is it time for ads on uniforms?

[Live in the Now]

It's just a matter of time. Anyone who won't watch the game (most important thing in the discussion) because of some ads needs to check themselves before they wreck themselves.

 

[Easton]

What do you think the point of the lockout was for?

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

What do you think the point of the lockout was for?

so BOS, CHI and NYR could make more money then they did under the old CBA. Why do you think Wirtz and Jacobs were the ring leaders for the lockout.

Not only do they pocket many many millions more than before, they can raid teams like OTT of its all star talent and not have to invest any money in their own development systems.

What, you thought the lockout was to save teams like OTT, TBY and VAN? lol, well i guess you fell for it hook line and sinker like the rest of the sheep.

 

[Butch 19]

Gots to love that cap right OTT? The very vehicle that was sold as saving OTT has cost them two superstars.

Wow - some sour grapes, huh?

Those 2 superstars could have stayed in OTT. Things don't go smoothly so it's the cap's fault? So w/o a cap those 2 players would have stayed in OTT for less money than was offered elsewhere? - please.

All teams operate under the SAME system... (no matter if you think it's a good system or needs to be tweaked a bit, that seems to be fair)

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Wow - some sour grapes, huh?

Those 2 superstars could have stayed in OTT. Things don't go smoothly so it's the cap's fault? So w/o a cap those 2 players would have stayed in OTT for less money than was offered elsewhere? - please.

All teams operate under the SAME system... (no matter if you think it's a good system or needs to be tweaked a bit, that seems to be fair)

they wouldnt have had the leverage of pending UFA status, at least in Havlats case. In Chara's case, who knows, OTT was prohibited from even making an offer.

why would it be sour grapes, i am no OTT fan.

dont so cliche, all teams operated under the same system before too. some teams used money to buy talent, some teams developed talent. now no one can develop talent, or at least not too much of it at one time. i prefer to see excellence rewarded and not teams like CHI and BOS who are vultures, stealing from the fans and from the good teams.

 

[HOF]

I'll puke if I ever see ads on Jerseys. It looks pathetic. I can't even look at those European league jerseys.

The players look like a bunch of clowns.

 

[HBK27]

Thank you!

I would assume that hockey fans would embrace an idea that would generate extra revenues for their favorite team, and therefore making gameplay better in other areas.

No, because fans would get nothing out of it except uglier jerseys.

Every team would be generating extra revenue, with the rich just getting richer (Toronto would surely generate more ad revenue than Nashville). No team really makes out much better in this - the rich/poor gap just widens, while high revenue teams can already afford to spend to the cap anyway.

No way the teams reduce ticket prices as a result of this new revenue and the cap just goes up slightly as a result.

So, let's recap:
Owners - win
Players - win
Fans - lose

Why should we be in favor of this?

 

[colonel_korn]

People seem to overreact whenever this is brought up because they picture the European league jerseys and just assume that NHL jerseys would end up looking the same. That's not necessarily the case though. Believe it or not it is possible to have discreet advertising on uniforms. One example is the CFL - I've never heard anyone comment about how the RONA patch absolutely ruins the uniforms or makes them want to stop watching...

http://www.canoe.ca/Argos/News/2005/09/08/LevingstonAllen364X450.jpg

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

....

So, let's recap:
Owners - win
Players - win
Fans - lose

Why should we be in favor of this?

the fans dont lose at all ... i would rather see the owners drain every area of revenue to maintain a strong business than resort to these artificial cap BS.

the more revenue, the better. tough beans if you cant afford tickets, you werent born with the right to attend hockey games. if the owners can get 10,000 per second and still fill the billing, they have every right too do it. just as they have every right to put advertising on the uniforms.

however, just as they should have no limits on how much revenue they generate, there shouldnt be a limit on how much a player can make. but alas, that battle has already been conceded.

 

[Roughneck]

Hmm.. If a team could make US$20m a year, I could see this happening very easily.

I'd be suprised if any team other than the Maple Leafs (or maybe the Habs) made even $1MUS a year from jersey advertising.

