My theory (and a lot of other people's) was the rule about not allowing jerseys to be tucked in is basically paving the way for advertising.
Homer said
Sep 18, 2014
Since it falls under HRR, it will have a trickle down effect on players' salaries. Instead of signing a Methot for ~$4.7 it will be for $5.25 and so on for other players. So money generated by this would get erode.
Ottawa would not be the only team making money with a sponsor on their jersey, big market teams would probably be able to command more money from a sponsor than Ottawa could and sign a Methot for $5.75M. So in the end and we're no further ahead than were we are now except for players making more money.
Kardinal said
Sep 18, 2014
We talked about this in s2e22, and my thought was that if it were to happen in the NHL it would be more along the lines of the EPL rather than NASCAR/Euro league play (ie/ walking billboards). ManU gets $179M for putting the advertiser logo in the middle of their players' chest ($100M from Nike, $79M from Chevrolet/AON), and while I'm not saying any NHL team would get close to that it would be another source of revenue that would fall under HRR.
Do I want to see it? No. Do I expect it to happen eventually? Yes.
tjlincoln said
Sep 18, 2014
If it's like the English Premier League I don't have a problem with it, if it means a team can resign a star like BobbyRyan or MarkMethot I really don't have a problem with it. All I care about is my team signing it's core players and winning games.
ChuckProuse said
Sep 17, 2014
I really don't want this in the NHL. It's bad enough in NASCAR. I don't want players being interviewed after winning the Stanley Cup saying "I'd like to thank Miller Lite, 3M, and Outback Steakhouse for all of their support".
Homer said
Sep 17, 2014
The NHL is saying no to advertising on NHL jerseys. They say they don't want to be the first of North American teams to do so. But if baseball, basketball or football do it, then things may change.
"The NHL, like other mainstream North American sports, to this point has resisted breaking with tradition, even though NHL jerseys already carry advertising since jersey maker Reebok's logo is so prominent"
Well since they are the manufacturer, of course their logo is on the jersey. It's no different for skates, gloves, helmets, face shields, sticks, etc... They all have manufacturer logos/names.
Lets say one day they do have advertising on jerseys. What happens if a team/league sponsored logo on a jersey conflicts with a player's own endorsement deal.
Would you buy a jersey at the same full price as today with multiple NHL/Team sponsored logos?
Would it be an option to buy one without the advertising?
My theory (and a lot of other people's) was the rule about not allowing jerseys to be tucked in is basically paving the way for advertising.
Since it falls under HRR, it will have a trickle down effect on players' salaries. Instead of signing a Methot for ~$4.7 it will be for $5.25 and so on for other players. So money generated by this would get erode.
Ottawa would not be the only team making money with a sponsor on their jersey, big market teams would probably be able to command more money from a sponsor than Ottawa could and sign a Methot for $5.75M. So in the end and we're no further ahead than were we are now except for players making more money.
We talked about this in s2e22, and my thought was that if it were to happen in the NHL it would be more along the lines of the EPL rather than NASCAR/Euro league play (ie/ walking billboards). ManU gets $179M for putting the advertiser logo in the middle of their players' chest ($100M from Nike, $79M from Chevrolet/AON), and while I'm not saying any NHL team would get close to that it would be another source of revenue that would fall under HRR.
Do I want to see it? No. Do I expect it to happen eventually? Yes.
If it's like the English Premier League I don't have a problem with it, if it means a team can resign a star like BobbyRyan or MarkMethot I really don't have a problem with it. All I care about is my team signing it's core players and winning games.
The NHL is saying no to advertising on NHL jerseys. They say they don't want to be the first of North American teams to do so. But if baseball, basketball or football do it, then things may change.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=461971
From the article
"The NHL, like other mainstream North American sports, to this point has resisted breaking with tradition, even though NHL jerseys already carry advertising since jersey maker Reebok's logo is so prominent"
Well since they are the manufacturer, of course their logo is on the jersey. It's no different for skates, gloves, helmets, face shields, sticks, etc... They all have manufacturer logos/names.
Lets say one day they do have advertising on jerseys. What happens if a team/league sponsored logo on a jersey conflicts with a player's own endorsement deal.
Would you buy a jersey at the same full price as today with multiple NHL/Team sponsored logos?
Would it be an option to buy one without the advertising?
Do you want to see this coming to the NHL?