You’ll Never Believe Why Steph Curry Chose To Sign With Under Armour Instead Of Nike In 2013
Steph Curry has turned himself into a bonafide NBA superstar over the course of the last two seasons. But as recently as just three years ago, the verdict was still out with regards to how his pro career was going to go. He seemed to have all the potential in the world, but due to a series of ankle injuries, there were some people who were skeptical about how far he would be able to take things. Since then, he has silenced all of his critics and won both the NBA MVP and an NBA title. But back in the summer of 2013, there was still plenty of uncertainty swirling around Curry.
With that uncertainty in mind, Curry’s sponsor Nike made a pretty weak pitch to re-sign him during the 2013 offseason. They had sponsored Curry through his first few years in the league, and the thought was that they wanted him to come back to the Swoosh and continue to represent the brand. But according to an excellent new ESPN.com report, they didn’t go after Curry as hard as they should have. In fact, they put together a pretty awful pitch for him, according to his father Dell Curry who attended a meeting with Nike with his son. At that meeting, Dell claims a Nike representative referred to Steph as “Steph-on” and didn’t offer up any sort of apology for doing it. Furthermore, Dell says Nike reps showed Curry a PowerPoint presentation that featured Kevin Durant’s name on it. It made it look as though they were basically just recycling the same presentation they had given to KD and using it for Curry.
Those things didn’t sit well with Curry, his father, or his representatives. Dell told ESPN.com that Curry also wasn’t thrilled about the idea of playing second fiddle to guys like Durant, LeBron James, and Kobe Bryant. So rather than re-signing with Nike, he inked a deal with Under Armour, a company that went to great lengths to sign him. UA went as far as to give an endorsement deal to Curry’s little-used Golden State Warriors teammate Kent Bazemore to try and get his attention. It worked, and the rest is history. UA is obviously still nowhere close to the size of Nike, but their basketball division is growing and the perception is that Nike missed out on a huge opportunity by not re-signing Curry in 2013. They could have cashed in thanks to all the success he has had in recent seasons.
You can check out the entire ESPN.com story here to read other interesting tidbits about Curry’s decision to sign with UA. Do you think he ultimately made the right decision by turning his back on Nike to sign with a company that, at the time, had an unproven track record when it came to working with NBA superstars?