[UPDATE, 5/5/2008, 10:00 pm: If you'd like to hear John Canzano, Rachel Bachman, and Brent Hunsberger talk about this series, just click here. You'll need to go about halfway through the MP3 to hear this segment. Is it worth it? Yeah, it's worth it. And it's worth it alone to hear Canzano explain why he thinks academics has suffered because of Phil Knight's donations to Oregon athletics. Do I need to explain why that's preposterous? Well, OK. It's preposterous because while academics is suffering, athletics would be suffering just as much without Phil Knight's donations. And that seems to be John Canzano's idea of a "healthy relationship". Also, see if you can catch the swipe at The Register-Guard. And if you want to listen to the second hour, just click here.]
Jay, here.
On a cool Saturday evening, a rather curious news item came across our desks here at Duck Sports News: an interview The Register-Guard had conducted with Phil Knight intended for publication on Sunday.
The headline read, “KNIGHT HOLDS COURT”.
As the first line in the story states, Phil Knight wanted to talk.
But I asked myself, “Why?”
Why would Phil Knight want to talk? Why The Register-Guard? Why now?
After reading the article, the interview struck me as a public relations move. That’s not a bad thing. It just seemed like Mr. Knight was trying to get out ahead of something. He was feeling the heat. But what had happened?
Well, we found out what that something was Sunday in The Oregonian. Why would Phil Knight want to talk to Ron Bellamy and The Register-Guard? Because he wasn’t talking to anyone at The Oregonian.
And, honestly, I can’t blame him.
In case you missed it, here’s a brief recap of The Oregonian’s stories on Phil Knight, Nike, and the University of Oregon.
“Statement from Phil Knight”
Recap: The Oregonian requested an interview with Phil Knight, but he declined and issued a short statement.
Bottom-line: The Knights have been successful and wanted to give back to the University of Oregon through their gifts.
“Band out of step with Nike’s offbeat uniforms“
Recap: The band uniforms designed five years ago by Nike through a gift from the Knights were ill-suited for a marching band.
Bottom-line: If this story had been a television show on Spike or on the old FOX, it might have been called, “When Good Donations Go Bad”. OK. We get it. The uniforms were terrible. And they still are. I’m not even sure what Oregon has now is a uniform in any traditional sense. We all know that. But the story starts off, “Five year ago…”. In terms of relevance, that might as well have been, “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.”
“Knight’s access to UO sports is a fan’s dream”
Recap: As Oregon’s top donor, Phil Knight enjoys rare access to University of Oregon athletics.
Bottom-line: Duh. Reading like a laundry list of the privileges Phil Knight enjoys at the University of Oregon, the tone of the story makes you think he’s done something wrong. When in fact, he hasn’t. While this article notes that NCAA rules restrict booster contact with recruits, the writers paint a picture that Phil Knight is exploiting the gray area of boosters’ access to players or coaches.
“The biggest man on campus”
Recap: Phil Knight’s financial influence has transformed University of Oregon athletics.
Bottom-line: When printed out, this story is seven pages long. So, I’m not going to get into a point-by-point critique of the article. I’ll leave that up to the message boards. But as many have already stated on those very same boards, “What’s new here?’. As far as I can tell, not a whole lot.
“UO ‘gets’ Knight — he just gets”
Recap: John Canzano opines that the problem with the Phil Knight-Oregon dynamic is not Phil Knight’s fault, but a failure on the part of the University of Oregon’s administration.
Bottom-line: Canzano’s take is that Phil Knight has acted like a petulant child at times and should have been told “no” on several occasions.
Truthfully, it would be great to have the time, and the resources, to analyze all of these pieces. But I’m not really inclined to do that. And I think you would be completely disinterested in reading anything close to that. Plus, what would be point?
And that’s the bottom-line for all of these stories: what’s the point? More specifically, what’s the problem The Oregonian is investigating? There’s got to be a problem they’re trying to address, right? If there is, I’m not sure The Oregonian could easily summarize the singular problem they are investigating.
Before I go any further, I want to explain why I’m referring to The Oregonian as a monolithic entity. Even though my friends in the print media deny a groupthink mentality exists in the newsrooms of large newspapers, I’ve been around enough broadcast newsrooms to know that it does exist in the media. And maybe the term “groupthink” is too evocative of a mob, or even zombie-like, mentality. Perhaps, a more appropriate word would be “culture”.
I think there is a decidedly anti-University of Oregon, anti-Phil Knight, anti-Nike “culture” that exists at The Oregonian. Just as I think there is a pro-University of Oregon culture that exists at The Register-Guard. I also think that FOX News is more conservative and CNN is more liberal. To deny the existence of “cultures” within any of these entities is to deny the obvious, and the very human.
