By: The MV (4,915 posts) - 5/10/2012 3:25:42 PM

Credit to tk who first posted this on another thread but I felt it was worthy of its own thread.  Without knowing the financials, I think on the surface, this is a great deal for GW.  IMG's connections in the world of college athletics is unparalleled and this clout should only work to GW's advantage.  Kudos to Nero and staff for recognizing that this program, while on the way up, is a tough sell at this moment in time.  The only potential downside is that GW marketing, as a priority, falls by the wayside as more prominent programs receive more of IMG's attention and resources to the point where GW marketing is all but neglected.  However, with a dedicated individual working on GW's behalf, I would not anticipate this being the case.

By: runnindawheel (59 posts) - 5/10/2012 5:06:04 PM

While it may be good for the program, there is a major downside for fans with this deal. Many of us do not live in DC, like myself, and I fully expect that we now will have to pay to listen online. No more free streaming. If you don't live within range of WFED expect to pay for the radio feed, or any feed for that matter.

However, nearly all repuatable programs are either partnered with IMG or Learfield Sports.

By: tk (258 posts) - 5/11/2012 12:53:56 AM

interesting that richmond is the only other a10 school that partners with img. would think it'd be x.

By: Levinator (1,535 posts) - 5/11/2012 5:00:42 AMGreat points MV. Frankly- I think it's awesome. The rewards way out run the risks - if any. That stream we got- every other game- sucked. Quality over quantity. That's PN and ML and our beloved small undergrad university. ;)

By: Alumnus (2,050 posts) - 5/11/2012 9:19:08 AM

I agree it's a good move to see what can be done to pump up GW's program.  The way things have been, there's no telling what level of sustained success is necessary to develop and keep a strongly-supported program.  Realistically, I would think GW will be in the same situation with a firm like IMG as A-10 programs are with coaches.  If you get a youngish, eager representative who has some success, they're probably going to "graduate" to a bigger program, or set up their own firm, probably quicker than coaches move.  But it's worth a try, and I commend Nero et al for this and all their other efforts. 

By: Bigfan (2,829 posts) - 5/14/2012 2:00:29 AM

Not sure how this works.

But if this doesn't cost us any money, and IMG pays us a fee and pays Amy Weinstein Flynn's salary, hard to imagine it isn't a positive move under an aggressive leadership. Don't think we were inundated with requests for sponsorship or signage rights.

By: BM (5,673 posts) - 5/14/2012 8:37:07 AM

I'd guess there would be a retainer plus a percentrage of revenues.

GW RECENT RECRUITING, Classes of 2013 2014 2015...2016

Easy fix for those Pat Andree devotees. We can leave young Pat's thread to Pat Andree: The Dude (529 posts) - 8/10/2015 7:39:09 PM Anyone else here a little concerned about the recent recruiting efforts? The 2013 class was a disaster, the 2015 cl



As a fairly new reader and poster of this esteemed board, its impossible to not detect an air of defeatism among some of the loyal and thoughtful writers. 1) Any highly successful coach will just .... 2) We can't ever land a legit top recruit 3)