- 02/14/2012, 09:48AM ET
Mr. Jolly said 02/14, 09:48 AM
I'm surprised this hasn't happened yet and with all the suggested figures that have been offered by advertisers, it's only a matter of time.
I say "yes".
You can split this situation into 3 groups w/ a financial stake.
The NBA lockout pointed to $ issues that several teams were struggling with and bringing in more $ can only help this problem. Cash disparity between teams is already in place, but any way that smaller market teams can find additional income should be viewed as a win.
The soccer leagues in Europe have proven that it's realistic for players to hold their own endorsements, along with the teams/leagues holding theirs. Coke and Nike aren't going to be the targets in this new agenda. Instead, this will open paths to new advertisers and only add to a pot that the players get their cut of. The recent lockouts have taught us that the players care about the value of their revenue split.
With the Internet & recording devices, any event truly watched "live" holds more value everyday on TV. It's why the $ in TV revenue has skyrocketed. Jerserys are just an extension of ads that already cover the stadiums & broadcasts
Mondo Jay said 02/15, 01:37 AM
Enough is enough!
The "big 4" is already drenched in corporate sponsorship as prices continue to sky-rocket for the average fan.
You can't look around without seeing scores of LED billboards everywhere or hearing ear-splitting audio sponsors selling you everything from Coke to Viagra and just about everything in-between. Hell, you can't watch a football game anymore without being subjected to an endless display or mind-numbing (not the good kind of "numb") commercials. The names of the venues themselves constantly change from corporation to corporation. Its hard to keep track of what the **** the stadium is called that houses your favorite team from year to year!
A line must be drawn somewhere!
Do we really want to see a bunch of football players with a shatload of sponsor patches all over their bodies bashing into each other like some twisted, multicolored NASCAR demolition derby? (okay, wait... demolition derbies are bad ****... disregard that image)
It may be inevitable that corporate sponsors will proliferate like a virus all over the storied and treasured uniforms of our favorite athletes.
Should it happen?
I say HELL NO!!
Mr. Jolly said 02/16, 12:52 AM
"Should" is why it's "yes".
These are businesses. Their goal is to maximize profit from their product. Cost/benefit is a basic tool used to evaluate the best ways to do that. The benefit is the 100s of millions on the table. The cost is very low. Everybody w/ a financial stake stand to make $, in trade for what is no more than a cosmetic issue.
A logo on a jersey will not affect how the athlete plays or change how the game is played. There is no cost to the product in of itself. The cost is in the consumers' minds.
There will be initial irritation to the fans, but not 1 w/ value that $ can be attached to. Fans won't stop watching b/c of this. Fans don't follow sports b/c of uniform purity. If so, new versions of uniforms would bring more action.
If the NHL chooses to say no, while others say yes, this won't bring more fans to the NHL. Soccer fans didn???t rush over to follow another sport b/c they chose to stay pure to the jersey.
If you were offered ???X??? amount of $ to wear a logo on your shirt every day, would emotion stop you? No. A rational person would always take the $. It would be foolish to do otherwise. It's the same for the Big 4 and why they should say yes.
Mondo Jay said 02/16, 05:25 PM
Although I understand that professional sports teams are businesses, I think team sports are different than a standard business due to the relationship between the teams and the fans.
Sports is unique on the consumer landscape. The individual players come and go, but fans still keep rooting for those colors, the logo and uniform, even if the quality of the team goes up or down. Regular consumer items don't demand the kind of loyalty that sports teams do.
Sports foster a very special kind of brand loyalty. Let's not tarnish that with even more corporate greed and massive advertising. Do fans matter at all or is it all about profit?
Take the Yankees for instance. As relentlessly revenue driven as the Yankees are, they are very sensitive to the value of their team brand than most franchises are. The NYY uniforms haven't changed in decades. The NYY never had any interest in signing a naming rights deal for their stadium. The Yankees understand that no corporate alliance could be more valuable than the value they've already built up in the words "New York Yankees."
Death, (like advertising) is inevitable too, but I am not ready to embrace that yet either.
Mr. Jolly said 02/17, 01:44 PM
I'm a fan and I don't like it, but that's easy for me to say, because I have no stake in it. I'll continue to watch/support the Big 4, regardless, and I'm not alone.
Ever been at the Blackjack table and up a few hundred, only to keep playing and lose it? You can convince yourself you only lost what you started with, but that's an illusion. The hundreds were yours the moment you won it.
Essentially, the NFL has been offered $230 million to do this and by choosing "no", they're spending $230 million to uphold tradition. That's a lot of money that could go a long way in helping settle labor issues.
That kind of money can also go to make the NHL more attractive to networks. I think we can all agree that the NHL could use a better TV deal in the states.
Endorsements aren't always commercial products. UNICEF has used this angle to advertise in soccer before and while I'm not silly enough to think this would be constant, it's possible.
The Yankees are hardly the example of an "average" franchise. Their market situation allows them more leverage to embrace that mentality.
Death is inevitable. Watching sports is not, but you'll do so, even with jersey endorsements.
Mondo Jay said 02/17, 03:43 PM
In this often soul-less world, sports can epitomize what is great about humanity. Passionate fans root for players that are engaged in the sublime pursuit of excellence through competition. Yes, "professional" teams are business entities, but they're also civic entities that's why fans are so crazy about them! They carry the names of our cities and states, and are also a source of local pride or shame (sorry Raider fans).
We live and die with our teams. Civic institutions should not be for sale.
I realize that professional sports has always been about business, but I don't think we can just reduce the worth of human athletic endeavor to simple dollars and cents. The things we value the most in life (love, family, community, art, music...) transcend the mighty dollar and is the very reason we care about those things so much. Sport straddles that line between economics and passion. I embrace the passionate side of that divide.
There's a difference between capitalism and greed.... there is also a difference between promoting your product and corrupting it. IMO uniform advertising falls on the wrong side of that line.
Great TD Mr. Jolly
|2||7#bag _ Com||1098||333||88||75.2%|
|5||Dyhard is a certified stoner||54||25||3||67.7%|
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia