This same discussion went on when a donor endowed an offensive coach's position and named it after Andrew Luck. Like it or not, the naming rights, whether it be for a coach's position, a display at a zoo, a building at a museum, etc. are a way of attracting major donations. The donor gets the right to name the position, building, etc. for whomever he/she chooses. Fairly often the name is that of the donor or maybe a family member and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with their distinction in a particular field. David Shaw is the Bradford Freeman Director of Football, but Bradford Freeman is a private equity guy, not a coach. And just what position did Roscoe Maples play back in 1904?
Maybe it would be better to require chairs or other endowed positions to be named after a distinguished person in the field, but it's just a misconception to think that's the way it works. And an anonymous donor naming the DC's position after Willie Shaw rather than himself is, in my opinion, to be commended, not criticized.
Maybe it would be better to require chairs or other endowed positions to be named after a distinguished person in the field, but it's just a misconception to think that's the way it works. And an anonymous donor naming the DC's position after Willie Shaw rather than himself is, in my opinion, to be commended, not criticized.