Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU #49 in licensed merch sales!

hokiehead

hokiehead

Gobbler on the Mountain
Club Member
Collegiate Licensing Company lists top royalty producing universities. Props to Nortzahokie on techsideline for this.

Article lists top schools by royalties on merchandise. CU made the list at #49. I will eat some crow over my previous posts regarding Colorado being a "pro sports state", overly infatuated with the Broncos. Gotta admit, Black and Gold is a pretty bad-ass color combination and it seems that since football season ended, I'm seeing more CU apparel around town.

notes of interest from reading the article (at least those noted by me):
  • No surprise that Texas is #1 again, with 'Bama and Notre Dame near the top
  • I don't get it, but kids love Michigan's colors and uniforms. I had a VT football player tell me once that in HS he dreamed of playing at Michigan because of the uniforms (s/h).
  • I guess that also explains Delaware.
  • noted on TSL, Michigan State conspicuously absent. off of a B1G football champ year, no less.
  • I love the Badgers, and will admit that being a UW-Midwest fan is really easy (absurd consistency in both football and hoops, never mind volleyball and hockey), but the Wisconsin colors and logo are not all that cool. Even in the state of Wisconsin, Green and Gold is seen about a billion times more frequently than [STRIKE]Red[/STRIKE]Cardinal and White.
  • I wonder what percentage of people who buy and wear Duke merchandise have ever set foot on the campus, never mind attended a class there.
  • Montana made the list?!?!?! and Michigan State didn't!?!?!?!?!
  • Montana State made the list?!?!?! and Michigan State didn't!?!?!?!?! seriously, that's a butt-ugly green color, but I fucjiking see people wearing MSU stuff all over the country.
  • A lot of those North Carolina girls look really cute in that powder blue.
  • I don't think I've ever seen someone wearing a Boston U item. Same for Texas State, but I've been to Boston (couldn't even tell you what city they were in before I just googled it -- San Marcos)

Can anyone offer insight into the licensing corporationss listed (too drunk/tired/lazy to research): is Knights Apparel affiliated with Nike? Can you give un-hip old people like me a decoder ring between the corps listed and the entities they're DBA'ing?
 
HuskerHater said:
That's what I noticed. Had to check the list a few times. Wonder how they figure their numbers.
Click to expand...
does occur to me that this is only for 2013-14 season -- the Ducks had (relatively) disappointing years in both football and men's basketball last year. but still...
 
HuskerHater said:
http://espn.go.com/college-football...as-longhorns-again-top-merchandise-sales-list

End of the first paragraph gives us our answer.
Click to expand...

nice find! -- quoted for those fearful to click:

For the eighth straight year, the University of Texas collected the most royalties of any college or university represented by the Collegiate Licensing Company, whose clients include all the major schools except Ohio State, Michigan State, University of Southern California and Oregon.
Click to expand...
 
They also don't have K-State, Baylor, Iowa State, Miss St., Kentucky, Indiana, Iowa, Miami, NC State, CSU and probably others in the other small conferences that I don't care to look up.
 
#49 is not good. Puts us in the bottom third of P5. Used to be that the Buffs were among the elites on this.
 
Buffnik said:
#49 is not good. Puts us in the bottom third of P5. Used to be that the Buffs were among the elites on this.
Click to expand...

RG is already working to address this one of the positions he filled late last year was a hire to specifically focus on merchandising. Under Bohn there had been a person assigned to it but he also had about 42 other responsibilities including supporting the football coaches with advanced analytics recording, production and evaluation. MM worked with RG to bring in some specific support there and RG created a position solely to focus on raising our licensing revenue.
 
absinthe said:
RG is already working to address this one of the positions he filled late last year was a hire to specifically focus on merchandising. Under Bohn there had been a person assigned to it but he also had about 42 other responsibilities including supporting the football coaches with advanced analytics recording, production and evaluation. MM worked with RG to bring in some specific support there and RG created a position solely to focus on raising our licensing revenue.
Click to expand...

All true.

