By the time modern sport discovered sponsorship deals, athlete endorsements and brand ambassadors, the blueprint had already been written. Not in a boardroom or a marketing agency, but in a small German town divided by a river, two brothers and a bitterness that never healed.
This is the story of Puma versus Adidas, and how their rivalry reshaped global sport.
In the early 1920s, Adolf “Adi” Dassler and his older brother Rudolf began making sports shoes in their mother’s laundry in Herzogenaurach, Bavaria. Adi was the engineer, meticulous and obsessed with function. Rudolf was the salesman, confident and outward-facing.
Together, they formed the Dassler Brothers Shoe Factory, driven by a simple ambition: build footwear that helped athletes win.
Their defining moment came at the 1936 Berlin Olympics, when American sprinter Jesse Owens wore Dassler spikes. Owens won four gold medals, and in doing so delivered one of the most powerful sporting moments of the 20th century. For the brothers, it was proof that performance on the biggest stage could elevate a brand worldwide.
The Second World War changed everything. Business pressures, personal tensions and wartime suspicion fractured the brothers’ relationship beyond repair. Accusations were made, loyalties questioned, and by 1948, the partnership was over.
Adi remained in Herzogenaurach and founded Adidas, combining his name into a new identity. Rudolf left town, setting up Puma on the opposite side of the river.
It was a separation that would define both companies for generations.
What followed was unprecedented. Herzogenaurach became a living case study in brand loyalty.
Families, friendships and football teams aligned themselves with either Adidas or Puma. Workers drank in separate pubs. Shopkeepers chose sides. Locals were said to look down at each other’s shoes before deciding whether a conversation was worth having.
The town earned the nickname “the town of bent necks”, a place where footwear was identity.
Both companies understood something few others did at the time: athletes were not just users of products, they were proof of credibility.
Adidas focused on innovation and performance, equipping national teams and elite competitors. Puma pursued star power, targeting individual icons who could command global attention.
One of the most famous moments came at the 1970 FIFA World Cup. Puma-sponsored Pelé, already the world’s most recognisable footballer, asked the referee to stop play just before kickoff so he could tie his boots. Television cameras lingered. Millions watched. Puma’s logo filled screens across continents.
It was not an accident.
It was the birth of athlete-led marketing on a mass scale.
As decades passed, the divide sharpened.
Adidas became synonymous with structure, engineering and team sport dominance. Its three stripes symbolised credibility and consistency at the highest level.
Puma cultivated speed, flair and individuality, aligning itself with athletes who represented personality as much as performance.
Their rivalry pushed innovation faster, sharpened marketing tactics and elevated the role of athletes from competitors to commercial forces.
Despite their shared legacy, the brothers never reconciled. Adi and Rudolf Dassler died without speaking, buried at opposite ends of the same cemetery in Herzogenaurach.
Yet their conflict left behind something extraordinary. Two global brands, each valued in the billions, both born from the same workshop and driven by the same obsession with winning.
Today’s sports landscape is built on foundations laid by this feud. Sponsorship deals, ambassador programs, athlete-led brands and community-driven loyalty can all trace their roots back to Puma and Adidas.
What began as a family dispute became a defining chapter in sports history.
Not because the brothers agreed.
But because they competed.
And in doing so, they changed the business of sport forever.
