Will HBCUs Activate Another Revenue Stream With Stadium Naming Rights? By Brahma Media LLC

HBCU stadiums are more than concrete and bleachers. They are memory banks.

They hold first games, last games, marching bands, homecomings, legends, and generations of families who learned what pride looked like sitting on aluminum benches.

So when the question comes up—

Should HBCUs sell stadium naming rights?

It’s not a business question first, it's a cultural one. Why this question is surfacing now? College athletics has quietly shifted into a new era. Facilities are more expensive.

Technology expectations are higher. Recruiting is national. NIL has changed the economics. And HBCUs, long underfunded compared to their peers, are being asked to compete in the same marketplace with fewer built-in advantages.

Naming rights are attractive because they are:

Predictable revenue

Multi-year contracts

Flexible in use

Not dependent on ticket sales or donations

In plain terms: it’s one of the few revenue streams that doesn’t fluctuate with wins and losses.

The fear: selling history

The pushback is understandable.

Many HBCU stadiums are named after:

Founders

Civil rights leaders

Legendary coaches

Pillars of the institution

Changing those names can feel like erasing chapters from Black history.

And for alumni and communities, the stadium name isn’t branding.

It’s inheritance. That’s why the resistance is emotional, not just ideological.

The counterpoint: protecting the future is also protecting the legacy

Here’s the uncomfortable truth:

History is preserved by institutions that remain financially healthy.

If naming rights revenue:

Funds scholarships

Modernizes facilities

Improves athlete safety

Enhances academic support

Attracts better enrollment

Then the legacy is not being sold.

It’s being reinforced.

The real danger isn’t corporate logos.

The real danger is stagnation.

The compromise model: monetize without erasing. There is a model that respects both sides. Instead of: “Sponsor Stadium”

You get: “Sponsor Stadium at [Legend] Field” Or “Sponsor Fieldhouse at [Historic] Complex” In this structure:

Corporate money funds the future

Historic names remain on the field, the gates, the complex, or the facilities. Legacy stays visible, Revenue stays flowing, This isn’t selling the past. This is leasing the roof while keeping the foundation.

What a responsible HBCU deal should look like? If an HBCU does this right, the contract should guarantee: Dedicated funding for students (scholarships, academic programs)

Facility improvements beyond signage

Protection clauses for traditions and branding. Local business participation.

Community access and programming.

Transparency in how funds are used.

If the money disappears into general budgets, the criticism is fair.

If the money visibly improves student life, the narrative changes. The deeper question

isn’t really about stadiums! It's about this:

Who gets to decide what Black legacy is worth in a modern economy?

Alumni?

Administrators?

Students?

Communities?

Or the market itself?

Because the truth is, HBCUs already generate enormous cultural value.

They just haven’t always been paid for it.

Final Thought

Tradition should not be frozen in time.

It should be strong enough to evolve.

If naming rights are used to:

Strengthen institutions

Expand opportunity

Preserve culture

And secure generational stability

Then this isn’t selling out.

This is buying time for the next generation to build their own legacy.