But he also got them to where they looked a hell of a lot better playing programs like Hawaii, Fresno State, CSU, UCLA and Stanford than CU did against those teams (except for SJSU getting rolled by Furd in 2011).
 
Buffnik said:
#49 is not good. Puts us in the bottom third of P5. Used to be that the Buffs were among the elites on this.
Click to expand...
I see your point, but what's not good is the team. That we have sucked so badly for so long, I don't see #49 as too bad, but that's just moi. Start winning games and get some grown up merchandising by the AD, this number will go up.

Any idea what we used to be ranked?
 
BuffClass90 said:
I see your point, but what's not good is the team. That we have sucked so badly for so long, I don't see #49 as too bad, but that's just moi. Start winning games and get some grown up merchandising by the AD, this number will go up.

Any idea what we used to be ranked?
Click to expand...

Back in the 90s, I think we were Top 10. Black & Gold are cool colors. Gang members loved us and the suburban white kids who like to pretend they're gangstas followed suit.
 
Buffnik said:
Back in the 90s, I think we were Top 10. Black & Gold are cool colors. Gang members loved us and the suburban white kids who like to pretend they're gangstas followed suit.
Click to expand...

We should roll out an exclusive pair or Jordan's.
 
Buffnik said:
All true.

But he also got them to where they looked a hell of a lot better playing programs like Hawaii, Fresno State, CSU, UCLA and Stanford than CU did against those teams (except for SJSU getting rolled by Furd in 2011).
Click to expand...

wrong thread? or was my post that unclear?
 
absinthe said:
wrong thread? or was my post that unclear?
Click to expand...

Wrong thread. There was one where tini was going too far in saying SJSU was predictive of CU success for MacIntyre and you pointed out that the WAC had competition where all the rosters are half terrible so the scholarship limits weren't as big of a deal (i.e., who cares if you have 75 or 85 when you can only find 30 who can play anyway?).
 
Buffnik said:
Wrong thread. There was one where tini was going too far in saying SJSU was predictive of CU success for MacIntyre and you pointed out that the WAC had competition where all the rosters are half terrible so the scholarship limits weren't as big of a deal (i.e., who cares if you have 75 or 85 when you can only find 30 who can play anyway?).
Click to expand...

I actually agreed with abs for the most part, I just thought that those two points were also important. I wasn't saying anything about predictive success because of it.
 
There are a ton of notable schools missing because the CLC doesn't have agreements with everyone. CU is more like #60 and probably 10th or 11th in the Pac 12.
 
tante said:
For your girlfriend?
Click to expand...

**** off.

The player number isn't whats important. I would get a custom one if they had the same quality. Unfortunately the upper end ones come in two numbers. I wear the jersey on game days. She can have it the rest of the time.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
**** off.

The player number isn't whats important. I would get a custom one if they had the same quality. Unfortunately the upper end ones come in two numbers. I wear the jersey on game days. She can have it the rest of the time.
Click to expand...

I think i speak for everyone when i say only players and girls should wear football jerseys.

Super hot:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Eftj2On9fzY/TnObPUtYJUI/AAAAAAAAADs/OQVeQhxLDhE/s1600/jerseys3.jpg

Even Jay-Z who is at least 100 times cooler than you looks like a douche in a football jersey

http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/5d/esq-jay-z-rodarte-2014-xl.jpg
 
tante said:
I think i speak for everyone when i say only players and girls should wear football jerseys.

Super hot:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Eftj2On9fzY/TnObPUtYJUI/AAAAAAAAADs/OQVeQhxLDhE/s1600/jerseys3.jpg

Even Jay-Z who is at least 100 times cooler than you looks like a douche in a football jersey

http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/5d/esq-jay-z-rodarte-2014-xl.jpg
Click to expand...

Well frankly, I don't give a damn what your or "everyone's" opinion is. I think wearing them out to do anything besides what a game is stupid. I played in high school and have always liked jerseys. So if that is how I choose to put my money back into the program then that is my own prerogative.

Girls do look hot in jerseys, that is why mine can where it whenever she wants.

I would argue that Jay-Z is just a douche.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top