I just think one large symbol, on the chest of the players, done well, could really help every team - $$$ wise.
BMO could sponsor the Argos and their double blue.
TD could sponsor the SRR and their green jerseys.
Tim Hortons would look great on the Black, Silver and Gold of the Ticats.
It would be easy revenue and people would get use to it.
Depends on the size. As I keep saying, they need to work with the game not just for the money. If it was kept to no bigger than the area currently used for the numbers that might not be too obtrusive yet big enough to satisfy advertisers.
Sydney Swans of the AFL (Aussie Rules). All teams have adverts in the same spot and when the accept the trophy after winning the Grand Final the winning captain, in his many thank yous always includes the team sponsor. They can work on jerseys.
I'd love to see what your work clothes look like. :?
As far as Uni sponsorship, the shoulder patches are where it should stay. They stand out and are viewable enough to be worth a company to buy. This is Football, numbers on the chest and back on the uniforms. That's how it's done, it's why so many signature jersey's have been flops in my eyes this year.
Keep also in mind, soccer doesn't have commercial breaks like football and FIFA abjectly refuses to allow logos on the field from my understanding. The full jersey sponsorship is MUCH more important in that regard as a result.
As far as the Grey Cup. I'm fine with "Presented By" but you DO NOT rename the Grey Cup, just like you DO NOT rename the Stanley Cup or the Vince Lombardi Trophy.
As far as the Grey Cup. I'm fine with "Presented By" but you DO NOT rename the Grey Cup, just like you DO NOT rename the Stanley Cup or the Vince Lombardi Trophy.
[/quote]
I am in full agreement with you!
I've seen a lot of ridiculous things on this board, this may be a new low. If anything, all advertising should be removed from the jerseys to make them look more professional.
Here come the "purists". :roll:
Okay, if you think "all advertising should be removed from the jerseys to make them look more professional", both of you should pool your money, buy the Argos/Lions and remove all advertising. We'll see how fast that gets done.
The "purist" sure love to talk big when it's someone else's money. :roll:
I don't ever want to see adverts on the jersey, but ticket sales and TV revenue alone are not going to keep the league afloat. Compromises have to be made sometimes. I remember when hockey was played on white ice with clean white boards. I remember the uproar when advertising started to fill those spaces, especially on the ice. Now it's barely noticed.
The choice isn't whether or not to advertise, but whether to let the money people do what they want unchallenged or become part of the process to set rules and guidelines as they do in other sports. If you bury your head in the sand the CFL will look like this one day;
http://blog.drstankovich.com/files/2014/03/ads-on-uniforms-82811960956.jpeg
I've seen a lot of ridiculous things on this board, this may be a new low. If anything, all advertising should be removed from the jerseys to make them look more professional.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Here come the "purists". :roll:
Okay, if you think "all advertising should be removed from the jerseys to make them look more professional", both of you should pool your money, buy the Argos/Lions and remove all advertising. We'll see how fast that gets done.
The "purist" sure love to talk big when it's someone else's money. :roll:
[/quote]
As a "purist", I would let the teams fold before I let the players become walking billboards.
How about, when they develop the technology, we allow the uniforms to have scrolling neon signs with not just a corporate logo but a corporate message?
Again, when the technology is developed, why not embed a durable, flexible video screen into the jersey which plays several corporate commercials instead of just a corporate logo?
Where do you stop?
Did you see the photo of that Finnish league hockey game? You can barely make out the players' numbers on the jersey.
Can you figure out the team logos?
Yes, you say one corporate logo.
But as dcmoses points out, we got used to advertising on the field/ice/boards - because it was forced on us. What makes you think that more advertising won't be forced on us so that the jersey is eventually covered, under the assumption that we'll get used to that?
Here's something to consider: if revenues are the be all/end all here, why don't the teams take a step backwards and remove the players' names from the jerseys? Then everyone at the stadium will have to buy a program to tell the players apart. Increased revenue! Decreased fan experience at the game in my opinion, but increased revenue!