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

i see nothing wrong with it. if i owned the product, i would put advertising in as many places as i could. remember, the product is a means of distribution. the NHL is doing its investors, players and other parties a disservice by not capturing as many dollars as possible.

i think OTT fans (and CGY fans in two years) should be BEGGING for a stream of revenue. If the CAP was 15 million dollars higher, they could have kept their team together, but since its not, the good teams are being punished so that crap teams like CHI can benefit.

Gots to love that cap right OTT? The very vehicle that was sold as saving OTT has cost them two superstars.

Bring on the revenue and stop your whining about it (not you OP, but everyone else)

And what makes you think ott would have been able to keep chara and havlat without a cap? Ottawa would not be able to afford a team of stars cap or no cap. And chara is not a huge lost in my opinion and havlat wanted to play elsewhere. The cap bothers more fans in toronto, detroit, philadelphia then those in ottawa and calgary.

p.s And by the way ads on uniforms don't bother me one bit. I think it would look great.

 

[Easton]

so BOS, CHI and NYR could make more money then they did under the old CBA. Why do you think Wirtz and Jacobs were the ring leaders for the lockout.

Not only do they pocket many many millions more than before, they can raid teams like OTT of its all star talent and not have to invest any money in their own development systems.

What, you thought the lockout was to save teams like OTT, TBY and VAN? lol, well i guess you fell for it hook line and sinker like the rest of the sheep.

Uh no, I believed the purpose of the lockout was to generate revenue so we wouldn't have to go to such measures like throwing ads on uniforms.

 

[Schmautz]

No Way!

It's just a matter of time. Anyone who won't watch the game (most important thing in the discussion) because of some ads needs to check themselves before they wreck themselves.

While we are at it lets take the Ads of the Ice and the Boards.

 

[Saint Teemu]

I've got no real problem with ads on jerseys.

What I'm curious about is whether it would be more profitable to:

a) maintain the status quo - change the jerseys rarely, use premium materials, and charge $100-200 for them.

or

b) use cheaper materials, change up the jerseys every year (with whatever minor or major changes a team wants - outside of changing colours and the logo), and sell them for, say, $50.

And if you did go with option b) and charge less, would fans feel ripped off with jerseys that changed every year? Or would they look forward to the release of each year's new jersey?

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Uh no, I believed the purpose of the lockout was to generate revenue so we wouldn't have to go to such measures like throwing ads on uniforms.

lol lol lol lol

seriously? the lockout had NOTHING to do with revenue. Even I acknolowedge it was ALL about the owners putting CONTROLS on their costs.

Why shouldnt the owners make money in every single instance that they can. If some corporation wants to give the Red Wings 2 million dollars to put their logo's on their jerseys, the Red Wings have an obligation to their investors, players AND YES to their fans to consider it.

Period.

 

[Dartmouth 02]

If some corporation wants to give the Red Wings 2 million dollars to put their logo's on their jerseys, the Red Wings have an obligation to their investors, players AND YES to their fans to consider it.

Period.

I actually dont disagree with your stance, but maybe you can explain this. What obligation exactly? There are no shareholders in the Detroit Red Wings. Specifically what obligation to their players? Again, I agree with your viewpoint, but arent sure what you mean in your justification.

 

[Cawz]

And what makes you think ott would have been able to keep chara and havlat without a cap? Ottawa would not be able to afford a team of stars cap or no cap.

See what happens when you use common sense against a staunch PA supporter? You get no reply.

 

[Cawz]

dont so cliche, all teams operated under the same system before too. some teams used money to buy talent, some teams developed talent. now no one can develop talent, or at least not too much of it at one time. i prefer to see excellence rewarded and not teams like CHI and BOS who are vultures, stealing from the fans and from the good teams.

You still believe that all teams operated under the same system before? I thought these bunk arguments disappeared when the PA folded.

