Advertisement

Opinion

Opinion

Kansas Athletics bullies business

April 7, 2010

Advertisement

As I was walking down Massachusetts Street the other day on my way to lunch with a friend, I passed what once was the Joe College T-shirt store. The shirts are gone but the sign saying that KU had not endorsed or licensed any of the shirts once sold there remained as a sad reminder of the battle between Kansas Athletics and a small Lawrence business owner.

Lawrence is a small town and it is dominated by two large institutions: Lawrence-Memorial Hospital and Kansas University. When I first moved to Lawrence in 1994 I was impressed at how the town and its two major employers worked so well together. LMH’s goal has always been to provide Lawrence and the surrounding communities with the highest level of medical care possible. KU and Lawrence have, for a very long time, also worked well together, or at least did until KU Athletics became a big business.

The fact of the matter is that KU Athletics is not an educational entity and, whatever its tax status, it certainly shouldn’t be considered a not-for-profit entity. Instead, it is a very successful sports franchise that generates large sums of money, mainly for itself. Its leadership is paid vast sums and receives significant non-cash benefits, in many cases, far more than do the CEOs of private corporations in these days of increased scrutiny of executive pay.

The relationship between KU Athletics and the people of Lawrence and Douglas County has become strained over the past several years. First, athletics officials instigated the wildly unpopular “points” system which disenfranchised many fans who had been loyal ticket holders through the “bad” years of KU sports. The explanation, of course, was that KU Athletics had to make money.

Then came the decision to move the KU-Missouri football game to Kansas City, a move which cost Lawrence merchants large sums of money. Coming at the beginning of what is now being called the Great Recession, such a decision was certainly not a friendly one to the town or its business community. But again, the explanation was the need for more profit.

Now we have all witnessed the epic battle of Kansas Athletics against Joe College; a massive and rich organization with seemingly unlimited resources (I define “unlimited” as being the case when not only employees but their spouses are provided free cars for their use) took on a small Lawrence business. To be fair, Joe College was found by a jury to have violated KU trademarks on several shirts it sold. But virtually no one who has followed the case believes that the jury’s verdict was anything other than bizarre in its findings.

While the damage award was high, over $100,000, I suspect that this would not, in itself, have forced the business to close. The killing blow to Joe College was the judge’s award of more than $600,000 in lawyers’ fees to KU. So the bottom line was that by spending massive amounts of money on bringing the case, far more than a small Lawrence business owner could afford, Kansas Athletics killed a local business.

While I am perfectly comfortable in saying that KU and Kansas Athletics have a right to protect their intellectual property and trademarks, I think that the exercise of rights should be tempered by reason and by neighborliness. The destruction of Joe College was neither reasonable nor neighborly. Indeed, it was quite the reverse. It was an example of bullying and excessive demands. The result is that Lawrence has lost another business and that Kansas Athletics has made it very clear that being a good neighbor is not high on its priority list. One can only wonder what comes next.

Comments

Richard Heckler 4 years, 8 months ago

Mike Hoeflich thank you for the excellent commentary.

Why should KU be able to do whatever the hell it wants?

heybluekc 4 years, 8 months ago

Happy the store is now closed. Maybe these silly shirts, with stupid sayings that make KU fans look like a bunch of stupid rednecks will fade away and we can get back to nice KU merchandise. I never been a fan of that crap and never will. The memory I have was walking into a football game in Norman and the fan in front of me with a shirt saying. "You can take the panhandle and shove it up your &^%. And I think on of the last one's I seen was "Frank Martin mows my lawn." Seriously that was really bad. Good Riddance Joe College. You should go to Columbia MO and maybe you can open up a shop there. The stuff you said on some of those shirts is stuff that I expect from a Mizzou fan. I think we are a little better than that. Rock Chalk Jayhawks!

