"I don't think Under Armour ever understood what they had" - Sneaker expert details why Stephen Curry-Under Armour partnership ended

One of the most surprising developments to emerge from this young NBA season is the split between Stephen Curry and his sports apparel partner, Under Armour, after 13 years.

No one, except those close to both parties, knows exactly what happened. Some reports indicate that Under Armour dropped Curry due to a lack of sales, while others suggest that Curry grew frustrated with how the brand was operating.

That said, long-time sneaker insider and expert Nick Engvall believes that this is more of a loss for Under Armour, as they failed to effectively market one of the greatest athletes of all time.

"Looking at it now, I don't think Under Armour ever understood what they had," Engvall wrote on his substack, The Sneaker Newsletter.

What Under Armour got wrong

The Curry brand, which will continue to operate independently moving forward, is projected to have generated revenue of $100 million to $120 million under the brand. This is considered relatively low, especially when compared to brands like Jordan, which earned approximately $7 billion in the last fiscal year.

Engvall believes that UA's disappointing sales numbers were due to the inability to effectively market Curry and his shoes. On top of that, their brand execution looked lackluster from the outside and wasn't innovative enough to stand out among its competitors.

"Basketball shoes aren't just performance products; they're status symbols, fashion statements, cultural artifacts. Nike understands this. Adidas understands this. Under Armour thought they were making athletic equipment when they should have been making art," Engvall writes.

Engvall also expressed frustration with how UA didn't capitalize on the momentum they had already built when they signed Curry in August 2013. Not only did they have the right athlete at the right time, but they also produced impressive models of his shoes early on. They also had a founder, Kevin Plank, who didn't mind spending the resources on decent technology that helped the shoes perform well on the court.

Unfortunately, the brand didn't capitalize on these things for more reasons than one and now they're feeling the consequences.

"And the saddest part? Those chunky, strap-heavy early designs they abandoned? They'd be fire in today's market. Every design trend they walked away from has come back around. They were sitting on gold and traded it for whatever the Curry 2 Low 'Chef' was supposed to be," Engvall wrote.

Was fumbling Clark the last straw?

Curry was already unhappy with how Under Armour executed his vision and mission, and it didn't help that they weren't excelling outside of his line either.

One of the last straws that led to him splitting with the brand was when they failed to sign WNBA superstar Caitlin Clark as a signature athlete.

Curry, along with UA, recruited Caitlin hard, but they couldn't offer her more than what Nike pitched, so she signed with the latter instead.

Now, after 13 years, Curry is a sneaker free agent, but he plans to move forward with his line independently. Time will eventually reveal what's next for both Curry's line and Under Armour, but what's certain for now is that the latter will be known as the brand that didn't capitalize on having the greatest shooter ever at the forefront of their business.

Related: "They did us a favor" - Luka Doncic praises Lakers, league for getting rid of "dangerous, slippery" NBA Cup court

This story was originally published by Basketball Network on Nov 30, 2025, where it first appeared in the Off The Court section. Add Basketball Network as a Preferred Source by clicking here.