Symmonds won't sign contract requiring him to wear Nike at all team functions, threatens to sue if USATF kicks him off WC team

Guess a CU education isn't worth much.

"And some of us where told to go out and buy Nike shorts and sports bras on our own dime."

As the worlds x/c concluded earlier this year it was pointed out in word and photo by the brojos that athletes from many other nations were wearing suits, leaving the hotel, at the airport, etc. I haven't searched for the article, but I recall them saying the US runners looked like slobs next to the fine fitted threads the Africans were wearing. Is or does Nike, aka No Interest in Kind Employment, have suits in their apparel lineup? The only time I can see the team wearing "mandatory branded gear" Is when they are actually competing or on the bus there. I hope Nick has success with this and that it gets to the point that competition time is the only required venue for "branded gear" from the USATF, aka Using Secrecy Against Track Freedom.

I thought of a few other things that could be "authorized Nike branded gear":

-Tampons

-Condoms

-Hemorrhoid Medication (It's a long flight, I've done it)

-Constipation Meds (It's a long flight and could mess your schedule up)

-Prescription Glasses

-Watches

-Toothbrush and other Toiletries

-Books including religious texts

-Phones

Feel free to add your own.

This whole thing reminds me of the RIAA who doesn't condone the sharing of music because it supposedly "takes" money from the "artists".

http://slowrobot.com/i/37781

I support Nick on this and wish him the best against the USATF/Nike collusion.

YES!!

I support Nick.

Shouldn't the Brooks and Nike lawyers be duking this out?

For some reason, this reminds me of the dispute in Quebec against non-bilingual parrots. Both ridiculous.

He states in his biography that he acted liked a hotheaded spoiled child as a frosh, and his coach set him straight.

Soccer Guy wrote:

I don't get it.

Imagine the Brazilian soccer team had 11 different jerseys for each of their players, one from Nike, another one adidas, puma, etc, you get the idea.

Nike sponsors the Brazilian National team and wants something back.

They have exceptions for shoes where every player can pick his own brand/sponsor but that's it.

These T&F athletes should be happy that there are companies that want to sponsor them at all, I mean there aren't that many people watching...

Human Beings are very Adaptable. We'd get used to it so fast your head would spin.

I remember when a few NFL players started wearing White Shoes, everyone was shocked or thrilled. A few years later, they were all wearing White Shoes. Now, years later, it was a shock when a few stated wearing "throwback" Black Shoes.

It's Chinatown, Frank.

HEY! DON'T FORGET TRYING TO DATE MY SISTER - PARIS HILTON.

No short shrifting here.

rojo wrote:

hypebeast wrote:

These people need to shut up. If Nike was getting such a 'song' of a deal, the other major companies would've stepped in and driven the bid upwards.

I would normally agree with you but it's hard to say. Nike sponsors Max Siegel's racing team which is a huge conflict of interest. I'm not sure if they even bid out the Nike deal.

If James Harden is worth $15 million a year for adidas, I think $20 million for USATF is a bargain.

Let's get real, there is no way Adidas, Brooks, Saucony, New Balance were ever going to bid over $20m to USATF.

They all have the same strategy towards Tiny Track And Nobody Really Cares Field:

Let Nike Underwrite The Sport And The Bulk Of The Athletes, And We'll Just Cherry Pick Sponsor A Few, And It Costs Us Far Less.

Nike carring the heavy load, is an awesome deal for Adidas, Brooks, Saucony, New Balance et. al.

It's a dream scenario for them. First, Nike helped convert the whole world to wearing "trainers" as shoes, instead of leather shoes, hard shoes, as everyday shoes / casual shoes. Go back a 100 years and almost all men and women wore hats, every day, and hard leather shoes.

Converse won over the kids market in the late 60's, along with Tiger/Asics, Adidas, Puma, and then Nike BOOM...with Running/Fitness BOOM, and then Basketball and Hip-Hop KABOOOOOM!!!!!

