The Arrogance of Academics?

College athletics is big business – and that is okay. In 2010, the University of Colorado made a business decision to accept an invitation to join the PAC-12, an invitation they had rescinded years earlier. Most fan and critics believe Buff leaders made a judicious choice when it decided to switch conferences.

CU officials justified their decision, in part, by claiming that their academic mission aligned more closely with the schools in the PAC-12 than the Big 12. This discussion makes a nice sound bite that may appease Boulder residents who do not fully appreciate the contribution of the university and CU athletics to their community.

In fact, CU’s claim of academic prowess can be challenged. Boulder’s engineering school and Denver’s medical school are world class. Unfortunately, CU does not distinguish itself in most other areas.

The bottom line is the Buffs had to jump ship if they wanted to retain a “respectable” athletic program. The times they are a changing.

College football appears to be heading towards fewer, but stronger super conferences, i.e. a different structure intended to generate more revenue for the country’s elite programs. CU has a wonderful football tradition, but CU is not one of the country’s top funded programs. Unfortunately, the lack of adequate support makes it unclear whether CU can be is one of the country’s elite programs moving forward.

The switch to the PAC 12 will provide Buff leaders with an opportunity to generate more revenue for their athletic department. There are more CU alumni and major corporations on the West Coast than in Stillwater, Waco, and Lubbock.

On September 6, the Denver Post published an article, “CU President leery of PAC-12 Adding More Teams”. The article stated…

University of Colorado president Bruce Benson said this morning he is wary of further Pac-12 expansion, particularly if Colorado is placed in an “East” division with former rivals from the Big 12 such as Oklahoma and Texas.

Later in the article Benson added..

“One of the reasons – and there are a lot of reasons – we got in the Pac 12 is to play regularly on the West Coast,” Benson said. “When I hear things like East-West divisions, we’re going back to the Big 12 again. I don’t know who’s possibly going, but I sure don’t want to get shorted out of the West Coast.”

The Post article went on to say..

Benson and DiStefano always maintained a major reason for CU joining the Pac-12 was that the schools matched Colorado’s academic mission. While Oklahoma and Texas are on a par with CU academically, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State may not be. “I believe that we should have a robust academic atmosphere among all schools in the league,” Benson said. “What schools have cinch courses or gut courses? We don’t have any and never will. The Pac-12 doesn’t. Some Big 12 schools do.”

Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate for Benson to make some of these comments in private, rather than to the Denver media?

As a newcomer to the conference, does Benson really think he can influence decisions by making public statements about getting shorted out of the West Coast?

What entitles Bruce Benson to use ATHLETICS, specifically the PAC-12 Conference, as a bully pulpit for belittling the quality of learning in the schools of the Big 12? Shouldn’t he be more focused on making sure the CU campuses are the best they can be?

Arrogant or not?

Ralphie Roams Outside Folsom – Bad for Licensing Revenues

The following articles from the Boulder Daily Camera are testimony to the fact that college athletics is big business. In Boulder, the ante has been upped since CU moved to the PAC-12 and since CU has experienced a $50 million shortfall over the past two years.

“Reining in Ralphie – CU Bolsters Brand. University Beefs up Logo Protection”
This article was the front page headline on Sunday June 5, 2011.

The article states, “The Buffs Barber Shop on University Hill is a shrine to CU sports-from the signature charging Ralphie logo dominating the window front to the pennants, signed footballs, clocks and encased Barbie cheerleader doll that decorate the inside of the shop. Now the business relationship between the barbershop and CU has been strained because of a dispute over licensing royalties, and the squabble has broken the partnership beyond repair, say both sides.”

The article continues by stating that CU earns about $750,000 per year from its trademark, well below the average of other PAC-10 schools, about $1.2 million. Officially licensed Buff merchandise includes dog bones, bird houses, Victoria’s Secret underwear and sweatshirts, action figures, tricycles, and cheerleading uniforms for toddlers.

By comparison, the University of Texas brings in $10 million a year in revenue from licensing agreements. Texas has turned down opportunities to use their logo on funeral urns, toilet seats, guns, knives, and the paper that covers patient tables in physicians’ offices.

The Camera stated that the use/misuse of Ralphie is not a light matter. His likeness smoking a joint has graced t-shirts promoting 4/20 that said “Buff. Buff. Pass.” Another hijacked image of Ralphie shows him being humped by Cam the Ram; the t-shirt is popular at the CSU-CU football game. Finally there have been concerns about the CU image being placed on shot glasses.

“Buffs Barber Shop, CU Come to Agreement”
This article appeared at the bottom of the front page on Thursday June 30, 2011.

The article states, “Under the new deal, the school’s trademarked charging Ralphie image will be removed from the store’s window front and replaced with a more generic buffalo logo.