BigPrune 4 years, 8 months ago

Is the ticket controversy and subsequent Federal investigation of KU Athletics the "bad karma" that resulted from all of KU Athletics' bad deeds? What goes around comes around? -maybe if only it goes all the way to the puppet master?

Jeff Barclay 4 years, 8 months ago

Something is yet brewing in the financial arena with KU Sports: fund-raising, ticket sales, etc. I don't think the final head has rolled. Institutional and personal egos eventually implode.

grammaddy 4 years, 8 months ago

Thank you, Mr. Hoeflich! I know I'll be boycotting Ku gear from now on. If the kids want new t-shirts for the games, we'll just make 'em ourselves. I bet I can come up with some raunchier sayings than JoeCollege did. Copyright this!

goozie 4 years, 8 months ago

The shirts were really tasteless, but that is free speech. I think KU Athletics opposed the tasteless sayings more than anything. If there wasn't this accepted culture of paying $$$$ to ADs and coaches, then the need for money would be less, but how are you going to change that?

Phillbert 4 years, 8 months ago

Sounds like someone is mad that he doesn't get good seats anymore.

And I love it when a law professor goes with an argument based on "Sure, Joe College was found by a federal court to have broken the law, BUT..."

Flap Doodle 4 years, 8 months ago

Worth repeating: • jkealing (Jonathan Kealing) says… bronze- I've warned you privately, now I'll warn you publicly. You do not have bearded_gnome's name correct. If you don't immediately cease to attempt to out an anonymous user, your account will be banned. In addition, I will immediately ban any account I suspect to be created by you without notice, warning or further cause. This is your final warning. Jonathan Kealing Online editor

––––– How has paulette2 lasted this long Jonathan?

cowboy 4 years, 8 months ago

Many good points in the LTE but the headline fail is any sympathy for Joe College. The rules are simple to follow in collegiate licensing and honestly you get a number of chances to make mistakes before you are called on the carpet. The owner of Joe College lost his licenses on his prior business and proceeded to ignore the protocol in his most recent venture. How many times do you need to be told ?

That being said . it will be a good day when the current money grubbing administration is gone. The coaches have done a great job while the KUAC has been publicly taking credit. This act is getting old , quick.

hoeflich 4 years, 8 months ago

Phillbert & Pilgrim2: As I tried to say in my column (perhaps, inadequately), I do believe in the rule of law and I do accept that Joe College was found to have violated KU's trademarks, but people do not always have to bring litigation nor do they have to insist on being granted extremely large attorneys' fees. To my mind, justice also requires mercy and one component of mercy is moderation. This was not a criminal action and the actual damages awarded to KU were a small percentage of the attorneys' fees. An old law professor of mine was fond of saying that "in Heaven there will be no law and in Hell due process will be strictly observed." I think that forcing Joe College out of business, if that is what happened, was simply an unkind and unneighborly decision for KU to make. They had the legal right to do it, but they weren't required to. I think all of us want judges and prosecutors, and those who are our adversaries to show a little kindness.

hoeflich 4 years, 8 months ago

Phillbert: I forgot to mention that I voluntarily gave up my tickets in 2000, long before the points system was instituted. I don't like large crowds. I had the tickets while I was dean at the law school and generally gave them away to alumni, faculty, and staff. I'm one of those people who prefer to watch from home. So I have no personal interest in the points system. I do have many friends, however, who no longer can afford to go to games even though they had tickets for many years. I think that a university ought to reward loyalty as well as financial largesse.

4everahawk 4 years, 8 months ago

A few tasteless t-shirts is nothing compared to the disgrace, embarrassment and humiliation athletics has brought to KU and Lawrence recently. The coaches work diligently to do their jobs and have done a great job in spite of all the corruption going on at the top. This was a high profile case, but there have been several other companies that have suffered at the hands of this administration. Hopefully with a 'clean' house, pride and integrity can be brought back to athletics and the Lawrence community can once again embrace the Jayhawks.

