Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="dwalks93, post: 2351184, member: 5598"] You are certainly entitled to your beliefs...perhaps it is correct. But I'd say the best opinions are formed by the facts we know. What we know is the money being paid to the UL players was not coming directly from Louisville but from Adidas. This is because Adidas wanted the marketing for its brand and it benefited Adidas to have its brand worn by the best players on the biggest stages at the premier programs. It also states in the FBI affidavit, during a recorded conversation with Adidas executives, a University of Miami recruit's payment offer was being raised since an "unnamed" apparel competitor was coming in at a higher offer. This unnamed apparel company is likely Nike which is also supported by the FBI subpoena issued on Nike AAU the following day. What are Nike's biggest college brands in men's basketball? What programs would Nike most like to have wear their apparel? What players are most likely to go to the NBA and wear Nike products at the next level? Why would Nike hurt itself by paying players to go to schools that weren't its best marketing options? Bottom line...nothing indicates this was a pure Louisville issue. This is starting to sound more like an industry practice involving multiple shoe companies. The better question is which programs have benefited the most under the current system. [/QUOTE]