|
droner
|
 |
« on: March 22, 2015, 10:40:39 EDT » |
|
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12537466/input-nike-preceded-tennessee-lady-vols-decisionI think this was a bad business decision. It's true that Lady Vols merchandise revenue is only a small fraction of overall Vols merchandise revenue. But it's still additional revenue. And with money, more is always better. There are Lady Vol fans that buy only Lady Vols merchandise. And there are Vol fans that buy Vols merchandise and Lady Vols merchandise. Eliminating one stream of revenue, no matter how small, is still eliminating a stream of revenue. And if Nike was responsible for this, it just confirms the belief of many that Nike is the devil. It was time to do away with the two athletic departments. But to do away with a separate line of goods that brings in additional money was, in my opinion, a mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BanditVol
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 22, 2015, 11:03:49 EDT » |
|
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/12537466/input-nike-preceded-tennessee-lady-vols-decisionI think this was a bad business decision. It's true that Lady Vols merchandise revenue is only a small fraction of overall Vols merchandise revenue. But it's still additional revenue. And with money, more is always better. There are Lady Vol fans that buy only Lady Vols merchandise. And there are Vol fans that buy Vols merchandise and Lady Vols merchandise. Eliminating one stream of revenue, no matter how small, is still eliminating a stream of revenue. And if Nike was responsible for this, it just confirms the belief of many that Nike is the devil. It was time to do away with the two athletic departments. But to do away with a separate line of goods that brings in additional money was, in my opinion, a mistake. agree |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The speed of our movements is amazing, even to me, and must be a constant source of surprise to the Germans.” G. Patton
|
|
|
|
RockinGrannyVol
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 22, 2015, 11:06:18 EDT » |
|
True..
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Black Diamond Vol
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 23, 2015, 02:54:38 EDT » |
|
This is just the beginning. We made our deal with the devil, and we're in bed with the swoosh now. They pretty much own us. Who knows what they'll make us change later on?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Clockwork Orange
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 23, 2015, 02:03:45 EDT » |
|
Nike or no Nike, "Lady Vols" is antiquated and it was beyond time to stop separating our competing women from our competing men like that. I get the business angle you bring up, droner, but I think this was the right move no matter whose idea it was.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Stay patient and be strong, 'cause it's gonna hit. And when it hits, it's gonna hit hard."  |
|
|
|
Creek Walker
Guest
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 23, 2015, 04:31:39 EDT » |
|
Whether we agree or disagree that it was time for the Lady Vols brand name to go, I find it a bit disturbing that Nike is playing such an influential role in the university's sports marketing decisions. Ditching the Lady Vols name is a big deal...not something as simple as what color of socks will be worn with a certain color of uniform. I'll be completely honest and admit that I don't understand how Nike is able to play such a role in dictating decisions that schools make, but it appears they have a history of it.
Personally, though, I can't agree that the Lady Vols name needed to go. There was no harm in letting the women play under the Lady Vols name. I've yet to see a good reason given for why the change should have been made.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Clockwork Orange
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2015, 04:37:12 EDT » |
|
Personally, though, I can't agree that the Lady Vols name needed to go. There was no harm in letting the women play under the Lady Vols name. I've yet to see a good reason given for why the change should have been made.
From a branding standpoint it never made sense to separate the two, and UT is in the middle of a massive rebranding campaign to unify sports and academics, so to unify men's and women's sports behind a logo and a name makes all the sense in the world. The success of LV basketball is the only reason in the world to keep the name "Lady Vol" alive IMO, and even that shouldn't hold us back. I guess I'm a bit of a feminist but I find it mildly insulting that the men are VOLS-- not "Gentleman Vols" or "Y-chromosome Vols"-- but the women have to be "Lady Vols." No-- they are all VOLS. If I were a LV or a big time LV supporter I'd have been demanding this for years. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 23, 2015, 04:38:45 EDT by Clockwork Orange »
|
Logged
|
"Stay patient and be strong, 'cause it's gonna hit. And when it hits, it's gonna hit hard." |
|
|
|
Creek Walker
Guest
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2015, 04:56:00 EDT » |
|
The success of LV basketball is the only reason in the world to keep the name "Lady Vol" alive IMO, and even that shouldn't hold us back. I guess I'm a bit of a feminist but I find it mildly insulting that the men are VOLS-- not "Gentleman Vols" or "Y-chromosome Vols"-- but the women have to be "Lady Vols." No-- they are all VOLS. If I were a LV or a big time LV supporter I'd have been demanding this for years.
I think you'll find, though, that it is mostly the ladies who are insulted by UT's move to eliminate the Lady Vols name. In fact, most of the ones who are so vehement that it needed to go are the guys. I just don't see it as a men vs. women issue, or a matter of gender equality. I see it as a very unique brand that was built by Pat Summit. It's historically significant because Summit paved the way for women to be able to play on the same stage as men in collegiate athletics, and not just basketball. It's culturally significant because how many high school girls teams (especially basketball) proudly use the name "Lady Whatevers" to refer to themselves now? And that's not just in Tennessee but well beyond. The "One Tennessee" branding and the "Lady Vols" are not mutually exclusive, nor should they have to be. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
droner
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2015, 05:02:56 EDT » |
|
If I were a LV or a big time LV supporter I'd have been demanding this for years.
