Less than two years into a six-year naming-rights deal for Livestrong Sporting Park, both the Livestrong Foundation and Major League Soccer's Sporting KC say the agreement is set to end for different reasons.
The move would be the latest of several by the anti-cancer charity to separate itself from its founder and former chairman, Lance Armstrong, who has been stripped of his seven Tour De France titles.
It also comes just two days before the first part of the disgraced cyclist's interview with Oprah Winfrey in which he admits to using performance-enhancing drugs was set to air. ...
See the whole story here, courtesy of ESPN.
Kicking Back Comments: So there are always multiple sides to every story. I think personally Sporting KC comes out the loser in this one.
Their choices were:
(a) We don't have the money, or won't pay it (as Livestrong contends). Well this is not good if true. How solvent is Sporting KC, or how dishonest are they if they failed to pay?
(b) We suddenly don't like the terms of the agreement ... that has existed for 2+ years (as KC contends). This is a weak excuse. Even if (and I think this is reasonable) they were concerned about the "Armstrong Affair", they had a chance to back out a while ago when this first came out, not on the eve of the Oprah debut of Lances' confession.
KC continued to dig their own hole by saying that they "staunchly defend the mission of the foundation."
Frankly, no they don't. If they did they would grow a set and say something like:
While it is now clear based on Mr. Armstrong's own admissions that he took performance enhancing drugs during his time as a professional cyclist, and has been stripped of his titles as a consequence, Sporting KC believes that his surviving cancer and subsequent work in forming Livestrong to aide those who are suffering this horrific disease is alone worthy of associating with Sporting KC who stands beside him in fighting all forms of cancer.
Instead we get drivel from Sporting Club CEO Robb Heineman say we believe in the foundation, we just aren't going to give it any more money because ... well insert (a) or (b) above.
Very cowardly in my opinion Mr. Heineman. You can't have it both ways.