"It’s the block M that has power, not Denard Robinson"

Submitted by Blue and Joe on

Full quote from Michigan CMO Hunter Lochman on college athletes potentially being paid:

“The athletes are there for four years. At Michigan, it’s the block M that has the infinity and power, not Denard Robinson. Those are fleeting, four-year relationships, but it’s the block M that’s been there for over 150 years.”

uh wut

Full article

MGoBoard
Football
Denard Robinsion

steve sharik

December 12th, 2014 at 2:08 PM ^

...is nothing without its people, and without the people that have built the brand, the brand value is zero.

If Hunter Lochman thinks the university added more value to Denard than vice versa, he needs a CAT scan.

Joined: 08/08/2009

MGoPoints: 13860

PurpleStuff

December 12th, 2014 at 2:28 PM ^

How many minor league baseball jerseys does anybody buy?  Or Arena Football?  A lot of those guys are probably better at what they do than Tate Forcier (who sold a few jerseys himself).

If Denard (or anybody) had played for the Ann Arbor Scalawags instead of the University of Michigan, no one would own his jersey or know who he is. 

The money comes into college football because the schools and their history provide the value.  On the free market, less than 10% of the players would have a place to play and they would probably be making less than $50,000 a year (just like in the XFL or Arena League).

Joined: 04/21/2009

MGoPoints: 15969

MGoManBall

December 12th, 2014 at 2:37 PM ^

Just like there are a bunch of Steven Threet jerseys out there? (No offense to the guy)

What makes the history at these schools? The fact they've had a long line of players that have created said history. History doesn't just happen. 

Denard made Michigan exciting to watch. Just like Johnny Manziel made Texas A&M exciting to watch. 

I'd love to see how much tradition and history matters if Michigan continues to perform the way they have for the next 3-4 years. 

Joined: 10/27/2012

MGoPoints: 13029

MI Expat NY

December 12th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^

That's right.  It's a chicken and the egg situation.  Michigan adds value by itself, but that value has been built by generations of great players.  

While you can't say as many Denard jerseys would have been sold had he been playing for Eastern Michigan, you also can't say that as many Michigan jerseys would have been sold if Denard wasn't as special of an athlete as he was.  Both Michigan and Players bring money into the university.  

As someone above pointed out, it's the same thing with the NFL.  When the USFL was "challenging" the NFL, they were stealing a lot of the best players coming up from college.  The level of play was probably closer to the NFL than the NFL would have ever admitted, yet the USFL had to fold because it wasn't as popular.  The NFL brands had value irrespective of the players playing.  Yet, the NFL players are still highly paid because without those great players, those same NFL brands quickly lose value.  

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8641

jmdblue

December 12th, 2014 at 4:33 PM ^

A) college talent isn't nearly as good as pro talent.

B) If the NFL were to fold tomorrow, a replacement league would quickly form and would be very popular very quickly.

C) If college football ceased to exist, a minor league would likely form and wouldn't be popular at all.

So, without college football the kid's would have no major place to sell their services (for the most part).  It's the "college" aspect of it that makes these guys marketable.  Stipends, guaranteed scollies? sure.  Pay for play doesn't make sense.  It's not a "free market" in the first place.

Joined: 12/01/2010

MGoPoints: 8655

DISCUSS Man

December 12th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^

If Dave Brandon was called Hitler by former players (according to Gregg), then Lochmann is Joseph Goebbels.

Chief propaganda officer.

Joined: 12/08/2010

MGoPoints: 2640

the bee train

December 12th, 2014 at 2:14 PM ^

Has he been fired yet? I'm sure kids will line up to play for michigan with some dickhole in the AD promising that they will be tossed aside and forgotten after four years.

Joined: 08/10/2011

MGoPoints: 576

ShadowStorm33

December 12th, 2014 at 2:17 PM ^

There's definitely a good degree of truth to this. Any time you reference the monetary value a player brings to a school, particularly when making the argument that players should be paid, you need to break out how much of that value is attributable to the player himself, and how much is attributable to the program. Take Denard for instance; put him at a MAC school, and while he's essentially the same player, he doesn't bring in nearly the same amount that he does at a big program. To take it a step further, imagine if Denard and Jordan Lynch from NIU were switched (or Kaepernick at Nevada, etc.). Denard doesn't bring in nearly the same amount of value there as he does at M, and Lynch or Kaepernick or whoever, while probably not going to match Denard's value, would likely come fairly close.

TL;DR version: it's true that a good portion of the value a player brings in comes from the program, and so regardless of your view on paying players, players certainly aren't entitled to the value created merely because you put on the winged helmet instead of a MAC one...

Joined: 07/22/2008

MGoPoints: 23063

Monocle Smile

December 12th, 2014 at 2:23 PM ^

It's a bit unfair to look at straight dollars here due to the histories and notoriety of the different schools. It would be a better analysis to look at percentages.

Here's the other thing...the block M's power was built on the backs of "fleeting" players. Without the history of great players, that M has no power in the way Lochmann uses the term.

Joined: 09/17/2009

MGoPoints: 23075

ShadowStorm33

December 12th, 2014 at 2:31 PM ^

Denard's a bad example because he's such an awesome person, but for your average good player, I think it's pretty fungible. People weren't buying the #1 jerseys because of Terrell's ("bomb-ass") personality; they bought them because Terrell was a talenter receiver who wore a winged helmet. Replace him with Randy Moss (at Marshall) and I don't think you see any difference.

Joined: 07/22/2008

MGoPoints: 23063

MGoManBall

December 12th, 2014 at 2:29 PM ^

But if Denard played at say, BGSU, I'd argue he would have a larger impact on the amount of money the program made than he would at UM.. Michigan is a large program with millions of fans that support it.. so they are going to make money pretty much regardless if Denard played there or not. 

But Denard at a MAC school would create excitement and fill a lot more seats than if they just had a normal MAC-level QB playing there.  Increased ticket sales, more jersey sales, and an increased chance at a bowl game would have a far greater economic impact. 

Joined: 10/27/2012

MGoPoints: 13029

HELLE

December 12th, 2014 at 2:19 PM ^

of these business type statements, but he is very wrong. It's troubling that he referred to the college experience as a fleeting four year relationship. Universities can't survive without alumni support. I hope this snippet poorly represents his entire statement and he is saying that the block M is the symbol of the University, not the players.

Joined: 07/26/2011

MGoPoints: 2400

Everyone Murders

December 12th, 2014 at 2:43 PM ^

This is probably the best comment in this thread.  Any alumnus has a lifetime relationship with the school, and so do the diehard fans.  As do loyal employees of the school.  And many native Ann Arborites.

Because the comment appeared to downgrade Denard Robinson (and the OP's caption), most of us reacted to that.  But I think HELLE has zeroed in on the really offensive part of this. 

"Fleeting four year relationship"?  That's astoundingly tone-deaf.

Joined: 12/14/2010

MGoPoints: 65552

gwkrlghl

December 13th, 2014 at 1:08 AM ^

The hardcore business-types Brandon brought in all seem to fail to see the difference between college athletics and corporate America. They see money untapped and if they can increase the money in then they're doing their job. College athletics is so so different though. There's tradition, loyalty, experience. So much more than "Is product X worth Y dollars to me?"

When guys like Lochmann think things like forced ad revenue is a gain for the University, they completely fail to see the damage they do to their customer base which is the near-everlastingly loyal fans and alums

Joined: 04/13/2012

MGoPoints: 72