Name of the game for University of Missouri is protecting its brand

The Edward Jones Dome. Sprint Center. Scott Trade Center. The Nextel Cup. The Buick Open. Wimbledon. Nike. Reebok. Coca-Cola. Budweiser.

Ohio State University. The University of Michigan. The University of Nebraska. Harvard University. The University of Texas. Kent State.

The University of Missouri.

How important is a name? Companies like those named in the first paragraph spend hundreds of thousands of dollars annually protecting their brands, their trademarks and their signatures. A name is a product. It is a sign of integrity. It is a sign of skill. It is a sign of dominance.

Every year, thousands of companies engage in legal matters to protect their brands. The brand is everything. The brand is the identity. The brand is the hallmark (excuse the pun).

For generations, the little university here in Columbia with more than a quarter million graduates was known as the University of Missouri. No one anticipated that there would ever be any question that the phrase “University of Missouri” would be identified with the flagship campus in Columbia. But that is no longer the case.

The name of the University of Missouri has actually been conveniently borrowed. The university’s parents, the Board of Curators, have borrowed the name. They have denied the little university in Columbia from using its name and have done so in a protocol document that is seldom discussed in public. The protocol document limits the use of the name “University of Missouri” and makes it so the little university in Columbia must use other monikers. This is a classic case of brand attrition. Let’s use an example.

The University of Missouri baseball team is in the Super Regionals, playing in California. On their jerseys is the name “Mizzou.” Coming from out of state, let me tell you the nam