- Memphis To Join Big East In All Sports
- NCAA's Emmert Supports Four-Year Scholarsh ...
- Big Ten Proposes Four-Team Football Playof ...
- Pac-12 Extends Commissioner Scott's Contra ...
- Minnesota AD Maturi Set To Step Aside
- Student Attendance At Duke Games Down
- Big 12 Takes Steps For Permanent Commish
- NCAA To Consider D-I Governance Retooling
- WVU Says It Will Play In Big 12 Next Seaso ...
- Navy Officially Announces Jump To Big East
Upcoming Conferences and Events
-
Mar 21-22
-
Mar 22
-
May 23
-
May 30-31
-
Jun 5-7
SBD/Issue 33/Sponsorships, Advertising & Marketing
Bad Communication: Michigan Dumps Title Sponsor Proposal
Published October 28, 2004
|
| Alumni Backlash Forces Michigan To Can SBC Deal |
The Univ. of Michigan (UM) has “pulled out of” a two-year deal with SBC Communications to title sponsor its annual football game against Ohio State (OSU), according to Michael Rosenberg of the DETROIT FREE PRESS. The deal would have paid each school $265,000 a year, but “a lot of alumni complained about the proposal, and now U-M says it will respect its ‘traditions’ and values.’” Michigan AD Bill Martin indicated that he “failed to grasp the impact of selling naming rights,” saying, “I did not focus on the naming aspect of this thing soon enough. There is nobody to blame in this situation but me” (DETROIT FREE PRESS, 10/28). Also in Detroit, Fred Girard reports UM President Mary Sue Coleman “killed the proposal.” Martin: “When this surfaced to the presidential level, and we reviewed the details with Mary Sue, she was very strong on this, and very adamant that there were just some issues here we couldn’t go along with” (DETROIT NEWS, 10/28). More Martin: “The money was not the issue. We didn’t even talk about the money. It was a matter from president Coleman’s perspective and mine in the final analysis that this was inconsistent with the values that we share with the greater Michigan family.” Martin estimated that 80% of e-mails and phone calls from UM alumni “opposed the SBC deal,” and the other 20% understood “the realities if you don’t (sell naming rights), what’s going to happen to our ticket prices?” (AP, 10/27).
OSU: OSU AD Andy Geiger in a statement said, “It became apparent that this agreement could detract from the great tradition of the game itself” (Mult., 10/28). Geiger indicated that there was “some unhappiness at Ohio State, too, although he said he did not get any negative feedback from the university’s trustees.” Geiger said the deal fell through because of a “combination of negative reaction and our inability to adjust enough to all the concerns to make it work” (COLUMBUS DISPATCH, 10/28). OSU SID Steve Snapp said that the school “had received feedback from fans both positive and negative” (AKRON BEACON JOURNAL, 10/28).