“CU’s Licensing Officials Keeping Eye on New Ralphie’s Restaurant”
This article appeared at the bottom of the front page of the Local section on August 20, 2011.

The article states, “CU spokesman Bronson Hilliard on Friday wouldn’t go so far as to say that the restaurant is in violation of the school’s trademark policies. But, he said athletic director Mike Bohn and licensing director J.T. Galloway will be swinging by the restaurant to talk about the use of the name Ralphie. Hilliard further commented that they’ll talk to them about the use of Ralphie and see what kind of friendly arrangement we can come to. They’ll sit down, on a human level, and see what they’re trying to achieve. We to need to protect our symbols. But it will be in a friendly conversation, not a cease-and desist order.

Art Johnson, co-owner with his wife Lisa, played football during the 1970s. He also owns a real estate company called Golden Buff Realty.

The moral of the story – before you start a business, hold a fundraiser, or plan a public relations campaign that involves a local sports team’s logo or trade name, check with the organization about what can and cannot be used. Licensing agreements and trademarks are part of the revenue stream for these organizations and athletic departments rightfully protect their assets. To quote Hilliard, “Imagine what a liquor store or a marijuana dispensary or a strip club could do if they could get a hold of our brand.”

Contenders or Pretenders – What is University’s Actual Goal?

The Boulder Daily Camera has always had top-notch sports writers. On Friday August 21, 2009 Neill Woelk wrote a timeless article entitled “CU must decide if ‘competitive’ is actual goal.”

Woelk’s focus was on the University of Colorado Athletic Department; however, his commentary applies to the academic side of the university as well. In fact, Woelk’s editorial makes the case that higher education is a tough business. Although he doesn’t say it, many colleges and universities have encountered challenges similar to those facing CU.

A lot has changed since Woelk penned his column in 2009 – CU has new coaches in its marquee sports and a new practice facility for basketball and volleyball. As well, the Buffs are now part of the PAC-12, and Commissioner Larry Scott has aggressive plans for the conference – and CU.

Despite these and other changes, the basic question is still pertinent – CU must decide if it really wants to be competitive (in athletics and academics). If competitiveness is their choice, they must find a way to finance that decision.

Woelk’s comments from 2009 follow:

It seems that every few years, the question arises concerning the University of Colorado and its athletic department.  What exactly, are the expectations that should be associated with CU’s programs?

It’s pertinent again today because the upcoming year might just be one of the most important in years for CU’s athletic department.

Important because CU’s fortunes in the “marquee” sports-football and men’s and women’s basketball-have been less than productive in the win-loss column in recent years. Important because a positive step forward by each of those programs is vital to the long-term viability of not only each individual program, but vital to the overall success of the entire department.

And, important because it’s time for the school-not just the athletic department, but the entire administration – to decide whether the Buffs should actually compete in the Big 12 or simply be merely a member of the conference with no expectations attached.

By no means is this the first time such a question has been asked. Fact is, it’s been an issue at CU for decades, and the answer has ebbed and flowed as administrations have come and gone.

It’s no secret that the zenith of Colorado’s athletic successes coincided with the presidency of Gordon Gee (now the president at Ohio State). Gee and then-athletic director Bill Marolt built a foundation for success at CU that set the stage for Bill McCartney’s 1990 national championship team, the opening of the Dal Ward Center in 1991 and what turned out to be maybe the most successful overall stretch ever for CU athletics in the ensuing half-dozen years.

That stretch also set the stage for CU to earn a seat on the national stage across the board. While some members of academia – not all, but some-are loath to admit it, successful athletic programs benefit a school in myriad ways. The marketing potential of successful athletics can’t be over-stated, and CU reaped the benefits in the ’90s.

(If you need to see the correlation between athletics and top-ranked public institutions, check any of the annual lists compiled by a variety of magazines. The top 20 always includes such schools as Virginia, Cal, North Carolina, Washington, Illinois, Utah, Texas, and Florida. Those same schools, of course, all boast successful athletic programs.)

It’s also no secret that when Gee left in 1990, CU’s ability to excel on the field began to slowly erode. McCartney had recruited well enough to keep CU nationally competitive for the ensuing six seasons, but support from the administration was never the same. The result was that maintaining competitive facilities became more difficult, as did the ability to attract the athletes necessary to compete in one of the nation’s most competitive conferences. By the end of the decade, CU had slipped significantly.

Gee’s departure is one of the reasons McCartney finally left in 1994, when support from the administration waned. It’s also one of the reasons Marolt followed suit just a couple of years later, and that lack of support is at least in part behind Rick Neuheisel’s departure after the 1998 football season.

