I wrote Whit Babcock earlier in the week regarding that lack of naming rights on UC facilities such as Nippert, Schott Field and the Tennis and football practice facilities. He indicated that Nippert itself will not be renamed, but they are looking at ALL ways to enhance revenue and they may possibly rename the field at Nippert Stadium. Such as Nippert Stadium at Cincinnati Bell field. Cincinnati Bell is only an example. Whit did not mention that company.

Either Kroger or P&G need to get into the game in my opinion...

I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

(02-21-2013 08:17 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

They wouldn't be selling off the rights but simply changing the "Carson Field" portion of the name. As the OP mentioned, it could be "P&G Field at Historic Nippert Stadium."

The only name that would bring money to Nippert while maintaining the family name and tradition would be, "Procter and Gamble - Nippert Stadium." The Gamble and Nippert families are relatives and already have a YMCA named after them on the West Side.

This name to me makes too much sense from the perspective of naming rights and tradition.

(02-21-2013 08:26 AM)Riptsa Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:17 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

They wouldn't be selling off the rights but simply changing the "Carson Field" portion of the name. As the OP mentioned, it could be "P&G Field at Historic Nippert Stadium."

Either or. I prefer Carson Field at Nippert Stadium.

(02-21-2013 08:17 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

I recall a Q&A from a few years ago with Mr. Thomas during the construction of the bubble where he was asked about selling naming rights for it. He said at the time, and I'm paraphrasing, that "if the complex is built and it is still named Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex at that time, then I haven't done my job."

Foot in mouth.

That guy sucked.

Where do you guys expect revenue to come from? The wonderful new TV contract?

(02-21-2013 09:11 AM)Riptsa Wrote:  Where do you guys expect revenue to come from? The wonderful new TV contract?

Nippert renovation for one.

I'm sure the amount that UC can get in naming rights is dependent on the exposure of the team. It wouldn't surprise me if they held off on these rights until 1)we are settled into the New Big East or we have announced a new conference affiliation; 2)the opening of the newly remodeled Nippert Stadium.

I'm sure they are willing to sell the naming rights of concourses, press boxes, club areas, etc. Nothing, other than the name of the stadium (and the Dieterle Vocal Arts Center - discussion from another thread) is off limits for selling the name. Though renaming the stadium would probably earn UC the most money, I'm ok with the Nipp keeping the name...there's cool (and kind of tragic) history in that name. We can make money other ways.

(02-21-2013 08:17 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

Jimmy Nippert has been honored with the stadium name for 87 years. He didn't die on the field. He died from blood poisoning due to chicken excrement getting into a spike wound. Not exactly an inspirational story to worry about some kind of legendary history being lost if the name changes. I think his grandfather James Gamble got more than his money's worth. Its time to move on. I see no reason why the stadium shouldn't be renamed for the right price. This is a bad move by UC imo if they're potentially turning down tens of millions just to keep the name.

(02-21-2013 09:08 AM)CD11 Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:17 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

I recall a Q&A from a few years ago with Mr. Thomas during the construction of the bubble where he was asked about selling naming rights for it. He said at the time, and I'm paraphrasing, that "if the complex is built and it is still named Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex at that time, then I haven't done my job."

Foot in mouth.

That guy sucked.

But it wasn't called the Jefferson Avenue Sports Complex by the time it was built.

(02-21-2013 09:26 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  

(02-21-2013 08:17 AM)cinbinsportsfan Wrote:  I would prefer Nippert Stadium's naming rights not be sold off. That would be a Mike Thomas type of move.

Jimmy Nippert has been honored with the stadium name for 87 years. He didn't die on the field. He died from blood poisoning due to chicken excrement getting into a spike wound. Not exactly an inspirational story to worry about some kind of legendary history being lost if the name changes. I think his grandfather James Gamble got more than his money's worth. Its time to move on. I see no reason why the stadium shouldn't be renamed for the right price. This is a bad move by UC imo if they're potentially turning down tens of millions just to keep the name.

Perhaps P&G is paying UC for the Nippert name? I don't know. If not, then they should be. Or I suspect they have other partnerships with the university in other areas. I would hope P&G contributes to UC in some ways.

If not, then I don't have a problem selling naming rights for the right price.

The Nippert family gave money during the Varsity Village fundraising to ensure the stadium name will always stay the same.

(02-21-2013 09:57 AM)subflea Wrote:  The Nippert family gave money during the Varsity Village fundraising to ensure the stadium name will always stay the same.

I didn't know that. If so, then I certainly understand their reasoning for keeping the name.

The Nippert family paid for the construction of the stadium in honor of Jimmy. The Gamble and Nippert families and their heirs have been long standing large donors to the University. I don't think these are two families UC could afford to offend with renaming the stadium.

Keep it Nippert Stadium but cant they do a "Kroger Field" @ Nippert Stadium type deal?

I used Kroger as an example...

Or Proctor and Gamble Nippert Stadium

or something...surely they can get creative, make money, and not piss off the families involved

(02-21-2013 11:21 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Keep it Nippert Stadium but cant they do a "Kroger Field" @ Nippert Stadium type deal?

I used Kroger as an example...

Or Proctor and Gamble Nippert Stadium

or something...surely they can get creative, make money, and not piss off the families involved

It's already Carson Field at Nippert Stadium.

(02-21-2013 11:38 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It's already Carson Field at Nippert Stadium.

It needs to be "Highest Bidder" Field at Nippert Stadium

I'm not sure what the Nippert's paid to keep the stadium name the same but hopefully it was substantial. If not I'm telling them thanks for all your support but we need to do what is best for this athletic department. That 15 million her estate gave to CCM instead of the athletic department could've bought the rights for a while longer.

(02-21-2013 12:40 PM)Kco17 Wrote:  I'm not sure what the Nippert's paid to keep the stadium name the same but hopefully it was substantial. If not I'm telling them thanks for all your support but we need to do what is best for this athletic department. That 15 million her estate gave to CCM instead of the athletic department could've bought the rights for a while longer.

You do not piss off donors by going back on an agreement like that. Especially one that has the power and influence of that family. If you tell them that, it hurts a whole lot of places throughout the university. It is not worth losing their support university wide so you can get a few million bucks from renaming the stadium.