2015 Sport Marketing Association Conference (SMA XIII)

Sumlin, the SEC, and Johnny Football: A Case Study of Texas A&M Football’s Rebranding Perfect Storm

Gregg Bennett, Texas A&M University

Friday, October 30, 2015 50-minute poster presentation 8:00-8:50 AM, Charleston Room

Introduction

The purpose of this case study is to examine the impact of Tyrone Willingham’s tenure as head football coach on the brand equity of the . The case focuses on Willingham’s a three-year stint as following Gladden, Milne, and Sutton’s (1998) recommendation that longitudinal examinations be used to evaluate the cyclical nature of brand equity. In this case, the concept of brand equity takes on more complex meaning as it is intensified locally and expanded globally (i.e., beyond Notre Dame) given the long-standing tradition of Notre Dame football and, as of the beginning of the 2004 season, his being one of only five African American NCAA Division I-A football coaches. The team, the football program, the University of Notre Dame community (including students, faculty, staff, administrators, alumni), and the community beyond the Notre Dame campus are evaluated as part of the equation.

Theoretical Background

In examining the antecedents of brand equity established by Gladden et al. (1998) (please see Figure 1 for Gladden et al., 1998 model) and subsequent attention to the development of the coach antecedent by Robinson and Miller (2003), Notre Dame football performs well. Notre Dame football has long enjoyed success (.750 all-time winning percentage), has had its fair share of star players (seven Heisman Trophy winners, 57 NFL first-round draft picks, five No. 1 picks in the NFL draft), has a well-established reputation and tradition, enjoys the unusual situation of flourishing despite the lack of a conference affiliation, and delivers a product in the game-day experience complete with traditional activities (Gladden et al., 1998) such as following the marching band and tailgating that begins as early as when the recreational vehicles roll into the parking lots on the Thursday before a home football Saturday. Notre Dame also possesses the only institution-specific national media contract in with NBC, the Notre Dame football following extends beyond its geographic location to fans throughout the country, this following lessens the number of local and regional competitors, and finally the University of Notre Dame football program has one of the largest support bases in sport between students, alumni, “subway alumni” (i.e., fans who never attended the university), and fans who affiliate themselves by watching games on television and buying merchandise.

Each of the antecedents of brand equity have been represented strongly at Notre Dame over the course of the last 15 years with the exception of the coach. During the last years before ’s departure in 1996 and the subsequent five-year tenure of Bob Davie, Notre Dame’s brand equity was not being enhanced by the head coach. Expectations that Tyrone Willingham would change that equation were set when he was introduced as the new head football coach of the University of Notre Dame in December of 2001.

How the Challenge Was Addressed

The application of the brand equity model was complicated in this case. The long-standing tradition of expected success in Notre Dame football and nationwide popularity of the program expand the network of fans and critics. The differing evaluations of Willingham’s on and off field progress and his ethnic identity in a field where so few head coaches are African American also made the evaluation of brand equity complex. The bottom line was that those few in the position of power in making a decision opted to terminate Willingham’s coaching tenure at Notre Dame. Criticisms have been voiced that the group in power was too small and acted to quickly (Boucree; Duerson, 2004). Even outgoing Notre Dame President Edward Malloy voiced his disappointment at the decision and the way that decision was made (Coyne, 2004). Even though the challenge has been addressed, mixed opinions remain.

Atlanta, GA October 28-30, 2015 2015 Sport Marketing Association Conference (SMA XIII)

Conclusion

It can be argued that despite not living up to Notre Dame’s expectation of winning 75% of games played, based on the all-time winning percentage of the program, Ty Willingham did positively impact the brand equity of Notre Dame and Notre Dame football. Perceptions of football players on campus and in the community were more positive than in past years (Muir 1) and the student-athletes were achieving academically. Connections had been made to former players (Francisco), alumni (Lennon), Black alumni (Boucree), and minority undergraduate applicants (Mundy). Also during Willingham’s stint at Notre Dame substantial financial gains were realized by the university as a result of football. Ticket sales remained constant as the 43-year streak of sellouts continued (Lennon), merchandise sales increased specifically in relation to “The Shirt” (O’Connor 1, 2) and most notably the contract with NBC was extended. The community also continued to gain revenue through visitors to new hotels and the College Football Hall of Fame (Ayers; Kish). Some believe that Notre Dame’s brand equity was not damaged by Willingham’s tenure as head coach but that firing a coach who established a positive off-field identity for his team was what did the damage (Boucree; Fralish, 2004; Hanna, 2004). Former Notre Dame football coach commented, prior to Willingham’s arrival, “the tradition of Notre Dame had pretty much broken down ... a lot of people said they’re done; Notre Dame can¹t do it anymore” (Price, 2002, p. 42). Willingham helped to return the Irish “to glory” (Grant, 2003) complete with a “sea of green.” His firing marked the most public and critical questioning of Notre Dame’s mission of striving for excellence in all areas, not giving athletic excellence priority over academic excellence.

References Collins, P. M. (2007). Lobbyists before the US Supreme Court Investigating the Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs. Political Research Quarterly, 60(1), 55-70.

Kearney, J. D., & Merrill, T. W. (2000). The influence of amicus curiae briefs on the Supreme Court. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 743-855.

Krislov, S. (1963). The amicus curiae brief: From friendship to advocacy. Yale Law Journal, 694-721.

Roesch, R., Golding, S. L., Hans, V. P., & Reppucci, N. D. (1991). Social science and the courts: The role of amicus curiae briefs. Law and Human Behavior, 15(1), 1.

Supreme Court Rules (2013) Rule 37. Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/supct/rule_37.

Walsh, M. (2013, September). It was another big term for amicus curiae briefs at the high court. ABA Journal. Retrieved from http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/it_was_another_big_term_for_amicus_curiae_briefs_at_the_high_ co urt/.

Atlanta, GA October 28-30, 2015