UCF Drops the Ball with Jordan

Guess "just do it" doesn't apply to putting on shoes.

By JANIE CAMPBELL

Updated 3:56 PM EST, Thu, Nov 5, 2009

Print Email Share TWITTER FACEBOOK

It's just shoes, Marcus. It's not like your feet will melt upon insertion.

Marcus Jordan should be ashamed of himself. UCF should be close behind.

By refusing to wear the same shoes as his teammates in Wednesday night's exhibition game against St. Leo, Jordan -- and the UCF Athletic Department staff who didn't require it -- have cost the school its adidas sponsorship. That's a big deal, because Central Florida was about to ink an even better $3 million, six-year extension with the company that would have provided shoes, clothing, and equipment free to all of UCF's 15 sports programs, the first such agreement for the Knights (the current structure provides some and requires UCF to purchase others).

Now that deal is dead, and though Nike has not expressed interest in sponsoring UCF, they -- or Michael Jordan himself -- will almost certainly do so, because the Jordans don't do anything without Nike. But if not? Too bad, women's soccer, tennis, and track. Tough luck, ladies of volleyball, basketball, cross-country. Good luck, men's baseball team. You'll get your shoes and equipment in the end, but you'll also be laboring under a more financially-strapped department, so have fun with that.

And thank one spoiled kid on the basketball team.

Jordan says he checked with UCF before signing day to be sure he could wear his father Michael's Nike kicks. UCF says they checked with their adidas reps and got the OK but that, later, company higher-ups balked and found UCF "has chosen not to deliver on their contractual commitment." So the partnership won't be moving forward.

It doesn't matter who's at fault. When it became clear that insisting on wearing the Air Jordan Retro VII Rising Sun would cost his peers and the school, Jordan should've laced up like a team player.

"I think everybody understands how big of a deal it is for my family," Marcus said of his refusal to wear adidas on his feet. Dan Drane, an assistant professor of sports management at the University of Southern Mississippi, ratcheted up the crazy by noting "it would be very difficult for [Michael Jordan's sons] to be associated with a company other than the one that was so supportive of their father's career."

Difficult? Only as hard as tying a pair of shoelaces. We're talking about corporations, not civil rights or the cure to cancer. It's not like putting on adidas would wipe out his father's bank account or melt Marcus' feet.

And if Nike does cover what adidas would have provided, that's beside the point: why is one incoming freshman allowed to highjack an entire program and its bottom line? If Jordan were the son of, say, the Russell Athletic founder, would this conversation even be happening? UCF has now set an unnecessary and unfortunate precedence, when everyone (except, apparently, the Jordan family) understands how college athletic equipment sponsorships work and, because he plays for UCF, no one's going to see Marcus on TV anyway.

The whole thing is ridiculous, and paints the Jordans in a worse light than they'd be in if their kid was spotted in shoes his dad didn't get him for free. The Athletic Department should have treated Jordan like any other athlete, and because they didn't, those other athletes are out a sponsor.

It's just shoes, but it's just shoes.

Janie Campbell is -- wait, don't you know who her father is? Yeesh. Her work has appeared in irreverent sports sites around the Internet.