"Is Lacrosse on the Cusp of a Division I Sponsorship Explosion?"

From Athletic Business

Review by Meryssa Wacholder in KIN 501

Could men’s college lacrosse ever be on the same page as college football or college basketball? Is men’s lacrosse going to be the next big thing for Division I college athletic departments? The University of Michigan has realized the potential impact men’s lacrosse can have and has added a men’s Division I varsity lacrosse program to their athletic department. The article, “Is lacrosse on the Cusp of a Division I Sponsorship Explosion?”, discusses the University of Michigan’s decision to add a Division I men’s lacrosse program last year and what this decision will mean in terms of sponsorship for both the university and the sport. 

Men’s lacrosse is by no means a new concept for the University of Michigan. The wolverines have had a very successful men’s club lacrosse team for several years. In fact, the club team was considered by many to be the best in the nation, winning three consecutive club national championships since 2008. By making this jump from a club program to a Division I program, Michigan became the first BCS school to add a varsity program in 31 years. The last school to make this addition was Notre Dame in 1981. Although Michigan only won one game in their first season as a Division I team, the impact it has had on the school and the sport itself has not gone unnoticed. The article discusses how the University of Michigan is a high profile school athletically and by them making this addition, it may spark other BCS schools to do the same (Steinbach, 2012). By having such a well-known name or brand associated with men’s lacrosse, it helps promote the sport and likely help increase its popularity. Unlike football or basketball, college lacrosse is the highest level of play for a lacrosse player. The MLL (Major League Lacrosse) and the PLL (Professional Lacrosse League), the two professional leagues for lacrosse, lack the attention and popularity the collegiate game receives. Since 2003, the Division I men’s championship game has averaged an attendance of 40,000, ranking it in the top three for NCAA championship games in terms of attendance. The article stated that lacrosse is the NCAA’s fastest growing sport with participation numbers up 7,278 between 2006 and 2011 (Steinbach, 2012). This is huge for college athletic departments because as the sport continues to grow in popularity and becomes more of a demand, lacrosse is something athletic departments are going to have to consider adding if they have not already.

Men’s lacrosse has the power to change a school’s profile. This has been proven successful at the Division III level. Baldwin-Wallace College was mentioned in the article for this exact reason. They plan to add both a men’s and a women’s program in 2014. The school’s athletic spokesperson stated, “It is natural for us, not only from the standpoint of diversifying the options for students, but as a trend for growing admission.” (Steinbach, 2012). For schools like Baldwin-Wallace who may be hurting for students in the local geographic area, having these new options helps greatly, they are able to reach other areas of the country where lacrosse is well known and established. As far as large DI schools are concerned, lacrosse has the opportunity to change their image drastically especially if they do not have a BCS football team. School’s with a BCS football team may not need a new profile because they are already well established and recognized, their brand is already out there. However for big schools without football, having a men’s Division I lacrosse program can help the school reach a new demographic, play big-name schools like Ohio State or Notre Dame who they would not normally get to play, and possibly get the chance to have their school and team televised on national television. This is all huge in terms of promoting your school and your athletic department.

Men’s lacrosse at the Division I level is something that could take effect in the near future. With Syracuse leaving the Big East Conference and joining the Atlantic Coast Conference, the ACC has expanded its four-team dominant program. This creates the opportunity to establish a six-team ACC lacrosse conference, allowing for an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament. This provides a great opportunity for a Virginia Tech or a Florida State to seriously consider adding a program; they would be part of a conference with some of the best lacrosse schools in the country all of whom would be visiting their campus. Expansion in the West is also a high probability according to the article (Steinbach, 2012). The women’s game is very popular there already. For the University of Michigan, adding a men’s lacrosse program seemed to be a no brainer for their athletic department. The school’s athletic director claims, “The sport will afford us the ability to travel to places the maize and blue have not typically gone.” He believes it will help their brand (Steinbach, 2012).

I really liked the article and thought it did a good job of identifying the potential benefits a school could gain by adding a Division I men’s lacrosse program. I could relate to the article because in the Northeast lacrosse is very big and it was very popular at my college, so I was shocked to learn so few BCS schools had a Division I team. I found this article to be very applicable to my field of interest, college athletic administration, because this could be a situation I am faced with in the future. The only thing I wish the article addressed more was the actual sponsorship opportunities that were being created or established with the University of Michigan and their new program. Are they going to use the same sponsors as their football program and if not, how are they going to market their new program to gain sponsors? I felt like the article talked more about how Michigan was being a sponsor for the sport. All in all, I felt it was a very interesting and well-written article and a must read for anyone interested in working in college athletics.