Nike may be massive, but they more than massively Expanded The Market For All Current -at the time- Sporting Goods Companies, And All Future Sporting Goods and Sports (nutrition, energy gels, bars etc.) To Come and Still To Come.

RunGum? Are You Kidding Me?

Ironically, RunGum is actually FANTASTIC.

No coffee or tea handy, boom, RunGum to the rescue.

GO NICK!

Soccer Guy wrote:

I don't get it.

Imagine the Brazilian soccer team had 11 different jerseys for each of their players, one from Nike, another one adidas, puma, etc, you get the idea.

Nike sponsors the Brazilian National team and wants something back.

They have exceptions for shoes where every player can pick his own brand/sponsor but that's it.

These T&F athletes should be happy that there are companies that want to sponsor them at all, I mean there aren't that many people watching...

One EASY way around this.

Design the jerseys without logos (they can even be Nike jerseys and warmups). Let the individual screen print their sponsor's logo(s) in a specified 3"x2" spot (business card sized). Everybody is happy then.

Reaganomics wrote:

Good.

Nike and adidas have pretty much ruined the sport visually. Every race features half the field in Nike colours and the other half in adidas colours. It's no fun to watch. It's certainly a bigger issue in terms of spectatorship than doping is; when the spectator base doesn't know who the athletes are (e.g. as is the case in track) it only muddies the water when everyone is wearing the same thing.

Club colours. Sponsor logos. Go there.

There are some club uni's. Bowerman TC etc.

What's the other option, if Nike went Primary Colors, Adidas would copy that. Adidas has so many ex Nike execs that love to copy Nike, it isn't funny.

Nike invents Fkyknit /Knit, Adidas industrial espionage steals it as quickly as they can - and then lose the law suit in Europe/Germany. Nike launched Waffles, Puma made round peg waffles, Brooks made triangle shapped waffles, and on and on.

Wouldn't it be great and mess with peoples heads, if one year Nike decided to make their kit tops tie-dyed, in honor of Ken Kesey?

Geoff Hollister, you are so missed. Geoff would have given the tie-dye a go for atleast a meet or two.

To me, the key question is: What if Nick signs the agreement, but is in breach of the agreement? What are the penalties for being in breach? If there are none specified in the agreement, then who cares. The letter requesting that athletes not pack any non-Nike branded gear is irrelevant if it is not part of the agreement. Go have coffee in your Brooks gear Nick and have fun with this.

I know shoes are excluded from the contract. But, I was thinking of when Stacy Dragila messed up her Achiles (maybe both of them) wearing Nike's shoes especially made for her. Wonder if Dr. Brown or another doc could generate a note saying Nike workout gear causes rashes, pain, blisters, etc. in Symmonds and therefore he needs to wear the stuff he wants to wear or suffer physical, possibly career-ending harm.

LOL: "glorious physique."

Dude's a bit of a narcissist and a douche, but so are some of my best friends.

"glorious physique," thigh slapper!

Masback money deal wrote:

hypebeast wrote:

These people need to shut up. If Nike was getting such a 'song' of a deal, the other major companies would've stepped in and driven the bid upwards.

o.

You're an idiot. It was a no bid deal. The same way past corrupt USATF CEO Craig Masback gave away nationals and Olympic Trials in a midnight deal right before he took a lucrative job with Nike.

Nike is corrupt.

According to behavioral economist, and many, many studies and tests, 80% of all humans are corrupt.

So you're not corrupt?

Doesn't make it right. However, what if it was those deals are continued empty stands in Sacto, or no other bidders that could float the sport.

Show me where Adidas, New Balance, or any of the shoe companies have gone on record protesting that they would have offered MORE MONITARY SUPPORT?

Or any city or town that would have paid more for the Trials and Guaranteed the athletes as many fans fannies in the stands????

Hollow argument. Maybe so and so is corrupt, but the sport is, even in this time of resurgence, on life support.

See the thread about how much "pros" and "elites" actually made.

NCAA Champion Runners have been offered 12-20k "pro contracts."

