<Comment removed by moderator>

Shouldn't that be spelled "Heir Jordans"? johntee

Now just why should I buy Jordans or Adidas or anythg else for that matter because some usually overpaid athlete or celebrity tells me to? The huge royalties paid are another reason why the prices of these things are absurdly high. I grew up wearing Keds and Thom McCan or are these also now endorsed by some person who never even heard of them before being approached with a sack of money. In fact, where possible, I usually avoid products advertised by using the name of some famous personality. Let them earn their income by shooting lots of hoops or hitting baseballs but not out of my pocket unless I care to buy a ticket to the game.

My suggestion is for dad to make a donation to the university, oh for about $3 millon.

I would be interested to know who promised Marcus Jordan that he could wear the Air Jordans and was that person aware of the university's contract with Adidas? What person who is working in "higher education" did not understand the meaning of the term "exclusive contract"?

As for the post by awegweiser1, your choice of Mr. Jordan as a target for your "some person who never even heard of them" comment is ill-informed. Mr. Jordan is very involved in the design of the sneakers bearing his name and in fact was a main factor in the original development of this line of sneakers more than 20 years ago when he was looking for particular characteristics in sneakers he wanted to wear while playing.

All athletes who lend their names and images to products such as sneakers, golf balls etc. actually use those products. It would be pretty poor marketing strategy for the companies paying them those big bucks if that were not the case. Ergo the connection is made in the mind of the consumer. I'd be pretty damn foolish to believe putting on a pair of Air Jordans would allow me to dunk a basketball but what is the HL Mencken quote "no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public"...

That's one expensive pair of shoes.

First, $3 Million over 6 years is $500,000 a year.

Second, this was the last year of that 6 year agreement.

Third, most of that $3 Million is in "Trade and/or Gear" ... not cash. My sources say 80% trade/gear, which leaves $500,000 (over 6 years) in cash.

Thus, UCF gave up $100,000 in cash, and $400,000 in gear.

And Nike is loving this.

And UCF Athletics is loving this ... because no one would be talking about them otherwise (ESPN, Chronicle, etc).

My mistake $600,000 (over 6 years) in cash.

Still, only $100,000 per year, and this year.