Posted on: April 11, 2012 at 12:41:14 CT
Kentucky is, by most stastistical measures, the most storied program in college basketball. It is hard to argue any program has more "identity" to flaunt in college basketball than them. At no point in their storied history did that identity include wearing denim jerseys. It was never a part of their tradition or that of any other school in the country for that matter. But apparently prior to 1996 they decided to give it a whirl. By your logic Kentucky sold out its own identity for money.
This leads to the two points I'm trying to convey to you. First, even if your assertion is true, the Kentucky example (both with their current jerseys that are similar to our new Nike ones and their 1996 denim ones) shows that Mizzou IS NOT ALONE in this regard and indeed the most influential and prestigious programs in the country have done the *exact same thing* Mizzou is doing. You spin it as Mizzou selling out its identity. But when the only programs that are doing these sorts of customized unique jersey deals with shoe companies are the very top elite programs, it would seem to me you could argue that it's a sign of our university having a *stronger* identity and gaining national recognition and respect. It's a sign that our "brand" is recognized and worth something, and is something the top shoe company in the country would want to invest in.
Second, I think it refutes your idea that Mizzou "sold its identity" and "has no balls" because you would never say those things about Kentucky basketball or Duke basketball. They have strong national identities and the particular uniform they wear does not diminish that. I don't think it does for Mizzou either.