Racial Injustice & The Rooney Rule

For nearly a century, owners of U.S. professional sports teams have lobbied respective governmental bodies for public subsidies to build stadiums and arenas across the country, using franchise relocation as leverage. Myriad justifications have been used as a defense for the public subsidization of this private enterprise, ranging from the economic impact of capital intensive projects to the psychic regional benefit of being a host city to a professional sports franchise. But do these justifications hold up under increased scrutiny? In this case, students are placed in the position of the Mayor of Oakland as she is faced with a dilemma regarding publicly subsidizing a new Raiders stadium. Students will examine the issue through the lens of multiple key stakeholders, and will ultimately have to decide whether the city should utilize public funds to keep the Davis family happy and the Raiders in Oakland, or withhold funding for public good and risk the franchise relocating elsewhere.

Throughout the 20th century, football grew to be America's new pastime - and as the sport's popularity grew, so did the NFL's fortunes. From early league leadership to the Pete Rozelle era, the NFL successfully warded off rival league challengers and became the preeminent economic juggernaut of the American sports landscape. But as the NFL's financial dominance has grown, so has its risk exposure to certain elements of its 20th century business model. In this case, students will work to understand the NFL's monopolistic business model and how it has fueled the NFL's financial windfalls over the past several decades. Students will also gain an understanding of the history of rival football leagues in America in order to analyze the question facing the modern NFL management team: is its business model vulnerable to disruption by a handful of well-funded rival leagues set to start play in 2019?

Following the NCAA’s ruling to allow college athletes to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness (NIL), the marketing team at LEARFIELD, a premier multi-media rights partner for intercollegiate athletics, is hard at work to expand its leadership in (NIL) initiatives to best serve school and brand partners. The company has witnessed drastic changes in college athletics in the past five years and closely monitors the changes in student-athlete compensation as college athletes began earning money for their name, image, and likeness. LEARFIELD’s college business partners still retain control of their brand assets but now student athletes are free to engage in many activities that were once prohibited and on their own terms. While this has created a new frontier for young athletes, schools and businesses must consider how best to coordinate schools, brands, and student-athletes in a way that benefits all parties. The company must ensure that its services are holistic and consider all partners as it serves a variety of stakeholders: universities, conferences, brands, student-athletes, and the collegiate sports industry. Student-athlete NIL creates a new opportunity/division for LEARFIELD.

This case outlines Minor League Baseball's (MiLB) strategic resource allocation towards diversity and inclusion, and practical steps MiLB has taken to activate its core mission and values in the sports market - most notably through its 2019 Pride campaign and Copa de la Diversion platform. Written in collaboration with MiLB's staff, the case includes data and results from the 2019 Pride program, background research on the league's organizational structure and mission, and a robust theory section highlighting subject-specific academic literature to help educate students on current trends. Written from a management lens, the theory outlined herein includes substantial analysis on the societal shifts towards the LGBTQ community, economic benefits of diversity, equity and inclusion in marketing initiatives, and the LGBTQ sport consumer. Lastly, students are tasked with applying MiLB's model to a new U.S. market through analysis of relevant data on state equality measures, and dynamics regarding the market, population and community in question. The case fosters a greater understanding of diversity and inclusion policy and practice in sport organizations.