Arizona Athletics' sponsorship arm gives school competitive (and private) edge

For Tucson residents who attend games, work around the University of Arizona or follow the school’s athletes, the names on two of the city’s most prominent sports venues now represent a major shift in how UA athletics does business. Arizona expects to bring in $87.7 million from naming rights agreements announced during the past school year, including deals placing Casino Del Sol’s name on the football stadium and Alkeme’s name alongside McKale Center. Yet much of what the public would normally expect to see in contracts involving a public university remains out of view.

The Casino Del Sol agreement covers 20 years and is valued at $60 million. Alkeme’s deal lasts 15 years and is valued at $27.7 million, giving the insurance brokerage secondary naming rights at what is now called McKale Center at Alkeme Arena. Alkeme CEO Curtis Barton, a UA graduate, said during the February announcement that retaining McKale Center in the venue’s name was important to him. The arrangements also include branding, promotional exposure and, in some cases, name, image and likeness opportunities for Arizona athletes, but the university has not released the full terms.

Arizona said Alkeme paid $1 million for the partial 2025 to 26 contract period, covering February through June. The agreement averages $1.85 million annually, with payments increasing by 4 percent each year. That structure means the value is not evenly distributed over the life of the contract and confirms that at least part of the deal is backloaded. Arizona also disclosed that the Casino Del Sol payments average $3 million per year and rise by 3 percent annually. The university has not provided details about possible opt out provisions, the precise signage and exposure included, or how the NIL portions are structured.

The information became difficult to obtain because Arizona routed the agreements through Arizona Sports Enterprises, a nonprofit organization created in 2024 to handle sponsorship activity for the athletic department. When the Arizona Daily Star requested the Alkeme contract from the university, UA responded that it did not possess responsive records and did not identify ASE in that reply. Athletic director Desireé Reed-Francois had previously indicated that she would release at least the agreement’s first year value, but later said she needed to ask Alkeme whether it would agree to disclose the figure. Alkeme did not directly respond to the request for contract details.

ASE’s structure allows the athletic department to negotiate sponsorships in a setting that resembles a private business more than a traditional university office. The organization was modeled largely on a similar entity at Clemson, with assistance from South Carolina attorney Clay Grayson. Kentucky and Louisville have also created comparable arrangements. The approach replaces Arizona’s previous relationship with Learfield, a third party that managed multimedia rights and sponsorships before ASE was established.

Supporters of the model say it gives universities greater control at a time when college athletics is changing rapidly. Instead of receiving a fixed payment from an outside company while that company manages the costs and keeps the additional revenue, Arizona takes on more responsibility and risk while retaining more of the potential upside. ASE board member Kyle Sherman said the changing advertising market, expanded NIL activity and new business opportunities give schools a reason to consider managing sponsorships themselves. The model also allows sponsorship income to be connected more directly to athletes.

ASE general manager Brian Rooney reported that the organization booked $9.3 million in revenue during 2024 to 25 and $10.5 million during 2025 to 26. It projects approximately $18 million in 2026 to 27, when the Casino Del Sol and Alkeme agreements will be active for full years. Those figures suggest that the sponsorship arm could produce more for Arizona than a conventional third party might have generated, although the university must absorb the operating costs and financial risks itself.

A significant portion of the debate concerns public accountability. Arizona Sports Enterprises is a nonprofit affiliate rather than a university department, and the Arizona Board of Regents says such independent affiliates are not public bodies under its policy. The Regents said universities commonly use affiliated nonprofits for fundraising, research, athletics and other institutional purposes, while the board oversees the university’s relationship with those organizations through policy.

Grayson, who helped create ASE, argues that a nonprofit that receives no state support should not be covered by public records requirements. He said the purpose of such laws is to track public spending and prevent waste, fraud or abuse. In his view, an organization that pays its own expenses and does not receive grants, free facilities or other financial support from the state should be able to keep its commercial agreements private. He also contends that revealing detailed sponsorship structures could give competing schools an advantage.

Critics see the arrangement differently. Sportico investigative reporter Daniel Libit said similar entities are increasingly taking over athletic department business while making records harder to obtain. He has sued the universities of Colorado and New Mexico over sponsorship contracts. Boise State law professor Sam Ehrlich said routing agreements through multimedia rights organizations may violate the spirit of public records laws, even if state statutes and court precedents make it uncertain whether the practice violates the law itself. Arizona officials have not explained whether the full ASE contracts will ever be released, leaving Tucson taxpayers, fans and athletes with only partial information about deals built around public university facilities.