Armstrong Still Falling From Grace

Lance Armstrong is was one of the most inspiring and well-known athletes of our time. He won seven Tour De France titles, fought and won a battle against testicular cancer and created the Lance Armstrong Livestrong Foundation to raise money for cancer research. Armstrong was proudly endorsed by Nike, Anheuser-Busch, Honey Stinger and more.

His fan base was in the millions. Now, it seems there is no love to be found for this man after he was banned for life from cycling and stripped of his seven Tour De France wins for illegal doping. Armstrong has fought claims against him for years for doping, but there was never sufficient evidence. The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency finally revealed the truth in early October, and Armstrong has been falling from grace ever since.  A total of 26 people, 11 of his own former teammates, accused him of doping in the 200 page document.

Nike dropped him, Anheuser-Busch cut ties, as well as Honey Stinger, a Colorado company marketing energy food. Armstrong had to step down as chairman from his own cancer research foundation, but could still be involved with Livestrong events.

The foundation has announced that it will officially drop Lance Armstrong’s name from the title to add a little more salt to his fraudulent wounds.

From what I hear, a leopard’s spots never change. A cheater is a cheater. His endorsers really had no choice but to drop Armstrong. What does it say to customers if he was still sponsored by Nike? It is not all right to lie to every one for more than ten years, especially when you are an influential public figure who a ton of people admire.

It would be wrong to say Armstrong has done nothing for cancer research and discredit his efforts in that aspect. He did fight and win a battle with cancer. He did create a foundation that has generated millions of dollars toward cancer research. But the millions of dollars he’s raised for the foundation came from his false image.

Is Livestrong successful because of Lance Armstrong? His name certainly made the brand more popular and easy to market. Will the foundation crumble without its shamed creator?

The livestrong brand and foundation is still living strong through this scandal. Donations are actually up 15 percent since the USADA released its evidence against Armstrong.

Was it necessary to remove his name from his own foundation?

Please comment to sound off.

Advertisements

9 comments

  1. Lori Remaker

    I think it’s a tough call to say if they should have removed his name from the foundation he started himself. He hasn’t made the best choices, and I think his sponsors definitely did he right thing by dropping him. Sponsors have to keep a positive image in the public’s eye, and if they choose to keep people, like Lance Armstrong or even Tiger Woods, who make bad choices that the public doesn’t deem “appropriate,” then they could lose a lot of credibility and respect. I’m torn whether or not his name should be removed from his foundation, Livestrong, though. Lance Armstrong DID fight cancer and win, and he DID start the organization to raise awareness, but I do agree that he did this with a false image people had of him. What I’m mostly leaning towards, though, is that his name shouldn’t be removed from the Livestrong foundation. I think the positives he’s done with this foundation and the awareness he’s created far outweighs the doping charges he’s been faced with.

    • Courtney Racz

      I agree that Lance Armstrong’s name should not be pulled from the Livestrong foundation. When you think of Livestrong, your mind automatically thinks of Lance; tearing the two apart wouldn’t be beneficial to the foundation. Lance had made some serious mistakes, but that has nothing to do with the organization; it’s about fighting cancer, not drugs. His reputation may be tarnished, but I think his motives in with the foundation still remain relatively good and honest.

  2. Nicole Roch

    I believe that Lance Armstrong should still be part of the Livestrong foundation. By him taking the drugs or dope had to do with cycling, not him beating the cancer. The Livestrong foundation is to raise awareness about cancer not to raise awareness about how Lance made a mistake during his cycling career. If it was not for Lance there would never be a Livestrong foundation to help many people. Because of this I believe that Lance should not be pulled from the foundation.

  3. Brighid Quinn

    I can totally see why his sponsors would drop him. If they didn’t drop him, like you said, they would be virtually sponsoring a cheater. However, I disagree that Lance Armstrong should have been dropped from his OWN organization. Regardless from what he has done in his personal life with the doping, he has raised a lot of awareness and money for cancer research. It is something that he started and it has truly made an impact within cancer research. The cheating was something separate from the organization, there for I think his name still should be involved within the LiveStrong brand. If he didn’t start the LiveStrong movement, there would have big a significant difference in raising awareness. The good he did for people should trump the personal mistake he did to himself.

