Nike releases schools from bat contract

quote:

I'm not sure I believe that, but my son all year long last year was frustrated by the dead bat - but we just assumed it was the BBCOR, not the Nike BBCOR.

I believe it.USC has had NIke and they are awful.This summer I realized it when I saw my son hit with wood.He was hitting the ball farther with wood.As well when I watched the college world series, and saw some schols just mashing,I was like this has something to do with the bats.Oregon State in supers comes to mind as they also use Nike and the hitters looked inferior.I watched Oropesa from USC who was drafted in 3rd round and has serious legit power.His numbers were significantly down.It might of cost him and others money. I had heard from our son they get new bats but I didnt know why.

Awesome thanks for that info

My son was looking for a bbcor mc2. What would anyone recommend for a top-heavy bbcor?

I just took advantage of a Perfect Game offer and paid $150.00 for a Rawlings 5150 for my son. He used DeMarini last year. Their were no complaints from him or his teammates about overly dead bats but after hearing that the Rawlings had some pop, he wanted to see for himself.

It is by far the least I've spent on a non wood bat in 6 years.

Surprising that a major manufacturer would admit to all it's customer base that their product is a "stinker." Obviously, they don't have an answer.

The fact that Nike bats underperform, comparatively, is old news as they have always been bad at any level, well before BBCOR standards evolved. Now thanks to the NCAA users, they were able to quantify and measure against the others bat performance.

Maybe, Nike thru some weird bad luck just happen to sign a whole bunch of poor hitting teams? ha

I think they also suffer from their reputation of having crummy bats.

Kids think they are no good before they even swing them and as we all no with hitting that is no good. Quickly becomes self fulfilling.

It isn't hard to imagine the USC, etc players that have a deal with Nike sitting in the dugout during their games having bat envy because the other team is not using their lousy bats. Turns into one big downer fest.

Quote"I think they also suffer from their reputation of having crummy bats"

Really?


I dont get the comment of a downer fest.Nobody had a downer fest.The fact is that USC and the other teams in the article that used NIKE bats had significant lower offensive numbers than those that didnt.The BBCOR s were even worse.

The facts are in and now the players can move on.

Nobody sat in the dugout with bat envy.I dont understand that comment either.

I dont know how a comment can be made that players are using self fulfilling blah blah blah, the bats su ck.period.

Its not a fair field if certain teams are using staistically proven inferior equipment.And if you do a web search many coaches complained to NIKE bat representatives about the BBCO Nikes.

Lets see what happens to the numbers now that many schools get to use bats that are on an even playing field.

Backstop dad,

Did you read the article?Just curious.

Does your son play college baseball?Just curious.Not an attack of any kind.

No and no. Guess making an observation about a reaction that is more likely to be made by boys my son's age vs. men who play in college.

No offense intended. I apologize if I did.

Not offended.

I agree with young players blame can be put on the bats.

But at the college level,these guys spend hours of extra time in the cages,hours to improve their game.And it is so competitve, every player at this level is doing all they can to be bigger, faster, stronger, better.

This last year was awful.The BBCOR NIke as I stated has less pop than wood.

NIKE has removed their college bats from the market, and have not issued a a statement.

What if teams were sent home from the college world series early due to a inferior bat.What if a player lost money in the draft from one of these schools.?

The article stated that NONE of the HR leaders in the nation used NIKE bats.That every college that used them had significant dros in offensive numbers.

That college coaches had been complaining to Nike bat representatives that they felt their teams were at a distinct disadvantage.

To me that is huge.And as another poster said, we all knew NIKE bats were awful before the BBCOr came out ,but now there is actual Data to back it up.

The good thing is my sons school, and Robs son school,and all the other NIKE bat schools get to try out and choose new bats.Thats exciting.

They get to spend the fall using different bats and choosing what they like.I am personally pretty happy as I think the bats were awful.

quote:

Originally posted by HVbaseballDAD:
My son was looking for a bbcor mc2. What would anyone recommend for a top-heavy bbcor?

"Anderson Ignite" is end loaded and seems to have quite a bit of "PoP" for a BBCOR. My son also loves the sound of it.

Do most conferences require all their teams to use the same bats or do some allow teams to make their own choices? I know my son's team used Demarini's last year but are testing Easton bats this Fall.

I believe it is team by team decision.

Three bagger,

I think generally teams sign contracts with specific bat companies.So I am not sure what will happen with the old NIKE bat schools.There were several in the PAC TEN,USC,Oregon State,Oregon and some others.And many from other conferences.

Maybe coaches will want them to settle on one.It will be interesting.I am excited to see how the fall goes for the boys getting to try different bats, and what they think.

quote:

Originally posted by fanofgame:
I think generally teams sign contracts with specific bat companies.So I am not sure what will happen with the old NIKE bat schools.There were several in the PAC TEN,USC,Oregon State,Oregon and some others.And many from other conferences.

