By Zac Brown
Earlier in the spring, the University of Oregon released documents pertaining to its contract extension with Nike. However, the University of Oregon censored the financial details behind the contract. The Oregonian was not thrilled with this decision by the university and appealed the redaction to the attorney generals office. The UO believed the financial details with Nike are considered “trade secrets” and could be withheld from the public. On April 26, the Attorney General’s office ruled in favor of The Oregonian, mandating that the details behind the Nike contract to be made public. Attorney General John Kroger issued a statement on the matter, which stated, “even if the contract’s financial details were considered trade secrets, the public deserved to see them.”
UO complied with the ruling and released another version of the contract with financial amounts intact. It turns out that the contract with Nike is nothing out of the ordinary. The extension is for eight years and is worth $22.7 million dollars. In the Nike deal, Oregon gets $16.85 million for athletic apparel and equipment, $1.375 million for personal use of Nike product, and $4.5 million in cash. Nike’s contract with Oregon is its second largest with a university. North Carolina, which has a 10-year deal, is worth $37.7 million. While the contract with Oregon looks like a standard agreement, swarms of rumors still hint that Nike and UO are leaving out certain administrative details. Nike’s past engagements with other universities does nothing to silence the rumor either.
In 2005, AP reporter Susan Haigh wrote an article about the business dealings of Nike and the University of Connecticut. In the article, Haigh talks about the “consultant contracts” with both basketball head coaches, Jim Calhoun and Geno Auriemma. Both coaches receive payments, in addition to their coaching salary, for certain conditions that include, endorsing Nike products, making appearances at Nike sponsored events, and withholding a specific amount of tickets for Nike officials to tournament games. This obviously has brought about discussion about the ethics in college athletics. Nike seems to take any chance they can to get their hands into collegiate athletics. This marketing approach for Nike doesn’t start here.
Way back in 1998, David Loomis, a student at University of North Carolina wrote a term paper titled “ The Nike Contract with UNC: The Power of Money Here at Home.” Within the paper, it talks about the history of athletic sponsorships and the growing interest in intercollegiate athletics. One of the main research components Loomis used in his paper was an opinion-based survey conducted by then North Carolina president Bill Friday and alumnus Louis Harris. The survey found, at the time, that 80 percent of Americans felt intercollegiate sports were out of control, amongst other stats about intercollegiate activities and money. Friday and Harris concluded, “each institution’s president or chancellor must take charge of the athletic program and all athletic-program money should go through the head of the institution or his or her designee, and no one else. Friday insisted that “there’s a lack of financial control, and there’s too much money involved.” He also stated, in regards to UNC’s contract with Nike, that “The agreement provides Nike with a great deal of advertising value,” the report read. “The university’s name and image for these purposes is controlled by Nike.”
Friday makes an excellent point, and despite the date of the survey, it seems to be spot on with today’s perception. Nike may very well be having the same influence at the UO like they do at other schools and if that is the case, the school does a great job of covering up. However, until other information proves this idea wrong, fans all over can continue to speculate.
In addition to Nike and UO’s contract, the search for a new athletic director is in full swing. Robin Holmes, head of the athletic director search committee, mentioned they were considering seven search firms to help them identify candidates. She identified that Spencer Stuart, the firm that helped select newly hired men’s coach Dana Altman, was in the mix. Holmes, however, declined to mention the other candidates. It makes some wonder whether Nike may be one of the candidates. Only time will tell.
Links
http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindducksbeat/2010/05/university_of_oregon_under_ord.html
http://www.scribd.com/documents/30870661/Nike-University-of-Oregon-Contract-Unredacted
http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindducksbeat/2010/05/robin_holmes_chair_of_oregons.html
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/bigeast/2005-02-18-uconn-nike_x.htm
University of Oregon & University of Nike 