We will probably see ads on jerseys at some point, so all the drama queens that say they will stop watching better get ready to find a new sport. Hockey is a business, and advertising is a big part of business. Its deemed a necessary evil. Just look at the olympics now. That was supposed to be sacred and its polluted with advertising. It doesnt really take away from the quality though, does it?

 

[JRod1887]

Why would the NHL put ads on jerseys? They already have the entire perimeter of the ice to put ads on boards, and they could put ads in center ice as well. There are plenty of options to consider before we decide to ruin the appearance and, in some cases, tradition of NHL unis.

 

[Cawz]

Why would the NHL put ads on jerseys?

Because they can.

If you want to advertise, you put ads on the center of attention. Business-wise, its a no brainer. Tradition-wise, well, money trumps tradition, so I dont think you'll find too many players or owners that would give up revenue or salary becasue of tradition.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

I actually dont disagree with your stance, but maybe you can explain this. What obligation exactly? There are no shareholders in the Detroit Red Wings. Specifically what obligation to their players? Again, I agree with your viewpoint, but arent sure what you mean in your justification.

investors is a generic term, in the case of DET, it is one investor, Illitch.

He owes it to the players because as an owner he bent hte players over to accept a "partnership" where the players get 54% of revenues. Since the players themselves can not go out and commit the clubs to contracts with advertisers, the owners have an obligation to generate as much revenue as they can, as there part of the partnership. teh obligation to the fans is to generate as much revenue as they can, so they can afford to keep their teams together.

ok?

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

You still believe that all teams operated under the same system before? I thought these bunk arguments disappeared when the PA folded.

i should clarify in fairness ... you are right, there were a # of ways to build a succesful team, only one of them included money and frankly there are many cases where that didnt work (see PHI, TOR and NYR).

you could also develop talent and find a trip to the finals, in fact just about every year a team "that couldnt compete" made it to the finals.

but whatever, we cant change history. the players and owners have a cap and the fans will suffer (of course mostly in delight due to ignorance).

biggest winners in the cap? Bill Wirtz and Jeremy Jacobs .. w00t, so happy for the lockout!

 

[Cawz]

but whatever, we cant change history. the players and owners have a cap and the fans will suffer (of course mostly in delight due to ignorance).

How are we suffering?

The way the NHL is now is a million times better than it was. Its not perfect (thats an unobtainable utopian ideal anyways), but at least its not a joke like it was the last decade or so.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

How are we suffering?

The way the NHL is now is a million times better than it was. Its not perfect (thats an unobtainable utopian ideal anyways), but at least its not a joke like it was the last decade or so.

well, i guess we are both entitled to our opinions. i know my position isnt the popular one and I accept it.

i think the fans suffer because owners like Wirtz and Jacobs have legislated their rights to put more green in their pockets at the expense of teams like OTT.

in exchange for the cap, players can now get UFA as young as 25. fans will suffer when their favourite young player has to be dealt or leaves as UFA. in the old system, Havlat not only would not have demanded or comanded 6m, he would have had no leverage to get much more than 2.5, but under this new system, OTT had to trade him or lose him for nothing and because of liberal UFA rules, he has the leverage to get 6m per year. What did CHI do to earn the right to a player like Havlat? Nothing, no investment in scouting or development, just wait for a team like OTT who has a great scouting and development program to not be ALLOWED to keep Havlat.

ok ramble mode off ... i dont like the new system, its not a popular opinion, but so be it.

 

[JRod1887]

Because they can.

If you want to advertise, you put ads on the center of attention. Business-wise, its a no brainer. Tradition-wise, well, money trumps tradition, so I dont think you'll find too many players or owners that would give up revenue or salary becasue of tradition.

It's still unnecessary. Fans identify franchises by their uniforms and logos- why ruin that when there are so many other options? Ads already can be placed at center ice and along the boards. They are put in programs. They are placed throughout arenas. They appear on overheads. Corporations sponsor events between periods. Is that really not enough, especially when the NHL received revenue well above expectations? I believe ads on unis should be a last resort. But then again, I'm a fan with a somewhat biased opinion on this issue.