How the NFL continues to target women

From Ad Age and The Journal Gazette

Review by Christian McLaughlin in KIN 332 (section 2)

I chose to do an article about the current marketing done by the NFL directed towards women. I was really interested in this topic because I have actually noticed the increase in women fans over the past several years. Growing up, it seemed that NFL Sundays was all about the guys. Due to the NFL’s strong marketing campaign geared to women, we have seen a significant change in the demographics of football fans. The article said that 44% of NFL fans are now women! It also said that 43.3 million women viewed the Super Bowl. My only question about these numbers would be how many of the 44% are casual fans compared to diehard fans. I do not want to sound sexist, but how many of these women actually watch the game? To be fair, I also know that there are men out there that only watch football because other men watch, and it has become a social norm. On the other hand, the article makes a great point in that even the casual woman fan still wants to show team loyalty, meaning they are going to buy apparel. This is where I think the NFL has finally done a good job in its marketing strategy. They realized that women are going to be watching with the men, so why not tap into that market. I am not saying that all women are only watching the game because men are, I just want to make the point that I think the social aspect plays a massive role in the numbers. After reading this article I am shocked at how long it took the NFL to reach women. It wasn’t until the “Fit for you” clothing line, that the NFL made gender specific clothing. Social Media and celebrity endorsement then fueled the growth of apparel. Facebook became a platform for women to show off their new gear, and talk about their team. Alyssa Milano made her own clothing line that sells NFL apparel such as jerseys, handbags, boots, and jewelry. I think that the NFL has only scratched the surface with marketing towards women, and the revenue will continue to increase in the years to come. 

"Armstrong stripped of Tour de France titles, banned from cycling"

From SI.com

Review by Lindsay Brauch in SRM 334

In recent news, Lance Armstrong was stripped of his titles from 1999 to 2005, with an accusation of doping. With his most recent refusal to fight this accusation of ten years, the United States Anti-Doping Association had no other option. His old drug tests originally came out negative, but with new technologies, this was not the case. 

Not only were his titles taken from him, he was banned from cycling all together. Although he is still standing by his innocence, it’s a man’s word against the facts. Armstrong referred to the USADA’s actions a “witch hunt.” He felt that their actions in looking into his old tests were absurd.

As a result of being stripped of his seven titles, Greg LeMond, is now the only American to win the Tour De France in 1986, 1989, and 1990. According to USADA officials, at least ten of Armstrong's teammates were set to testify against him. Not only is it upsetting to have ten of your teammates not have your back, and lose your titles, as well as being banned from cycling, Armstrong’s ties with Nike have also been cut.

Apparently many witnesses said they knew or had been told by Armstrong himself, that he had “used EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone.” It is also common in the cycling world to have been a doper. I feel as if it’s a little extreme to only focus on Lance Armstrong. He was not the only cycler to have been apart of it, its just unfortunate that he is the main focus. I’m not saying I approve, I believe the whole concept of it is wrong; I just think it needs to be fair. If you’re going to look at all of his old tests, they should look at all cyclers. I also don’t believe that doping should ever be seen as an outlook to success.

Armstrong was an idol to many, and a role model to aspiring cyclers. He was even a role model to cancer patients and survivors. It is an upsetting loss to the cycling world; he was their most popular athlete. How would you feel if your star player was accused of being a cheater, or even your hero? Wouldn’t your views change on him or her?

Lance Armstrong has to find a way to save his image, now that he has chosen not to fight this case anymore. In my eyes it is now clear that he was in fact using drugs. We also have to consider how this scandal is going to affect his Livestrong foundation. It’s still a fantastic cause, and it would be awful to watch it fall apart. I hope he realizes how his actions affect everyone. As far as how this relates to our class, it’s analyzing how all of his actions affect his life. It’s going to be looking at how all of his foundations and sponsors bounce back, and how he bounces back. The media is going to be focused on all of them for a while, each company and even Lance himself is going to have to find a way to be seen in a positive light. 

---

Review by Christopher Hudgins in SRM 334

After nearly ten years of fighting doping allegations, Lance Armstrong decided to end possibly his biggest fight yet by quitting. Lance Armstrong Lance Armstrong was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned for life from the sport of cycling. Lance Armstrong refused to file for arbitration thus giving up on a fight that essentially wiped out 14 years of his miraculous career. This decision has shocked nearly everyone in the sports world especially in the close cycling community. Armstrong has stuck by his innocence through all the accusations and now to give up on the fight is what has shocked his former competitors the most. Former coach Johan Bruyneel said Armstrong was the victim of an “unjust” legal case, stating that he has never known Armstrong to back down from a fair fight. Many critics however believe that this decision to stop fighting is as good as a confession. This is in large part due to the fact that USADA (United States Anti-Doping Agency) claimed to have witnesses who had been told by Armstrong himself that he had “used EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone and cortisone” from before 1998 through 2005. Had Armstrong decided to pursue arbitration all the evidence would have been available for him to challenge. This decision to quit though could end up costing Armstrong more than just victories on the bike. Armstrong’s success helped sell millions of Livestrong bands and ultimately helped his Lance Armstrong Foundation. Since the foundation was started in 1997 it has raised nearly $500 million to promote cancer research and treatment. The recent turn of events and extensive media coverage of the recent findings in this scandal could cause his foundation to unfortunately take a hit in support. That first hit came almost a week ago when one of the biggest partners and supporters decided to cut ties with the ex-cyclist and his Lance Armstrong Foundation, after initially pledging their allegiance with Armstrong citing that “Lance has stated his innocence and has been unwavering on this position”. Some feel that the media whirl wind caused by this investigation and the ten years of fighting both USADA accusations as well as the media has ultimately just worn down the 41 year old Lance Armstrong. “There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough.’ For me, that time is now.” These were Armstrong’s exhausted words before the deadline to enter arbitration, yet still standing by his innocence.