BorderRuffian 4 years, 8 months ago

Personally I am deeply offended by the obvious work of KU Athletics to not only destroy a local small business (who was paying rent and taxes to downtown), but as well a less obvious move to control KU Fans and Larryvillains' rights to free expression. A previous commentator was correct when s/he noted how KU Athletics is not only a false non-profit organization, but rather, a highly FOR profit group. They are controlling, they are bullies, they are only slightly different than the Mafia.

Perhaps the apparell Joe College was selling was occasionally offensive to some, but that also added to the college atmosphere of a college town. Let the kids wear what they want - only too soon will most of them will be forced into the same restrictive, expression-suppressing, business environments we all have succumbed to. A college town ought to have a festive, albeit occasionally off-color, atmosphere. It ought to be fun. Joe College added much to this. For crying out loud, it was little different than the kids of an earlier age stuffing daisies into the gun barrels of National Guardsmen during sit-ins and demonstrations.

Perhaps that's what this town needs - a few sit-ins and demonstrations by the younger crowd to get us old foagies to lighten up.

Bravo KU Athletics, bravo. What's next on your "hit list," day care centers who flagrantly use crimson and blue in their color schemes?

puddleglum 4 years, 8 months ago

phillbert & foxnewsPilgrim2: And I love it when a law professor goes with an argument based on "Sure, Joe College was found by a federal court to have broken the law, BUT..."

yeah, but Joe college was also found not breaking the law with over 60% of his shirts.

and some of these findings go beyond explicable: kansas volleyball team is okay kansas swim team is not okay....our coach is phat is bad, but our coach can eat your coach isn't? the court's decision was wrong in so many ways, they couldn't even explain it.

my guess is you two just like bullies....like fox news anchors. now go be mad at liberals and have a nice day.

fu7il3 4 years, 8 months ago

If KU Athletics is so unpopular, why do people continue to buy the merchandise, buy the tickets, and watch the games?

If you don't like what they are doing, you can always boycott their product.

Bob_Keeshan 4 years, 8 months ago

As I read this, Hoeflich's real point is that KUAD had the wherewithal to run up a large legal bill.

He fairly observes that it wasn't the "illegal" t-shirts that killed Joe College, it was KUAD's high priced attorneys and the judge's decision to make the defendant foot their bill.

It would be interesting to contrast what KUAD spent on attorneys to what Joe College spent. If the amounts are in line, then this column missed its mark.

Frightwig 4 years, 8 months ago

Why must people continue to beat this dead horse? Joe-College was given the opportunity to stop selling the unlicensed goods and they refused to do so. Its owner willingly and knowingly broke the law. Trademark/copyright infringement and free speech are two entirely separate issues. It would have been "reasonable and neighborly" for Joe College to follow proper merchandising protocol rather than try to screw other local businesses who play by the rules. Good for KU for protecting the upstanding local merchants and for protecting the trademark.

hail2oldku 4 years, 8 months ago

hoeflich (anonymous) says… Phillbert & Pilgrim2: As I tried to say in my column (perhaps, inadequately), I do believe in the rule of law and I do accept that Joe College was found to have violated KU's trademarks, but people do not always have to bring litigation nor do they have to insist on being granted extremely large attorneys' fees.

Larry was given plenty of opportunities to settle before going to court and simply paying the licensing fee that many other t-shirt manufacturers in town already pay. If KUA Inc had let him slide, then all of the other companies in town producing t-shirts could have (would have?) stopped paying their fees as well. Why should Larry get a free pass? He could have saved a whole lot of money, and his business, but he let arrogance get in his way.

As for the longtime faithful fan losing their tickets. Nobody lost their right to purchase their tickets. They simply lost their prime seat locations which they were UNDER paying for for many years. I have no problem with the fact that I ended up moving from mid-court in the upper chair backs to a lower corner on a bench seat. I would prefer my old, nicer seat and had a chance to retain it by increasing my donation. I wasn't in a position to do so though so I took the best available to me. I got a good 10 years of sitting in those better seats for the same price as people sitting in the seats I'm in now, and the seats way up in the corners, etc. The points system really just created a realistic pricing tier system for the seats just like the majority of the arenas in the country.

