Quote Originally Posted by SeattleIrish View Post
How exactly does the shoe issue play into recruits thinking, generally?

People keep mentioning that UCLA is an "Adidas School", and that could/should play into a recruits decision making. How does that play out? Is it direct overt pressure from a Shoe Rep, telling the kid to go to "their" school? Is it pressure from the AAU coach, who's getting paid by that shoe company? Is it simply brand allegiance by the recruit, wanting to look good? Is it a less overt pressure in the form of connecting to a shoe contract once the recruit goes pro (and is that communicated by someone from the shoe company)?

I'm a bit lost on the whole brand tie-in to recruiting, but it does come up from time to time. Any help?

thanks,

s.i.
I'd say yes to all of the above within reason. Shabazz is a special circumstance because his sister is a pro tennis player and is under contract with Adidas.