I have a question (for anyone):

Are schools, or conferences, with Nike uniform contracts bound to using Nike bats, as well? All, some, none... it depends?

I've never paid attention to this. Does everyone with a swoosh on their uniform swing a Nike bat? I see that Penn State uses Nike bats. I'll check on some others.

Nike has been EXTREMELY protective of its exclusivity at North Carolina. Players have been prohibited from using anyone else's equipment of any type.

I'm looking into the bats' status there.

At USC everything has been NIKE as well.

.

"Players have been prohibited from using anyone else's equipment of any type."

And that policy leads to some very long lines!



.

quote:

Originally posted by AntzDad:
If a school, or conference, has a Nike uniform contract, are those schools bound to using Nike bats, as well? All, some, none?

I've never paid attention to this. Does everyone with a swoosh on their uniform swing a Nike bat?

No, both Gators and Seminoles in Florida wear Nike uniforms but use different bats than Nike (and not just last year.) I do think that the overall school has a deal with these outfitting companies for uniforms and that the equipment deals like bats/gloves, etc. are a different deal.

Agree with backstop17, two local D1's have had Nike contracts for years, with Nike supplying bats at both, at least through the 2009 season. Though Nike "schools", other brand bats have been used.

“Right now they’re kind of like kids in a candy store checking everything out.”
Under the revised agreement with Nike, Alabama can use other bats so long as it
does not sign a contract or sponsorship with another manufacturer. By not being
locked into a contract with a specific manufacturer, UA has the flexibility to
use a number of different bats simultaneously and change at any point in the
season.
Gaspard said the university will continue to use all other Nike apparel and
field equipment.


I am not sure if other schools have this same agreement.SoI will go back and edit my comment.

LOL!!!

quote:

Originally posted by gotwood4sale:
.

"Players have been prohibited from using anyone else's equipment of any type."

And that policy leads to some very long lines!



.

quote:

Originally posted by Backstop-17:
I do think that the overall school has a deal with these outfitting companies for uniforms and that the equipment deals like bats/gloves, etc. are a different deal.

I just spoke to a coach. He told me the same thing. In his case, who wears, or uses, what comes down to the actual contract.

My son's school is Adidas/de Marini. The team supplies free Adidas shoes and swag, but permits players to wear other brands of shoes (at the player's expense) in games. Same for all other sports.

I don't know if they get free bats, but they use de Marini, exclusively, in games- Voodoo or Vexxum only.

quote:

Originally posted by Three Bagger:
Do most conferences require all their teams to use the same bats or do some allow teams to make their own choices? I know my son's team used Demarini's last year but are testing Easton bats this Fall.

I am not sure about other teams, but on my sons team all the players must use the bat that sponsors them. what is strange is that another clothing manufacturer just came on board, but they cannot wear uniforms made by them because of the bat sponsorship. Apparently the previous clothing sponsor has a connection or binding contract to the bat manufacturer. So as a result the new clothing manufacturer will have their banner up, and provide all the warmup clothing, but the uniforms will remain from the old clothing manufacturer because they did not want to give up their bats.
It all sounded convoluted to me, but since my son is a pitcher only, it does not directly affect him.
Colleges should just switch to wood and get it over with. That way it is safer, and everyone is on an even playing field bat wise.

I don't have all the inside info but these types of contracts can vary dramatically from manufacturer and school.

Nike contracts often begin with the football teams and provide big dollars to provide "swooshed" uniforms to all the sports. I know sometimes they have bats tied to those contracts with more dollars in it for both the school and Baseball Head Coach.

Or, the school may opt out of that portion and contract individually for other equipment. I remember Georgia, and specifically their star player at the time; Gordon Beckham, being asked by a SI reporter "why there was that big pile of NIKE bats in a corner of their locker room?"

They were, are a NIKE school but the players were finding "creative" ways of getting around using their bats.

quote:

Originally posted by Vector:
…Colleges should just switch to wood and get it over with. That way it is safer, and everyone is on an even playing field bat wise.

How will it be safer, if the BBCOR bats perform little better than wood, if at all? And how will it be an “even playing field” if all colleges went to wood? Do you really think the manufacturers wouldn’t get in there with the contracts for using their products? And do you really believe “ALL” wood is equal?

Don’t ever kid yourself that the long-held beliefs of days and years gone by aren’t still with us, even if they’ve been debunked over and over again.

My understanding is that BBCOR bats have greater exit velo than wood, though certainly not as much as the rocket launchers of the recent past. If I am wrong, please correct me.
Assuming I am correct that covers the safety issue.

