The only thing that matters in our discussion is (A) what kids want, and (B) money. adidas is paying U of L more money than Nike, or we'd be with Nike. And adidas profits are increasing at a much faster clip than Nike's which indicates there's more adidas money where ours came from. (That's the only reason the financial analysis matters, can adidas keep paying up...)
I've given you an opportunity to somehow base an argument for (A), but you're not bringing much other than logic and intuition. And that's fine because there isn't much hard data for some debates. All I know is our coach and Nike are located at opposite ends of a recruiting and operating continuum. His system doesn't lend itself to most five-star, Nike/shoe kids. And most of them don't want any part of Pitino regardless of our apparel contract. So it appears to me that if there's one basketball team who should be saying "to hell with the image, we'll take the money", it is U of L and Pitino. Which is exactly where we're at.
If you really want Nike so bad, my suggestion is to start a campaign about the coach. He can't win with a large % of five-star Nike kids, and he's already proven that--probably more to himself than us. My overall objective is to make money and win basketball games; everything else is secondary...