  4. Katie Reiser

    Lance Armstrong was someone many people looked up to not only for his athletic ability, but also for his fight against cancer. By him doping, I believe he should lose all respect as an athlete because of his cheating. I agree that all of the sponsors should have dropped him and especially Nike. Nike had wristbands and athletic apparel that represented not only his foundation, but I believe it also represented Lance and his athletic ability. As an athlete myself, I always wore a livestrong wristband. I no longer will. I believe that it’s a great thing to help with his foundation, but I feel that wearing the wristband would represent not only the foundation, but also Lance Armstrong cheating and showing a sign that I support cheating in athletics. I believe that they should keep him representing the foundation that he began. He still did overcome cancer and is a survivor, but I believe there should maybe be a name change to the foundation. I feel the foundation needs a clean slate. The livestrong name will always be recognized as Lance Armstrong, an athletic figure who survived cancer. Its hard to view him as a true athlete when he doped. The name change will separate this and focus on the fact that Lance Armstrong is a survivor of cancer.

  5. Steven R. Pochedly

    Personally, I can see why his name was withdrawn from the title. The public had the wool pulled over their eyes by a man they perceived as utter motivation to go the extra mile in their own lives. With the latest results, I think people now view him as a false hope and a cunning con artist. However, I did not say that I agree with his name being pulled from the Livestrong label. This man, although deceiving the public should serve as the face of shame to athletes in all types of sports. However, he did nothing to smudge cancer research, in fact he’s provided extraordinary contribution to cancer research and, most importantly, cancer awareness. Personally, I can remember buying the Livestrong yellow wrist band. I honestly did not give a damn who Lance Armstrong was. In essence, I was buying it because I liked it, and as a perk, the proceeds went toward cancer research. I play real sports, not trying to be the best at exercising, to quote the wise actor Danny McBride as super-athlete Kenny Powers. My point is, he did a great deal to raise awareness of cancer and provide funds for research, even from people who did not know of his athletic feats. Yes, some people are going to inevitably hold grudges against the man for as long as he lives. But this isn’t about athletic brands like Nike, who, by the way, has some of the most unethical production standards the world will ever know inside their factories and do not actually care about morals. This is relevant only to the medical realm; its patrons, practitioners and patients. You can strip someone of their athletic accomplishments, but you literally cannot take away the money he’s raised for cancer research.

  6. Lauren Rankin

    From a PR standpoint, I can see why Lance Armstrong was dropped those organizations. As a person of authority, and as a brand, people expect Lance Armstrong (and Nike, Livestrong, etc.) to be truthful and transparent. So, it’s really no surprise that people are upset by these hidden discrepancies, just as it’s no surprise that these companies are quickly trying to fix the mess. At the same, and more so from a personal perspective, I think that the dishonor of Lance Armstrong is a little unjust. As you wrote, he’s helped raise millions of dollars toward cancer research, beat multiple versions of cancer himself, and as a professional athlete, he’s done a great job as a role model (obviously minus this recent doping scandal).

    It seems to me that fans are still by his side as well, because as you wrote, donations are up 15% since the USADA released its evidence. To me, that sounds like people are trying to show their support by proving Armstrong’s legacy as a charitable person.

  7. Akilah Porter

    I definitely believe that Livestrong took the appropriate measures by dropping Lance Armstrong, and his brand, from the foundation. Even though the purpose for Livestong’s existence it to promote cancer awareness and to help find a cure for the disease, the negative connection brings down its positive agenda, and the last thing a cancer foundation needs is for sponsors and advocates to drop due to a bad connection. They can’t afford to lose any funding for something so serious as find a cure for cancer, and even though Armstrong has lost his glory due to the drop, more people’s lives would be at risk, literally, if donations decrease. However, I think the foundation will really have to find a really good, new brand that people will be able to easily identify and want to support.

  8. Akilah Porter

    I definitely believe that Livestrong took the appropriate measures by dropping Lance Armstrong, and his brand, from the foundation. Even though the purpose for Livestong’s existence it to promote cancer awareness and to help find a cure for the disease, the negative connection brings down its positive agenda, and the last thing a cancer foundation needs is for sponsors and advocates to drop due to a bad connection. They can’t afford to lose any funding for something so serious as find a cure for cancer, and even though Armstrong has lost his glory due to the drop, more people’s lives would be at risk, literally, if donations decrease. However, I think the foundation will really have to find a really good, new brand that people will be able to easily identify and want to support.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s