Oh, and more room on the jersey for advertising.
Win/win!
Oh, and don't rename the Grey Cup? Totally agree.
But how about the BMO Toronto Argonauts, the TD Saskatchewan Roughriders, the Petro-Canada Calgary Stampeders, the Royal Bank Winnipeg Blue Bombers?
A slippery slope.
Sure, increase revenues while losing your team's identity, so that professional athletes (not CFL mind you) can earn $10-20mm PER SEASON?
No thanks.
There are limits for me.
If the CFL does not have enough support to operate without selling out every square inch of a jersey, then let it fold I say.
Sad if it came to that, but for me, there are limits.
There. I have not spent anyone's money.
There seems to be a faulty assumption that there ARE sponsors willing and able to pay substantial bucks for jersey space, field space, name on the game/trophy space. I'd suggest the problem is not where sponsors should or should not put their logos but a lack of sponsors even suggesting to do so for an amount that would justify the intrusion.
If the CFL has so little interest from fans that it is in danger of folding then there won't be enough jersey space to save a single team for the chump-change such sponsorship would generate.
Class cart-before-horse discussion.
That attitude is no better than the purists who refuse any change at all. You think someone pulled this idea out of their....? This has already been discussed by the big 4 North American leagues. If you think the CFL is on sound financial ground you are deluded. If you think the league will not listen to any idea that puts money in their pockets and turns that red ink black you're ignoring the fact that the CFL is a business.
To call this thread a cart-before-the-horse discussion is like putting the cart in the yard and going back inside hoping a horse will happen by and hook himself up to the cart. :roll:
(* I edited your post from 331 words to less than 25. Quality of the post unaffected. *)
Like most “purists” that’s a LOT of talk. I’m not going to spend my time reading that endless post.
Like most non “purists”, I am more concerned about solutions than waxing rhapsodic about how things should be in a world where “money doesn’t matter” and how the CFL should be like it was back in the 50’s/60’s/70’s.
Untrue. The TFC receives $4M/yr from BMO for their jersey advertisement and their TV ratings are at best one fifth of ours, and at worst one twentieth.
Amen.
Ah, I now understand.
You suffer from ADD.
In future, I will keep my posts to one or two lines and then make several posts in succession so you can absorb my valid points at your slower pace.
I'll start by summarizing your view:
My opinion good, dissenters' opinions bad.
I'll wait for you to understand that Einstein.
BTW, I edited your multi-quote post to reduce the number of words so that you don't get confused.
Finally we agree on something.
We are waiting for you in the "CFL Purist - A Dirty Word" thread. Your opinion should fit right in. Just keep it short please.
There's nothing I could add to that thread that hasn't already been said.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:Fair enough. Thank you for keeping it short - only 12 lol's.
Now that was funny.
Apparently it's some sort of slag to call me a "purist". Possibly the lamest put-down I've heard.
I wonder how the league survived for a decade after decade without ads on the jerseys, that can't be possible, can it? My argument is that ads on jerseys look bush, the younger generation recognizes this and it's one of those contributing factors to them writing off the CFL in comparison to the NFL, actually hurting the league's bottom line. Southern Ontario being a prime example of a lost generation. The reality is they could easily turf the ads. Do you think the western conference teams are dependent on ads on jerseys? Of course they're not. Try to respond without your little lame taunt if you can.
First, considering the league almost went under in the 90's and so many teams have filed for bankruptcy and/or folded over the years, your point is moot. There were far fewer ads back then.
Second, the younger generation turned off the CFL long ago and it had nothing to do with ads. To use ads as an excuse is naïve, silly and short sighted - or is that too much of a "taunt"?
Last, at the risk of being "lame", your kind of thinking probably would have rejected the idea of accepting money from the NFL back in the 90's - and, if they had taken the "CFL Purist" approach back then, we wouldn't have a CFL today.