But they didn't. In fact, they are downright pissed about the change. I think Nike did it for the gender equality perception. They didn't want to take grief from women's groups that they were supporting a program that used the "Lady" name. The thing is, the women involved didn't feel slighted by it and instead, supported it almost unanimously. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Clockwork Orange
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2015, 05:15:23 EDT » |
|
But they didn't. In fact, they are downright pissed about the change.
I think Nike did it for the gender equality perception. They didn't want to take grief from women's groups that they were supporting a program that used the "Lady" name. The thing is, the women involved didn't feel slighted by it and instead, supported it almost unanimously.
I know, and I think the LV supporters weren't seeing the forest for the trees ($). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Stay patient and be strong, 'cause it's gonna hit. And when it hits, it's gonna hit hard." |
|
|
|
volsboy
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2015, 05:45:40 EDT » |
|
I for one am all for the Lady Vols to be a thing of the past. Plus they can get rid of the powder blue bullshizzle. They are Vols. Pure and simple. Plus Nike will bring in more money than ever so the loss of the Lady Vols revenue stream is moot. Will make more merchandising money than ever before.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
volsboyinsodak
|
|
|
|
Creek Walker
Guest
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2015, 06:25:23 EDT » |
|
I for one am all for the Lady Vols to be a thing of the past. Plus they can get rid of the powder blue bullshizzle. They are Vols. Pure and simple. Plus Nike will bring in more money than ever so the loss of the Lady Vols revenue stream is moot. Will make more merchandising money than ever before.
How can we know Nike is going to bring in more money? Is that sorta the same thing as Nike is going to bring in more recruits?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
HerbTarlekVol
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2015, 07:00:51 EDT » |
|
There are groups of women who feel like being called "Lady" anything is somehow demeaning. I had an editor who was one of them. I covered the local high school basketball teams for our local rag a few years back, and even though "Lady Panthers" was on their jerseys, on the wall, everywhere in reference to them - she would edit out the "Lady" in the Lady Panther names in my stories because she felt like the word was demeaning. The same woman edited out the Lady in Lady Vols for the same publication, and this was during Pat Summitt's best years. There are a lot of women out there who feel that way.
That said, I don't find it demeaning at all, and I don't have a problem at all with the name remaining Lady Vols. But, if the decision has been made to drop it it needs to be all or nothing - drop it for all of the sports, or for none of the sports. The powers that be, and in this case it is coming from above Hart's head, need to have some moxy and either pull the trigger all of the way or don't pull it at all. You can't fire part of a round. You either fire it or you don't.
Nike made a recommendation based on their business experience, but they don't have the final say so on whether or not it is implemented. That comes from the big office in the Andy Holt Tower, and not from Thompson Boling Arena.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Go Army - Beat Navy!
|
|
|
|
RockinGrannyVol
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2015, 08:35:47 EDT » |
|
I would likely be called a feminist and I absolutely HATE removing the Lady from Lady Vols......I LIKE that the women are separated from the men and I LIKE being called a Lady....personally I think it sux that they are removing the Lady from Lady Vols.....why differentiate the BB ladies and not all the other ladies?
Just me -- a tradition I love and wish they would keep. I am not alone in this feeling from what I've seen....not sure how the teams feel about it though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Creek Walker
Guest
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 23, 2015, 09:16:30 EDT » |
|
I would likely be called a feminist and I absolutely HATE removing the Lady from Lady Vols......I LIKE that the women are separated from the men and I LIKE being called a Lady....personally I think it sux that they are removing the Lady from Lady Vols.....why differentiate the BB ladies and not all the other ladies?
Just me -- a tradition I love and wish they would keep. I am not alone in this feeling from what I've seen....not sure how the teams feel about it though.
Oh, I think the teams have made their feelings QUITE clear. Dave Hart isn't going to be getting many Christmas cards from the ladies' teams this year. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
73Volgrad
|
|
« Reply #15 on: March 26, 2015, 09:54:28 EDT » |
|
Privately, I think most of the females only supported it because they have seen the ham-handed way Hart and Cheek handle anyone that does not bow down and pass every word they speak. If anyone had voiced a bad word, they would have been fired within days if not immediately. Tell me truthfully, how many of you are comfortable enough to disagree with your boss without fear of being fired? If you are truthful, a lot fall in that "Boss you are always right!!" crowd. At UT now, anyone that disagrees publicly or in private is being shown the door. So when Hart declares everyone important accepted this, he means he and Cheek and no one else. If anyone crosses Cheek, he will sic every UT lawyer on staff to build a file against you. Hell in every big company I worked for it has always been this way so UT is no different. I believe Hart and Cheek only as far as I could throw them and God I was I could.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
