PDA

View Full Version : Where do you draw the line on corporate sponsorship?


HomeFish
10-08-2013, 08:11 PM
My sense is that WSI is a bit more conservative on baseball traditionalism than most other fansites. But I know we have a few radicals out there. This might be a fun little exercise to do in the offseason.

I'll list some potential corporate sponsorship ideas, and label them A through whatever. Some of these are actually happening in baseball right now, some are happening in other sports, and some of them I just plain made up. Tell me what's the highest letter you're comfortable with and why.

A: Advertising signs at stadiums

B: Purchase of stadium naming rights

C: One corporate logo on the uniform

D: Multiple corporate logos on the uniform (soccer-style)

E: Many corporate logos on the uniform (auto racing-style)

G: Player names on jerseys are partially replaced by corporate names. For example, Comcast sponsors the White Sox to promote its triple play package of Cable, Internet, and Phone. Each game, three White Sox players do not have their name on the back of their jerseys. These are players being honored for something they did last game: a player who made a good offensive play wears "INTERNET" on the back of their jersey, because they connected on that pitch. A player who made a good defensive play wears "CABLE" on the back of their jersey. And a player who came in out of the bullpen and pitched well wears "PHONE".

H: Sponsors change something major about the ballpark tradition. E.g., AT&T sponsors the White Sox, and during the 7th Inning Stretch "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" is replaced by Gene Honda's voice encouraging everyone in the stadium to take out their cell phone, call their mom, and tell her where they currently are.

I: Corporate name added to the team name, such as "Chicago White Sox Presented by BankOne"

J: Corporate name replaces city name. E.g., "Nippon Ham White Sox"

K: Corporate name replaces team name. E.g., "US Cellular Cellphones"

amsteel
10-08-2013, 08:13 PM
As long as there's 4 bases and nine players, it's all good.

kittle42
10-08-2013, 08:35 PM
As long as there's 4 bases and nine players, it's all good.

Amen. I don't care if the 5th pitch and the 5th inning and the 5th hitter are brought to you by Fifth Third Bank. All sports are moving in this direction, and they will continue to. Look at Japanese baseball and soccer, well, anywhere. People used to bitch about the naming rights. Now very, very few care. All change is met that way.

DSpivack
10-08-2013, 10:33 PM
How about General Manager Rick Hahn as presented by [corporate sponsor]?

It might not be so far-fetched...

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20131004/BLOGS04/131009853/northwestern-sells-naming-rights-to-athletic-directors-job?r=5134C4699801G6O

MUsoxfan
10-08-2013, 10:39 PM
I draw the line at corporate logos on uniforms

Brian26
10-08-2013, 10:51 PM
I draw the line at corporate logos on uniforms

That's where I'm at. I'm a uniform nutjob as most people here know. I don't have a problem with soccer clubs or Japanese teams with ads on their jerseys or equipment, as that is sort of already engrained in those sports cultures. Likewise, in baseball, advertising on the outfield walls dates back to the early 20th century, and the elimination of those ads was an abborration in the 70s and 80s afterall. Baseball has never had advertising on their jerseys, and I would hope that would remain. I don't count the Majestic logo on the sleeve or the Russell Athletic logo on the batting gloves or the Rawlings logo.

Great question though. I would prefer the radio broadcasts were scaled back in terms of advertising because I find the radio guys are so intent on trying to fit all of the commercial reads in that they lose some of the genuineness of the call.

MUsoxfan
10-08-2013, 11:00 PM
I'm fine with soccer teams having all the ads they'd like on their uniforms as I'm not a soccer fan. If MLB or NHL start putting ads on their uniforms, I'd likely not watch as much as I do now. I'm already souring on the NFL and it won't be long before the CDW Bears are playing on the BMO Harris turf at Soldier Field.

Brian26
10-08-2013, 11:03 PM
I'm fine with soccer teams having all the ads they'd like on their uniforms as I'm not a soccer fan. If MLB or NHL start putting ads on their uniforms, I'd likely not watch as much as I do now. I'm already souring on the NFL and it won't be long before the CDW Bears are playing on the BMO Harris turf at Soldier Field.

