Give me a break Joey

[lawdog77]

"We didn't agree with what we agreed to" is a disgusting stance, but that's what many do.

How about if the coaches tell the kid and his parents we are going to run the offense through you, and other forms of puffery...just playing devil's advocate

[Cheeks]

Unless the soda company is willing to give up pourage rights, there is little danger they will walk away from school sponsorships

The pourage rights are set, it doesn't mean they have to support it with advertising.  When you go to the concession stand they have you hostage...you want a soda, you buy what they have.  I did the 10 year Pepsi deal for Angels stadium and also multiple beer deals (ABC laws prevent alcohol pourage rights in California) with Miller, Heineken, etc.

[Cheeks]

"We didn't agree with what we agreed to" is a disgusting stance, but that's what many do.

Bingo....but but but but they were forced and it is a cartel, and poopy pants.

[Cheeks]

Well, since you say you're right you must be.

But let me make sure I understand you. You believe Nike would receive more value from sponsoring a single athlete - Jalen Hurts, let's say - than the entire Oklahoma program.
So, you believe they get a better deal by paying Hurts $30K, then spending somewhere around six figures-plus to produce an ad, then spend another six figures every time you want to air that ad. So, airing the ad about 10 times during major broadcasts costs them another $1 million. And then you're showing that ad to an audience during a break in the game when a large chunk of the audience is either looking at their phone, going to the bathroom, getting something to eat, talking with someone, channel surfing or fast forwarding the ads because they're watching on DVR.

You're telling us that's a better investment than spending, let's say $1 million a year, to put a swoosh on the jersey of Hurts' and every one of his teammates, and every one of his coaches, etc., for the audience to see during the game, when they're actually paying attention. And when it costs Nike nothing additional, because ESPN or ABC or Fox is airing this for them.

Hmmm.

If all this were true, why is Nike spending roughly $125 million a year to sponsor NBA jerseys?  Why is Rakuten spending $240 million a year to sponsor FC Barcelona's kits? Why is adidas paying the NHL $70 million a year to put its logo on hockey sweaters?
Are these all bad business deals, or do they maybe know a thing or two about getting exposure for their products?

Good Lord.  You are equating an apparel company that provides equipment and clothing for an entire program as core to their business.

Now try again with other school sponsors and categories...QSRs, telecom, banking, beverage, etc.  Your examples are tied directly to product worn and used by the teams, they are only one small part of sponsorships. 

[Cheeks]

How about if the coaches tell the kid and his parents we are going to run the offense through you, and other forms of puffery...just playing devil's advocate

Does the coach provide that in writing that is legally binding in the same way a kid signs with a school in their legally binding document?

[Nukem2]

Just can't wait for the days when these 17 year olds announce the signing of an NLI along with signing contract(s) for NIL(s).   .