- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 91,752
- Reaction Score
- 351,167
I saw the logo last week. It’s a joke. Idc what money they got for it. It’s an eye sore.So much negativity. I think this is great news! Money for the university, money for sports, more exposure … all good.
I cannot imagine a scenario where the on-court sponsor had any bearing on a school's overall perceptionThe naming rights to our arena going to a largely women’s products company will do more damage than good. I’m sure it was the highest offer, and I get why (because if you’re selling female products what better place is there) but with no idea what our options were I worry that the marginal gain will be offset by increasing the perception that our school is about women’s hoops and will never be a big time football program. Hope I’m wrong.
The company’s CEO and founder is also a UConn alum and is a UConn Foundation Board of Directors member.The naming rights to our arena going to a largely women’s products company will do more damage than good. I’m sure it was the highest offer, and I get why (because if you’re selling female products what better place is there) but with no idea what our options were I worry that the marginal gain will be offset by increasing the perception that our school is about women’s hoops and will never be a big time football program. Hope I’m wrong.
I think the notion that any of them would care one way or the other if it's Addison Reed or Just for Men sponsoring the court is hilarious. Their NIL checks are clearing just the same.Wouldn't/ shouldn't this have gone out to bid? Did anyone hear anything about naming rights in the works? That's how you get the most money and best fit
I wonder how the men playing in these womens arenas feel about this, especially off the heels of back to back Natty's.
I wonder how the men playing in these womens arenas feel about this, especially off the heels of back to back Natty's.
And here I am, thinking that this is the 2020's not the 1920's.I worry that the marginal gain will be offset by increasing the perception that our school is about women’s hoops and will never be a big time football program.
Additionally, what does the men’s BB team get from this deal? They share Gampel/XL. This feels like a full investment to the women’s team through NIL. Which is fine if it was a separate deal but this is smacked onto the court. Doesn’t mention a dime going to a male player. If it were the other way around I could see people complaining about inequity. Just saying.The naming rights to our arena going to a largely women’s products company will do more damage than good. I’m sure it was the highest offer, and I get why (because if you’re selling female products what better place is there) but with no idea what our options were I worry that the marginal gain will be offset by increasing the perception that our school is about women’s hoops and will never be a big time football program. Hope I’m wrong.
Tons of old man yells at clouds vibes on this thread
see Amy Errett ’79 (CLAS)The company’s CEO and founder is also a UConn alum and is a UConn Foundation Board of Directors member.
The school not the women's team gets the naming rights revenueAdditionally, what does the men’s BB team get from this deal? They share Gampel/XL. This feels like a full investment to the women’s team through NIL. Which is fine if it was a separate deal but this is smacked onto the court. Doesn’t mention a dime going to a male player. If it were the other way around I could see people complaining about inequity. Just saying.