The KU-MU game, I won't argue with you on that one. I will point out though that Lew & Co wasn't the first to try and move the game. They were just the group that was successful in getting it done. Alas, the money was finally right.

mom_of_three 4 years, 8 months ago

Never shopped at the store, and only enjoyed the sayings on the shirts about North Carolina.
But being unneighborly?
He wasn't the only shirt store in town, but the only one who sold shirts without a licensing agreement. He broke the law, he knew he broke the law, and got hit with the bill when he tried to fight it.
I don't feel sorry for him.

Graczyk 4 years, 8 months ago

There was always significant gray area regarding these shirts. I believe KUAC's claim was that all shirts broke the law. As Puddleglum pointed out above, only about 40% of the shirts were found to infringe upon the trademark. KUAC was overreached.

On top of that, the jury's decision seems nonsensical and arbitrary. Again, as Puddleglum mentioned... "and some of these findings go beyond explicable: kansas volleyball team is okay kansas swim team is not okay....our coach is phat is bad, but our coach can eat your coach isn't?" The limits the court established are extremely blurry.

This obviously wasn't an open and shut case. Saying that "he knew he broke the law, and got hit with the bill when he tried to fight it" obscures the facts of the case and ignores the confusion that even the court evinced in its decision.

whats_going_on 4 years, 8 months ago

wrong.

KU, LMH, and Doug Compton, own Lawrence.

lounger 4 years, 8 months ago

Really good points here and thanks for standing up to the K.U. giant. Lets not forget the number 3 slot though-Lawrence Journal World and Co.!!!!!

Bruce Bertsch 4 years, 8 months ago

A law prof should know that the suit was brought not by KU Athletics, Inc. but by the University itself. KAI is entrusted with maintaining the the rights and usage of ALL KU related trademarks and servicemarks. You may not like Lew, but in this case he was doing the right thing.

Ralph Reed 4 years, 8 months ago

This LTE addresses just the tip of the iceberg. There's much more that has been going on for years. Several things have been mentioned above, so I won't reiterate.

But you forgot to include: Canceling the Band Day parade because of TV. Now that it's been done once it will happen again and again. This is detrimental to many small businesses downtown for whom Band Day is (was) a major income day. Charging the city $5K (give or take) because Perkins, Inc "was forced to cancel" a celebratory dinner at the Holidome for the last national champion BBall team. Divorcing KU from participating in any activities that support Lawrence. It used to be "Town and Gown." It now seems like it's "Gown and F* the Town." Not letting LHS & Freestate play against each other in Memorial Stadium because "it would destroy the sanctity of the stadium. Can anyone else add anything?


I'll grant that Perkins, Inc built the KU Athletic Corporation into a big money machine. However, this was done by trampling on any relationships between KU and Lawrence.

oldvet 4 years, 8 months ago

"While I am perfectly comfortable in saying that KU and Kansas Athletics have a right to protect their intellectual property and trademarks"

And that says it all... Joe College was the one who decided to take on this fight rather than negotiate it early on... Intellectual property and trademarks are protected items and any organization that does not defend those risks losing their protection. Why do you think that Home Depot took on The Old Home Depot... If you don't defend it, you lose it.