The NFL uni change wouldn't bother me. Most of the uniforms have been updated so substantially over the past few years that they hardly even resemble what the guys were wearing in the late 80s, let alone 50 years ago.

WhiteSox5187
10-08-2013, 11:15 PM
I'm fine with soccer teams having all the ads they'd like on their uniforms as I'm not a soccer fan. If MLB or NHL start putting ads on their uniforms, I'd likely not watch as much as I do now. I'm already souring on the NFL and it won't be long before the CDW Bears are playing on the BMO Harris turf at Soldier Field.

One of the reasons that soccer teams have ads on their jersey is because there is no time to break for commercials during broadcasts. American sport teams do not have that problem.

kittle42
10-09-2013, 09:42 AM
That's where I'm at. I'm a uniform nutjob as most people here know. I don't have a problem with soccer clubs or Japanese teams with ads on their jerseys or equipment, as that is sort of already engrained in those sports cultures. Likewise, in baseball, advertising on the outfield walls dates back to the early 20th century, and the elimination of those ads was an abborration in the 70s and 80s afterall. Baseball has never had advertising on their jerseys, and I would hope that would remain. I don't count the Majestic logo on the sleeve or the Russell Athletic logo on the batting gloves or the Rawlings logo.

Great question though. I would prefer the radio broadcasts were scaled back in terms of advertising because I find the radio guys are so intent on trying to fit all of the commercial reads in that they lose some of the genuineness of the call.

At one time, soccer teams and Japanese baseball teams "never" had sponsorship on their jerseys, either. No one is going to leave baseball fandom, except for a few ridiculous folks, over it. Like all change, people will quickly get used to it.

I mean, where do we draw the line? We don't have much say, unless we honestly won't support a whole sport because of the degree of sponsorship.

kittle42
10-09-2013, 09:44 AM
I'm fine with soccer teams having all the ads they'd like on their uniforms as I'm not a soccer fan. If MLB or NHL start putting ads on their uniforms, I'd likely not watch as much as I do now.

But that makes little sense. Whether you are a fan of the sport is irrelevant to the question, really. I mean, why should it be OK for soccer or the NBA (which you did not mention), but not baseball or football? Seems like an odd position to take. "Well, because I LIKE those sports!"

roylestillman
10-09-2013, 10:11 AM
I draw the line at corporate logos on uniforms

This is about where I draw the line. You're missing two other opportunities, I think, that I'm also not opposed to within reason. First is corporate logos on the field. Second are those virtual ads that only show up on TV (ads on the ivy at Wrigley or against the screen at the Cell (might actually block out the M&M guy)))

doublem23
10-09-2013, 10:18 AM
That's where I'm at. I'm a uniform nutjob as most people here know. I don't have a problem with soccer clubs or Japanese teams with ads on their jerseys or equipment, as that is sort of already engrained in those sports cultures. Likewise, in baseball, advertising on the outfield walls dates back to the early 20th century, and the elimination of those ads was an abborration in the 70s and 80s afterall. Baseball has never had advertising on their jerseys, and I would hope that would remain. I don't count the Majestic logo on the sleeve or the Russell Athletic logo on the batting gloves or the Rawlings logo.

Great question though. I would prefer the radio broadcasts were scaled back in terms of advertising because I find the radio guys are so intent on trying to fit all of the commercial reads in that they lose some of the genuineness of the call.

This basically mirrors my position, as well

Railsplitter
10-09-2013, 09:47 PM
Baseball unis already have the manufacturer's logo visible, usually on one of the sleeves.

ChicagoG19
10-09-2013, 09:52 PM
I think I would be okay with it as long as advertising is not prominent on the uniforms. I still enjoy buying jerseys from time to time and it would really irk me if they charged a couple of hundred dollars for a jersey and it had a comcast logo across the chest ala soccer jerseys.

thomas35forever
10-09-2013, 10:13 PM
The Wolves used to have a logo on their jersey every season. It's been a few years though. That said, I don't support it beyond the manufacturers logo. As long as sponsors are nothing more than background drivel, they're fine. Anything to disrupt the purity of the action though, I won't support.

amsteel
10-09-2013, 10:35 PM
Anything to disrupt the purity of the action though, I won't support.

How would you define that?

kittle42
10-10-2013, 12:38 AM
How would you define that?