So, why does The Oregonian’s culture have a problem with the Knight-Oregon relationship. I don’t think you have to look any further than John Canzano’s most recent blog and the comments that follow.
In the comments, Wheaton4prez makes a simple request:
Please, somebody be specific and state what they think the loss or crime is here. It’s starting to sound like a spooky, fire-side story meant to scare children.
As he does on occasion, Canzano responds:
Thanks for the post. If you’re a Ducks’ fan you may love what Knight has done for the university, but it’s risky business because the university has given up control and sacrificed academics for athletics. Employees are in tough positions… nobody in green can criticize Knight… a donor has influence over personnel matters… and Knight’s building are being approved outside a university planning process. This is all problematic. Just take the guy’s donations, and keep your autonomy, and if he can’t live with that, don’t take it.
Again, I could go through this tidy summation of Canzano’s beef with the Phil Knight-Oregon alliance and address each one of his points. But I’m not going to do that either. However, Insominduck did a nice job of addressing at least one of Canzano’s points in another comment:
Since Phil has been involved as a high level donor the following have occurred (most due to his generosity)
New Law School
New Library
New Business School
$15 million to create endowed chairs and professorships
New Practice Facility
New Training Facility
New Student Center for Athletes
Remodeled Autzen
New Basketball Arena coming
not to mention other donations he’s made that aren’t public
What I want to address is Canzano’s very last line:
Just take the guy’s donations, and keep your autonomy, and if he can’t live with that, don’t take it.
Where would Oregon be without Phil Knight’s donations? Just look to one of The Oregonian’s articles:
“I’d hate to see where that school would be without his support and without the growth that they have demonstrated over the last decade,” said David Carter, a USC sports business professor and consultant. “They’re certainly among the elite nationally. Without that input, they would conceivably be an also-ran.
As Canzano notes, where have all of the Knights’ donations gotten the U of O? Not very far. Actually, on par with Oregon State. So, again, where would Oregon be without those donations?
Wherever Oregon would be, I think John Canzano would prefer Oregon was there with their autonomy intact, without the donations.
That’s great, John. Where would that leave Oregonians, the University of Oregon, Ducks fans, students, and the athletes? Better or worse off? Without a doubt, they all would be worse off. But they would have their autonomy. And that’s worth it, John? Really? And is that really the solution to the perceived problem of Phil Knight and Oregon? Don’t take the money?
If Phil Knight’s influence is a problem, what’s the alternative? I think it’s pretty clear. The alternative is that the University denies Phil Knight’s requests and he denies Oregon his donations.
While I think Phil Knight could live with an autonomous Oregon, I don’t think Oregon could survive being autonomous from Phil Knight. Then, I ask, who would have the heat on them?
And that, Duck fans, would be truly problematic.
If you would like to look at The Oregonian’s Cold War lead-up to this past weekend’s Hot War against Phil Knight, take a look at these stories. However, this is not an exhaustive list. This does not include all of John Canzano or Steve Duin’s columns and blogs.
April 26 | UO plans underground parking for new arena
April 16 | Favored companies new to the game
March 22 | UO seeks fast track for builder of arena
Feb. 24 | Goodbye, MacCourt; hello, questions and higher ticket prices
Feb. 23 | Legislature approves UO arena
Feb. 22 | Legislative committee approves UO basketball arena project
Feb. 21 | Arena finds support in Salem
Feb. 18 | Analyst: UO arena will drain long-term fund but should still get OK
Feb. 17 | Panel to hear public on arena
Feb. 15 | UO arena’s big jump: ticket prices
Feb. 14 | Steve Duin: Obsessive secrecy in Duckville
Feb. 13 | UO’s $12 million offer
Feb. 13 | USC’s all-cash arena
Feb. 9 | UO arena key to $100 million gift
Feb. 9 | ‘Buried’ report sees less revenue
Feb. 4 | UO sports arena: Creative financing or a dubious IOU?
Jan. 23 | Oregon arena idea includes ode to Mac Court
Jan. 22 | New-look arena
Jan. 22 | A misdirection of Oregon’s priorities (commentary)
Jan. 18 | State finance hearing or sports talk radio? (commentary)
Jan. 18 | UO arena closer to final OK
Jan. 17 | Proposed UO arena: Get out the checkbook
Jan. 13 | Steve Duin: Risk, rewards and Oregon’s new arena
Jan. 10 | Arena wouldn’t use academic funds, UO says
Jan. 9 | UO arena projections criticized
Dec. 18, 2007 | Prices, fees for new UO arena cited in report
Nov. 28, 2007 | Oregon swaps suites for feeling
