Sorry you’re right, that wasn’t very clear.
What I’m saying is that I view the naming-rights issue as peripheral compared to the structural problems facing UW athletics. If the department were consistently competitive, financially nimble, and aligned with the current reality of college sports, I’d probably care a lot more about whether the stadium name stayed untouched. Right now, arguing and complainign about things like stadium naming, AD compensation or AA re-seating feels like focusing on symptoms instead of the operating model itself.
The deeper issue, in my view, is that early in Burman’s tenure UW chose a strategy that only really made sense in a world where conference alignment was stable and the amateur model of college athletics remained firmly intact. In fairness to that choice, it wasn't completely crazy at the time. Once NIL, realignment, and the professionalization of the sport accelerated, that strategy became increasingly misaligned with reality. Some of that disruption couldn’t have been predicted. But over time it became clear the landscape was shifting and UW didn’t adjust course. That’s what I mean by systemic.
Whether Burman personally is the issue is almost secondary at this point. Firing him would amount to acknowledging that the broader strategic direction has been flawed for some time. Institutions aren’t quick to make that kind of admission even when it's painfully obvious to everybody else.
So to bring it back to naming rights, I don’t think selling them fixes much. And refusing to sell them doesn’t meaningfully preserve much either. It’s not nothing. It’s just not central.