I think it would be a gigantic Toyota logo through which a pitcher has to throw the first pitch to each batter.

"Purity." Give me a break.

SoxFanCPA
10-10-2013, 06:23 AM
I'm fine with soccer teams having all the ads they'd like on their uniforms as I'm not a soccer fan. If MLB or NHL start putting ads on their uniforms, I'd likely not watch as much as I do now. I'm already souring on the NFL and it won't be long before the CDW Bears are playing on the BMO Harris turf at Soldier Field.

:rolleyes: Doubt it.

kittle42
10-10-2013, 09:25 AM
:rolleyes: Doubt it.

Seriously, seriously doubt it - but there probably are some foolish people out there who still won't go to a corporate-named ballpark.

TheVulture
10-14-2013, 12:24 PM
This is what the ice the Ft Wayne Komets play on looks like these days. Sorry, I'm not having it. I'm not going to pay to have corporate logos burned into my memory banks for two and half hours straight.
http://image1.stadiumjourney.com/images/stadiums/888_Allen_County_War_Memorial_Coliseum_Interior

kittle42
10-14-2013, 12:54 PM
I feel like eating fresh.

Steelrod
10-14-2013, 03:35 PM
I always thought that the on deck circle and the dugout were perfect for ads. History so far has proved me half correct.

amsteel
10-14-2013, 05:51 PM
I'm not going to pay to have corporate logos burned into my memory banks for two and half hours straight.


But the ads on the backstop, in between innings and pitching changes, on the outfield wall, read by announcers for instant replays, pitching changes, doubles, on the score bug, and all the others are tolerable during Sox games?

Brian26
10-14-2013, 05:54 PM
But the ads on the backstop, in between innings and pitching changes, on the outfield wall, read by announcers for instant replays, pitching changes, doubles, on the score bug, and all the others are tolerable during Sox games?

I would say the difference here is that the ads on the backstop and outfield walls in baseball would be the equivalent of the ads on the boards around a typical hockey rink. The ads on the hockey ice would be the equivalent of painting ads all over the outfield grass.

That hockey rink pic is crazy. I'm not sure how anyone could keep sane trying to follow the puck.

Brian26
10-14-2013, 05:56 PM
The Wolves used to have a logo on their jersey every season. It's been a few years though. That said, I don't support it beyond the manufacturers logo. As long as sponsors are nothing more than background drivel, they're fine. Anything to disrupt the purity of the action though, I won't support.

Didn't the Hawks have a Giordano's logo on their practice jerseys for a couple of years? I thought it looked tacky, but at least it wasn't worn in a real game.

dickallen15
10-14-2013, 06:37 PM
One place i can't believe hasn't been used for advertising is the back of the mound. Many teams put their team logo on there, but I would imagine it would be pretty lucrative to have an advertisers logo on TV every pitch of the game. Maybe the league won't allow it.

Railsplitter
10-15-2013, 08:04 AM
This is what the ice the Ft Wayne Komets play on looks like these days. Sorry, I'm not having it. I'm not going to pay to have corporate logos burned into my memory banks for two and half hours straight.
http://image1.stadiumjourney.com/images/stadiums/888_Allen_County_War_Memorial_Coliseum_Interior

Are Wendy's and Subway aware the bought ad space on the same rink?

doublem23
10-15-2013, 09:21 AM
Are Wendy's and Subway aware the bought ad space on the same rink?

They don't really compete for the same customers, do they? Wendy's is fighting against McDonald's and Burger King, whereas Subway is in an eternal market fight with just eating out of a dumpster.

Irishsox1
10-15-2013, 10:02 AM
Are those people that walk around with Monster energy drink hats, t-shirts and stickers on their car being paid to advertise? Because who in their right mind would walk around in that crap without being paid?

If someone wants me to walk around wearing Pepsi hats, t-shirts and Pepsi stickers on my car, I will gladly do it for the small amount $400 a month.

And from here out my handle is Pepsisox1

Pepsi, Pepsi, Pepsi

TheVulture
10-17-2013, 01:22 PM
That hockey rink pic is crazy. I'm not sure how anyone could keep sane trying to follow the puck.

Apparently averaging 8,000 attendance per game isn't enough to fund a minor league hockey team these days.