The sport is in a pretty sad state, and has more problems than this one. The saddest thing is that the TFAA has no balls, like the NFLPA (NFL Players Union) has. And on average those NFL players are broke, most of them, 4 years after they exit the NFL.

For track athletes to gain more power and freedom, freedom to earn, they need to stand united - a probably impossibility in a sport filled with individuals and so many weird individuals, nerds, outcast types etc.

(Which is one of the great things about the sport in that it welcomes all body and personality types. Imagine a Pole Vaulter, a 10,000m runner, and a Women's Hammer Thrower walk into a bar... The bartender says: ____________.)

United they stand, divided, same old same old.

Nathans Hot Dogs wrote:

So no black polo player or a little preppie croc either ? Prada and Gucci stay home? Hugo goes BOSS-less in Beijing ?

No Mickey Mouse tees-- what will Dwight Stones wear?

No watch that keeps on ticking allowed?

how far does this go??

>> No Mickey Mouse tees-- what will Dwight Stones wear?

A hair piece.

Bada-bing!

Jeff Wigand wrote:

Simplistic thinking... wrote:

You are stating only one aspect of what he may be missing out on, and the long term ramifications.

This is a fight he is picking. Garett Heath ran in the Pan Am Games last month with these same restrictions. He couldn't wear any Brooks apparel when training in Toronto and it wasn't an issue, which is also why you don't see Loxsom standing with Nick on this.

Okay, Lauren Fleshman turns people off, she's also a cool woman, and funny.

Other athletes are not standing with Nick on this because by and large TRACK AND FIELD ATHLETES DO NOT GET PAID ENOUGH TO TAKE RISKS WITH THEIR INCOME.

Ever heard any of the behind the scenes chatter and jealousy, and anger, and jealousy between athletes because some get/got way more money from company X, Y or Z for about the same accomplishments?

It happens, big time. (Then it usually dies down, but it happens.)

There is not enough money to go around, and pro track in the USA is like high school, only with some severely limited money thrown in.

Truly appreciate your inside report.

Could you expand on your opinion / guess at what percentage of athletes are making more than 40-50k per year?

And also, what are the lowest initial contract offers you've heard of, and the highest (you don't need to name the athletes.)

Paying each athlete $5k to wear Nike for the 10 days is a SMART idea, win-win. Pay to the athletes -- not the Hightowers.

If I walk down town, 80% of the people, and all the hot women, are wearing Nike's, mostly Nike Free's.

There's plenty of dough to flow around.

The shoe companies do not have a money problem, they have a distribution of money problem. Hey, the NCAA is going to give you fresh young meat every year to replace this athlete or that athlete that's going to get maybe to slow, or maybe too old.

New Balance pays Maggie Vessey to be naked and painted blue for an ad, and then they drop her when she gets injured, and now, if she was consistently .5 seconds faster than she has been all season, every co. would want to sign her.

That is how crazy and thin thinking and imaginary thin margins these promo budgets for supporting our USA potential Olympians and WC team members are living in effect of.

It's a harsh reality.

dougruns26 wrote:

To me, the key question is: What if Nick signs the agreement, but is in breach of the agreement? What are the penalties for being in breach? If there are none specified in the agreement, then who cares. The letter requesting that athletes not pack any non-Nike branded gear is irrelevant if it is not part of the agreement. Go have coffee in your Brooks gear Nick and have fun with this.

It seriously takes like 2 seconds to google the contract. There are penalties. They apply to any breach

First penalty is a reprimand. Ultimately they can go the athlete for any penalties the sponsors level at usatf for the incident.

LOL.

I would have more respect for Nick's stance against Nike if he hadn't been such an active Nike hieny smoocher when sponsored by Nike. Was there some other reason besides pure dollars and Nick's anger that Nike didn't offer more to his narcissistic little self that has caused him to push his Brook's laden jersey out to the camera people and go on his Nike hating tear?

I'd respect him more if he admitted any other behind the seasons reason.

It seems that Nike sponsoring him has in huge ways facilitated most of the good things that have flowed from it, in his sports career, the support of the Eugene people, and his business mentor etc.