Spring Break
University should benefit from deals, not coaches
Editorial
Issue date: 2/24/05 Section: Commentary
The Hartford Courant released the details of contracts between UConn Men's and Women's Basketball coaches Jim Calhoun and Geno Auriemma and Nike on Saturday. In addition to salaries that rank them among the highest paid college basketball coaches in the nation, these private contracts net them an estimated $250,000 to $500,000 a year in exchange for several personal appearances and promoting Nike gear.
However, the contracts contain questionable clauses that violate state ethics codes.
In accordance with their contracts, each coach must "make available" Nike clothing and footwear to his team. Calhoun must "use his best efforts to have [the] team wear Nike products during games, practices and related activities." Auriemma's contract guarantees he "will prohibit any member from taping over the Nike logo on her uniform or shoe." If their players fail to wear Nike products, the coaches' contracts will be severed. In addition, the contracts will be terminated if the men are no longer head coaches.
The State Ethics Commission objected to both these provisions when it reviewed Calhoun's contract in 2000 because state ethics laws "prohibit state employees from using their official positions for private gain." Regarding the clauses allowing termination of his contract, the commission said, "It would be a use of official position for a coach's contract to be tied to or determined by his continued employment at the State University." Furthermore, the commission opposed the stipulation requiring the coaches to clothe their teams in Nike gear because "exerting such influence would be an illegal use of [their] official position[s]."
The ethics commission is not alone in this last objection. In both 1991 and 2001, the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics advised the NCAA to ban direct contracts between coaches and companies. Although the NCAA did not act, "a number of universities have prohibited direct contracts to ensure that the benefits of affiliating with a brand go to the university, not solely to a coach." Because the private contracts involve the entire team and not just the coaches, the university should be the one negotiating the deals. That way, the entire UConn community would benefit from the contracts with Nike, not just Calhoun and Auriemma.
Although Hugh Macgill, the new chairman of the State Ethics Committee, claims the commission has no reason to review the contracts again because no one has complained, it is clear that the contracts violate ethics laws and are unique in the realm of college sports. If Nike wants the basketball teams to wear their merchandise, then UConn, the owner of the teams, should benefit - not just the coaches. Mr. Macgill, here's your complaint.
However, the contracts contain questionable clauses that violate state ethics codes.
In accordance with their contracts, each coach must "make available" Nike clothing and footwear to his team. Calhoun must "use his best efforts to have [the] team wear Nike products during games, practices and related activities." Auriemma's contract guarantees he "will prohibit any member from taping over the Nike logo on her uniform or shoe." If their players fail to wear Nike products, the coaches' contracts will be severed. In addition, the contracts will be terminated if the men are no longer head coaches.
The State Ethics Commission objected to both these provisions when it reviewed Calhoun's contract in 2000 because state ethics laws "prohibit state employees from using their official positions for private gain." Regarding the clauses allowing termination of his contract, the commission said, "It would be a use of official position for a coach's contract to be tied to or determined by his continued employment at the State University." Furthermore, the commission opposed the stipulation requiring the coaches to clothe their teams in Nike gear because "exerting such influence would be an illegal use of [their] official position[s]."
The ethics commission is not alone in this last objection. In both 1991 and 2001, the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics advised the NCAA to ban direct contracts between coaches and companies. Although the NCAA did not act, "a number of universities have prohibited direct contracts to ensure that the benefits of affiliating with a brand go to the university, not solely to a coach." Because the private contracts involve the entire team and not just the coaches, the university should be the one negotiating the deals. That way, the entire UConn community would benefit from the contracts with Nike, not just Calhoun and Auriemma.
Although Hugh Macgill, the new chairman of the State Ethics Committee, claims the commission has no reason to review the contracts again because no one has complained, it is clear that the contracts violate ethics laws and are unique in the realm of college sports. If Nike wants the basketball teams to wear their merchandise, then UConn, the owner of the teams, should benefit - not just the coaches. Mr. Macgill, here's your complaint.