As to an even playing field, if the Nike bats are as bad as this thread and article imply, those kids were not on an even playing field due to being stuck with inferior bats. While there is probably a slight difference in different wood bats, I doubt it is as significant as the difference between the best and worst BBCOR bats if that article has any validity.

quote:

Originally posted by Prepster:
Nike has been EXTREMELY protective of its exclusivity at North Carolina. Players have been prohibited from using anyone else's equipment of any type.

I'm looking into the bats' status there.

In talking to some of our former players who are now on UNC's roster, they are experimenting with several different bats this fall (Rawlings, Easton, Demarini, etc.).

That's welcome news. Thanks, redbird5!

Now...if they'd just address the gloves in the same way.

Redbird,
Please let us know what kind of feedback they give. Just about every HS player/parent or program in the country will have to buy one in the next 6 months or so.

Does anyone know who makes Nike bat's?

The entire BBCOR transition was to fast. It did not allow the bat manufacturers enough time to put out quality BBCOR product. Nike is not a bat company, so we should not be suprise by this outcome.

We will see the true bat manufacturers begin to put quality BBCOR product in the marketplace, and give our kids a great bat to swing. Easton, LS, Demarini.

Lastly, a bat is a personal preference for a player. They have to feel confident and comfortable in what they are swinging. When a college kid is forced to swing a particular bat, things can get tough.

Lefty...

So what's left for Nike to do? Coming to a Football stadium near you.....
LSU
Va.Tech
Wash. State

just to name a few. Between Nike and UA I don't know who has the more jacked up uniforms, I hope that the great baseball minds never let this happen to america's pastime!

And by the way, Under Armour is about to get into the bat business. They're undoubtedly dancin' in the halls with the timing of this bit of news from their number one enemy.

quote:

Originally posted by cabbagedad:
And by the way, Under Armour is about to get into the bat business. They're undoubtedly dancin' in the halls with the timing of this bit of news from their number one enemy.

They will undoubtedly build them in the factory in China that produced the bats for Nike and at least one other brand??? Same product, just change the name.

It's not out of the question to use the same factories but usually the engineering and design specs will be unique by brand with the possible exception of low end product. The factories are pretty good about protecting each company's designs for fear of losing the business.
The bat companies will just cut up each others' products when they come to market to see what their competitors are doing.

I'd be surprised if Under Armour didn't come out with some unique angle. Usually they will find a way to incorporate one of their existing recognized technologies from their other products.

quote:

Originally posted by Sdlefty:
The entire BBCOR transition was to fast. It did not allow the bat manufacturers enough time to put out quality BBCOR product. Nike is not a bat company, so we should not be suprise by this outcome.

We will see the true bat manufacturers begin to put quality BBCOR product in the marketplace, and give our kids a great bat to swing. Easton, LS, Demarini.

Lastly, a bat is a personal preference for a player. They have to feel confident and comfortable in what they are swinging. When a college kid is forced to swing a particular bat, things can get tough.

Lefty...

Good post lefty.
Coaches DO NOT necessarily have to use one specific manufacturer for anything, but some do because THEY (the coaches) get paid to do so. So I don't think the entire blame should be on Nike, but rather also those who took money for their own gain.

Is it true that the new bats have been found to be altered in CA (HS) and that there will be penalties if umpires find bats that have been, the penalty will lie on the coach, not the player?

quote:

Originally posted by fanofgame:
I watched Oropesa from USC who was drafted in 3rd round and has serious legit power.His numbers were significantly down.It might of cost him and others money. I had heard from our son they get new bats but I didnt know why.

For all the USC games I saw last year, Oropesa was using an 2011 TPX Omhaha. All the other kids used the Nike's.

With the new bat policy, I don't know different all of the various bat companies are from each other now. I went to a D-1 school where we were contracted out by Wilson and used Dimarini's. At first I disliked them b/c I was used to Stealth's but as time went on I quickly got used to the new model.

With that being said, I was never overly impressed with Nike bats. However, if they have the money they WILL get into certain programs. Wilson's strategy was to monopolize the "smaller market" schools. I think 80% of the northeast schools I played against used Wilson/ Dimarini. When we went down south, to the big time schools, is when we saw the Nikes, Louisvilles, ect.

Ken Jacobi

Author of “Going with the Pitch: Adjusting to Baseball, School, and Life as a Division I College Athlete"

"Coaches DO NOT necessarily have to use one specific manufacturer for anything, but some do because THEY (the coaches) get paid to do so. So I don't think the entire blame should be on Nike, but rather also those who took money for their own gain."

That may be true in many places, TPM; but, it's not always the case. At UNC, Nike has an agreement that extends to every men's and women's sport. All athletic apparel and equipment is provided by Nike; and, the contract requires that student-athletes use nothing else (making this bat exemption truly exceptional). In that case, the coaches have no say, whatsoever.