And, it’s one of the reasons CU’s fortunes have since see-sawed, with the successes of the 1900s becoming more and more a memory rather than a constant.

How do administrations play a role in athletic success?

In the case of schools such as Colorado, it means making the playing field relatively level, wherever possible.

Clearly, CU will never compete on a financial basis with schools such as Texas, Nebraska, Michigan, etc. Those schools are economic heavyweights, with the booster dollars to provide whatever is necessary to facilitate success.

But CU can make sure its athletic programs are not hamstrung in other areas, such as academic admissions, necessary facilities, and the day-to-day process of doing business.

Check out CSU’s latest football press guide. In glossy color, it boasts of a $13 million indoor practice facility and a $7 million academic and training center. It’s by no means a Taj Mahal, but it keeps CSU competitive in its conference.

CU can make no such claims in the Big 12.

It terms of admission, I’ve never, ever advocated that CU accept the NCAA’s bare minimum standards. CU should be proud of its academic excellence. No shortcuts allowed.

But there are also cases in which some student athletes are on the cusp and are turned away. That’s not wise. Exceptions can and should be made. It was standard practice under Gee, and the university certainly seemed no worse for the wear.

By no means should Colorado compromise or taint the quality of its reputation.

But if CU officials – and fans and donors and students – do indeed want Colorado to actually compete in the Big 12, the administration should make that clear. Colorado should never hide behind the facade of claiming to be a productive member of one of the nation’s premier conferences if that isn’t actually the case.

Instead, CU administrators should consider another conference, because in the Big 12, the majority of schools see being competitive as a positive experience rather than a burden.

 

PAC-12 Arrives – Let the Games Begin

Tomorrow (7/1) marks the day the University of Colorado and the University of Utah join the PAC-12. For CU, the move is from one BCS Conference to another – no big deal. For Utah the move is from a non-BCS to a BCS conference – this is a big deal. Being part of the PAC-12 is historic in another sense. The league is the second oldest in the country with only the Ivy League having a longer history.

Reportedly there is a network deal with ESPN and Fox worth about $3 billion to the PAC-12 (Daily Camera). As a result the move could be worth an additional $20 million each year to CU. While this is not a firm number, neither it or other preliminary estimates are chump change. Unfortunately, CU and Utah will need substantially more to be competitive in the new league.

Being in the PAC-12 presents a number of new marketing opportunities for the newcomers, particularly given CU’s large alumni base on the West Coast. And on the academic side, Buff leaders are quick to make the claims that the PAC-12 conference in more in line with the CU academic mission.

At the moment the conference is thriving under the aggressive leadership of Larry Scott. CU and Utah will definitely benefit from his actions.It was necessary for both schools to make the jump, given the race by other programs to construct a series of super conferences. If either school failed to take advantage of this opportunity they would have ended up in a weak conference.

Not only did the Buffs and Utes find a home; they now reside in one of the country’s elite athletic conferences. HOWEVER; being tabbed as an elite programs presents the newcomers with a series of new challenges- how are they going to survive in the race to raise or generate the most money, build the best facilities, hire the top coaches, and recruit premier athletes.

The bottom line is that CU and Utah were invited into the PAC-12 to generate money and develop winning teams. It is that simple. Let the games begin!

For further information on the PAC-12, click here, or go to http://www.pac-12.org/.

 

PAC-10 Royalties About $12 Million per Year

The front page headline of the Sunday June 5, 2011 Boulder Daily Camera read “CU Beefs up Protection of its Brand.” The article brings new meaning to importance of royalties and the popular phrase, “Your Colorado Buffs.”

The article stated that the university generates approximately $750,000 per year from royalty revenues. The top licensees that pay royalties are:
• EA Sport – video game maker $81,524
• Nike $57,676
• Gear $35,863.
Nationwide, the top collegiate apparel licensee is Knights Apparel, the largest supplier of apparel to Walmart.

The article provides the annual royalty revenues for schools currently in the Pac-10.

USC                                            $2.0 million
UCLA                                          $1.7 million
University of Oregon                      $1.5 million
Arizona State University                $1.2 million
University of California (Berkeley)   $1.1 million
University of Washington               $1.1 million
Oregon State University                     $926,000
Washington State University              $864,000
University of Colorado                        $750,000
University of Arizona                          $740,000
Stanford                                            $707,000.

The total for the Pac-10 is about $11.9 million or $1.2 million per school. By comparison the annual total for the University of Texas is $10 million.

While these amounts are small compared to the total athletic budgets of the respective universities, they are large enough to support one or two minor sport teams. Look for protection of the Ralphie logo and the CU brand to be ramped up as CU enters the PAC-12. These are “Your Colorado Buffaloes” just be careful how you use their logo and Ralphie’s likeness.