4everahawk 4 years, 8 months ago

I understand the fine he had to pay - I don't understand the ruling that he pay for athletics attorney fees......of course that amount of money would cause him to close which was the goal in the first place.

d_prowess 4 years, 8 months ago

And without repeating all of the other good reasons KU needed to pursue their legal action, isn't it also true that if they let JoeCollege continue that would have set a legal precedent that KU does not fight for their image and thus giving any entity, large or small, the ability to print whatever they like? I believe this was brought up before and confirmed and if so, it seems that a former Law professor wouldn't know that...

gatekeeper 4 years, 8 months ago

I keep seeing people posting that KU was fighting for their image. KU was fighting over the color blue and using Kansas or Hawks on shirts. Joe College never used Jayhawks, never printed a Jayhawk, etc.... I would side with KU if he had, but all he did was come up with some funny *ss shirts. The jury's ruling was bad (just go back and read what they found to not infringe and what did infringe). It's all a joke. I quit paying into the Alum Assoc when KU did this and won't support my alma mater because of what they have become. Pretty sad. KU isn't about the students, the town or providing a good education. It's now just a business.

Robert Rauktis 4 years, 8 months ago

If you feel genetically obligated to buy in some fashion KU gear, make sure it hasn't the new font, an absolute marker of cash being filtered by Kansas Athletics, Inc.

By the way, are they assistant AD's or vice-presidents? They change and obfuscate the language so fast, it's hard to tell whether they're church or state or some new hybrid designed to avoid all accountability.

banksie 4 years, 8 months ago

So who would you have pay attorney fees? Does it not make sense to have the party who caused the legal proceedings by breaking the law and was found guilty of doing so footing the bill? Like other's have mentioned, KUAD gave Joe College the chance to stop violating trademarks and Joe College called KU's bluff and paid the price.

Larry Bauerle 4 years, 8 months ago

But virtually no one who has followed the case believes that the jury’s verdict was anything other than bizarre in its findings.

Count me as a virtual no one. He used something that didn't belong to him to make money. He knew it, as did everyone else. Joe College t-shirts, done. Dead horse, lives on and on and on.

Phillbert 4 years, 8 months ago

@gatekeeper - "Joe College never used Jayhawks, never printed a Jayhawk, etc.... I would side with KU if he had, but all he did was come up with some funny *ss shirts. "

Get ready to side with KU...

"In July 2008, a jury agreed with KU but only on 53 designs, just over a fourth of those in question. Some of the T-shirt problems were clear: use of the Jayhawk emblem or the word “Jayhawk.”"

The source of that info.? The March 30, 2010, LJW editorial. Sinks used Jayhawks, both the logo and the word. He had to have known this was a violation and he did it anyway.

@hoeflich - I appreciate the response and share the belief that not every dispute has to go to court, but Sinks' intransigence clearly left KU with no other option. You can't be "neighborly" with someone who is going to brazenly flout the law.

jonas_opines 4 years, 8 months ago

"I keep seeing people posting that KU was fighting for their image. KU was fighting over the color blue and using Kansas or Hawks on shirts. Joe College never used Jayhawks, never printed a Jayhawk, etc.... I would side with KU if he had, but all he did was come up with some funny *ss shirts."

Leaving the opinion of how funny the shirts were, they were clearly designed to emulate and mimic official KU gear. As far as I'm concerned, what this fight was really about was KU not wanting anybody to mistake that they gave official endorsement to items that were, in my opinion and I imagine in theirs, pretty classless and potentially offensive.

AnnaUndercover 4 years, 8 months ago

I agree with Professor Hoeflich.

KU Athletics behaved in a way that was neither reasonable nor neighborly.

hoeflich 4 years, 8 months ago

Anna: You are the first person I've encountered who has read The Rise of David Levinsky. I believe that it is one of the greatest American novels. I wish it were part of our literary canon so more folks would read it.

missmagoo 4 years, 8 months ago

thank you mike for a wonderful column. i couldn't agree with you more!

Jim Williamson 4 years, 8 months ago

Mike Hoeflich has his finger on the pulse of what college athletics should be. If it's 1973.

BigAl 4 years, 8 months ago

I blame Sinks. There is no doubt that he broke the law. He lost his fight in a courtroom and now he has to pay.

He very easily could have avoided all of this early on.

