of the college students. And they continue to increase tuition and room and board at a rate well above inflation. As far as I'm concerned, if Adidas wants to pay IU $5 or $6 million a year to advertise their brand, if it helps IU keep tuition down, then good for IU and good for Adidas.

  16. I’ll share a secret I learned as the parent of an Ivy League student-athlete. You get told all about the endowments and how, as a middle class parent, you can expect financial aid that will make an Ivy League education comparable to other schools in regard to price.

    It’s just not true.

    My daughter loved her time at Cornell but it left a financial scar. I don’t know who those endowments go to but the students are paying an arm and a leg.

    Here’s another brutal truth. When applying for graduate school most schools don’t look at WHERE you got your grades, just what they are. Her 3.4 at Cornell counted less than a 3.8 at Ball State to the admissions committee. I can promise you, a 3.4 at Cornell is a damn sight harder to get when you have roommates building linear accelerators or artificial brains in their closets. Almost every kid I met in Ithaca is in the process of being some sort of doctor. They were ALL scary smart. I like to think I’m fairly bright but some things are really obvious. Admissions offices apparently don’t care about that stuff.

    Go to a good Big Ten school and save your money. There’s a upside with networking and such but, at least as far as grad school admission, it’s absolutely the hardest and most expensive way to go.

    My little girl got into a doctoral program because she killed in the interview, not because of an Ivy League degree.

  17. Adidas et al. pay ’cause people like us crave college sports as dirty as the whole scene is, so anyone sickened by the $$$ in college sports is choking on his or her own appetite.

    A tiny % of professors make $200k. A friend of mine (IU ’80) was a full prof of physics at U. Wisconsin and gave up the insane demands on his time to both teach and do research to double his pay in govt. (Natioanl Lab at Los Alamos). He of the physics PhD could probably earn even more in the private sector.

    At IU, I bet a healthy slice of the top paid profs are in the Jacobs School of Music- some of those cats could earn a lot more than $200k/annum on the concert tour- but they’d have to live out of a suitcase, so they take the lesser pay in academia in return for being able to snuggle into their own bed at night.

  18. Do you have any idea where grant money goes? It doesn’t go into some general fund. It goes to pay for the research itself, which is expensive.

  19. When the country is $19 Trillion in debt, giving the wealthiest universities billions more each year to fund research is really stupid. Harvard and Yale, just as an example, have plenty of money to fund any type of research they want to conduct. And if they do, and it turns out to be profitable, then they deserve to profit from their investment. But I have to believe that spending those billions to assure that a greater number of qualified American kids have an opportunity to get an affordable and high quality education is a much, much better investment for our society to make in the long run. And we’ve all heard (and read) about some of the ridiculous “research projects” our government funds at universities across the country. For example, how about the Feds spending $176,000 “to determine if cocaine makes Japanese quail (yes, birds) engage in sexually risky behavior.” Or how about the Feds paying $3 million to researchers at University of California – Irvine to fund research on video games such as World of Warcraft. And they recently spent $615,000 to UC Santa Cruz “to digitize photos, T-shirts and concert tickets belonging to the Grateful Dead.” How many underprivileged American kids could attend a quality college for the $4 million they wasted on just those ridiculous “research” projects? The Federal Government’s funding of higher education is a massive scam, and we’re all victims of it.

  20. It’s hard to know which basic research will pay off and which won’t. You’d probably laugh at a study of the permeability of toad skin, too. That led to the development of the dialysis machine.

    I would imagine that many silly sounding research programs have valid scientific reasoning behind them.

  21. Chet, I’m not saying that the Feds should stop funding all research, but you’re a smart man, and you know that tens of millions of dollars a year are being wasted on nefarious research projects. Some of it is simply absurd. I referenced three such projects out of a list of dozens that wasted tens of millions of dollars. A significant portion of that money would be much better spent providing a college education for qualified underprivileged kids. It was one thing to be that wasteful when the U.S. Government had a balanced budget and was not in debt up to its earlobes. But given the reality of our government’s debt these days, every single research project should be highly scrutinized for its potential value relative to other priorities.


  22. Podunker, I agree with you that too many of our tax dollars are wasted on research that is ridiculous. Chet is right that it is often hard to see where some research will end up going but the way our gov’t waste money I do wonder if it needs to be spent by our gov’t. Private sources will still fund research because they will benefit from any financial gains the research leads to.

  23. I’m the first person to point out ‘bad science’. I’ve got some research floating around out there that I think is pretty good work. I’ve also seen more than one study on ‘do dogs dream’. Good grief, buy a dog and watch them for 12 hours.

    I just get a little defensive when I see where people want to cut back funding on basic research. There are all kinds of things to infer from this but I honestly feel like people aren’t nearly as inquisitive about science as a healthy populace should be. Unfortunately, I think we are really bad about this in the US. Too many people want simplistic answers to complicated questions.

    That’s not good.

    There are lots of places where money is just pissed away. No doubt about it. Scientific research is pretty far down that list.

  24. Well here is a pretty simplistic answer prioritizing how to use all that research $, spend the 1st 3rd to start paying down all that debt, 2nd 3rd to fund some scholarships for targeted promising younguns and spend the last 3rd on focused non-dreaming dog research. I am quite sure the debt holders will be pleased, you know everyone of those students and their families will rejoice and the research institutions will scream bloody murder because the research projects like how to determine why we can’t eat rocks won’t be funded.

  25. There’s science, and then there’s junk science. Researching if dogs dream is pure nonsense. Researching if cocaine causes birds to engage in risky sexual behavior is just stupid, no matter what the hypothesis is. When our government is flush with cash, our veterans are all getting the care they need (and deserve) and the U.S. economy is humming along at peak performance, the funding of research projects can be someone generous. But when the government is placing a huge burden, in the form of $19 trillion in debt on our children and our grandchildren, and qualified American kids can’t afford to attend college, its time to shift priorities and stop the gravy train for a few elite Universities that are already flush with Billions in cash. As medical doctors like to say, “one way or the other, eventually all bleeding stops.”

  26. …or guaranteeing loans for private enterprise to the tune of $1/2B on boondoggles such as Solyndra…

Comments are closed.