KU would have been negligent had they not protected their trademark and the vendors that were legally selling their licensed products.

hoeflich 4 years, 8 months ago

To those of you who think I am either naive or an idiot, my concern with the Joe College case is that a jury turned in a questionable verdict and that the judge awarded crippling legal fees to KU. This is, to my mind, a dangerous scenario when a large, wealthy institution can use expensive counsel and high fees to force a defendant out of business. As I stated in the column, I think that an award of legal fees so in excess of the actual damages is inappropriate and that KU would have been wiser to permit JC to pay the award and a reasonable amount of costs, but not put an unrealistic fee burden on him. In the end, the cost of the case, not the actual losses to KU and KUAA seem to be the killing blow here. Such actions may well result in the future in making many folks with better cases afraid to sue KU because of KU's ability to spend large sums on legal representation.

jonas_opines 4 years, 8 months ago

"To those of you who think I am either naive or an idiot"

Those are everywhere, and it's easier to just let it slide, I imagine. For my part, I agree with your assessment of the bizarre nature of the jury's judgment. My theory on the variation between shirts (which I haven't gone back to details on the case to support or contradict) is that rather than deciding on infringement, they were deciding on tastelessness or what might harm the image of the university, which is an arbitrary thing subject to personal judgment.

It also misses the boat. All of the shirts were designed to mimic, and therefore infringe, on KU's brand. There was no point, I opine, to picking which shirt did and which did not, they were all pretty much equally guilty in that regards.

For the legal fees, did that come from the recommendation of KU or solely from the judgment of the judge?

hoeflich 4 years, 8 months ago

Jones: A good question. The statute permits the award of legal fees. I would imagine that KU counsel would have asked for them from the court, but I haven't looked at the opinion recently. Whether or not KU asked, it certainly had the right to decline them or some portion of them.

hail2oldku 4 years, 8 months ago

Once more, and I'll type slowly so maybe you will understand, Larry had more than one opportunity to avoid even going to court. If he takes one of those opportunities, KU doesn't hire high priced lawyers to represent them. Larry pays a fee like all of the other t-shirt vendors in town and stays in business.

If KU didn't protect their brand with Larry, they would have lost their right to do so with every other vendor out there. Personally, I would hire the best attorney I could afford so I am not surprised that KU chose to do that as well. Maybe Larry should have spent a little more on his own lawyer and he would have received the advice to pay the licensing fee to the university.

missmagoo 4 years, 8 months ago

"kansas" and "hawk" are not trademarks of the university of kansas, nor kansas athletics, inc.

BigAl 4 years, 8 months ago

I have to agree with hail2oldku.

I do see your point Mr. Hoeflich but I just can't get past the fact that Sinks knew what he was doing and he continued anyway. Plus, one should add in the fact that the courts agreed with KU.

BigAl 4 years, 8 months ago

By the way Mr. Hoeflich, I definintely do not think your are an idiot or naive. I just respectfully think you are wrong on this account.

BabyBear 4 years, 8 months ago

Go back and look at the first court ruling and the most current one, its changed 4 times before any results were "final"

The judge for this trial is also a KU grad, I find it hard to believe there was no conflict of interest in this case. KU Law Alumni Board of Governors The Hon. Julie A. Robinson, L'81 Judge, United States District Court Topeka, KS http://www.law.ku.edu/alumni/board/bylaws.shtml

SnakeFist 4 years, 8 months ago

The standard for trademark infringement is "likelihood of confusion", which is obviously a very subjective (often arbitrary) conclusion.

I tell my clients that litigation is like a poker game - for the most part, the strength of your hand (i.e., your case) is irrelevant, what is relevant is whether you can pay (your attorney's fees) to stay in the game. Bigger businesses frequently use the legal system to harass little businesses, not because they have good cases but because the little businesses simply can't afford a prolonged fight. Unlike most clients, Joe College was apparently willing and able to do so, but lost in the end. Standing up for principles, while personally satisfying, is generally not good for business.

As for public policy, its never been clear to me why a public entity (e.g., KU) can own intellectual property and enforce it against the very public that paid for its development with tax money. For an interesting case, see Vitamin Technologists, Inc. v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, 64 USPQ 285 (9th Cir. 1945).

7texdude 4 years, 8 months ago

I find it really amusing that we are arguing what the law should be and not what it is. I agree with a lot of this column, but I'm glad Joe College is finished. And I bought a couple of t-shirts there. They broke the law and did it again and again. If you want to stay in business, you have to be flexible. They did not change their tactics.

Did Joe College ever e-mail KU with the lines on their shirts? Pretty easy to do. It's not they like they had to ask permission, but with $600,000 in legal fees on the line, I'd do it. He could have cooperated and worked with the university. He did not and he got what he deserved.

I also believe Lew Perkins will get what he deserves. This ticket investigation could be his downfall, but remember he would have to resign and not be fired. There is no way KU can afford to pay out Perkins, but I didn't think they could pay out Mangino either.

If the season ticket holders don't renew and also stop giving to the university, then he will feel the backlash. But, more important, if KU's football declines and the basketball team suffer another flameout, then the heat will be on Perkins for sure. Regardless, I will not root against KU just to see Perkins go down. I am a Jayhawk fan through thick and thin.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 8 months ago

Is it even remotely possible that both Sinks and KUAC/Perkins are all unsympathetic jerks?

CHEEZIT 4 years, 8 months ago

Exactly oneeye! I doubt very seriously the words on those shirts are going to keep a parent from sending their children to KU. The purpose is to poke fun at things people do or say or may look like. Do they cross the line. Its a cloudy issue. Does SNL cross the line or are they doing the same thing. They have been on TV a long time so I guess not. or maybe they have better lawyers! Andy Taylor used to tell Barney to consider the Human Equation. The university pretty much threw that in the toilet in order to make money. Bill Self once said the KU-MU game would never be in K.C. If Lew is still around after this debacle I wouldn't be surprised to see it,.!!!

daveramseyfan 4 years, 8 months ago

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this. Maybe the sad football and basketball endings were brought on by this outrageous behavior. I am always proud to be a Jayhawk, but this has just been hard to witness. I hope Mr. Sinks is able to recover and prosper after experiencing this unnecessary battering by the sleeze balls in the athletics department. Oh, yeah, and watching them take down Mark Mangino was equally unimpressive.

verity 4 years, 8 months ago

Yeah, this nag been dead a long time and the flies are swarming.

Lot of whining about big bad KU. I'm not saying KU is perfect---have some complaints myself---but where would this town be without it?

Kylee Manahan 4 years, 8 months ago

Maybe someone can enlighten me since I was living in Houston since 1988 till 2005, but what was going on before Lew. I am trying to imagine a KU basketball game not sold out. I am a born and raised Lawrencian and began going to basketball games when I was 4 years old till I moved to Houston. I don't recall any games where the seats weren't filled.

Sure I have resentment with Lew since I have to watch my 90 year old father watch games from his TV set instead of having his tickets that he had since Allen Field House was built. Where was Jayhawk sports before Lew?, with exception to all the money he brings in (and KU turns around and pays him a few million.)

I liked what Dolph had to say a couple of weeks ago regarding the points system and the free rides for employees and their spouses.

independant1 4 years, 8 months ago

At one time I found myself in need of good legal representation in civil matter. Couldn't avoid it or run away. I hit the jackpot, my lawyer here in Larryville advised me, "the more you disagree with the other side, the more money I make." I followed his advice and replied, "just try to optimize my outcomes." He did, I was lucky. That's what it takes if you can't settle before it goes to trial. Here? Could be Mr. Sinks didn't get that advice or KU crushed him like a fly or some of both. As idealist I'd like to beleive a little of both.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.