Thread: Senator criticizes National Guard sponsorship deals with NFL teams

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

I understand his point too, I just don't agree with it. I have a fairly good friend who's a marine corp vet, having served multiple tours. He was bent out of shape about it and I said the same thing to him. This is good marketing.

You don't agree that the NFL and its teams should honor and recognize the military and military vets for FREE, instead of getting paid by the military to recognize them??

Originally Posted by MNPatsFan

You don't agree that the NFL and its teams should honor and recognize the military and military vets for FREE, instead of getting paid by the military to recognize them??

When we see military recruitment commercials on tv, are those paid for too or are the tv stations just showing them for free out of the goodness of their hearts? It seems like the same sort of deal. You have to pay to secure those advertisement spots or they will find another entity to fill it.

Originally Posted by Bronco4ever

When we see military recruitment commercials on tv, are those paid for too or are the tv stations just showing them for free out of the goodness of their hearts? It seems like the same sort of deal. You have to pay to secure those advertisement spots or they will find another entity to fill it.

IMHO, tv commercials are different. I have been to a number of professional (and college) sporting events and have seen the NBA, MLB, NHL teams as well as the Patriots recognize servicemen and women and their families as well as local high school dance teams, cheer leading squads, etc. and I can almost guarantee you that the servicemen/women and their families and the high school squads didn't pay for that recognition or honor.

I guess I might need clarification as to what the military is paying for and receiving. If it is merely recognizing local servicemen and women for their service to our country, then I feel strongly that the NFL and the 14 named teams should not get paid for that!

Read my post. The military is paying for recruiting. You think recruiting is free?

Originally Posted by MNPatsFan

IMHO, tv commercials are different. I have been to a number of professional (and college) sporting events and have seen the NBA, MLB, NHL teams as well as the Patriots recognize servicemen and women and their families as well as local high school dance teams, cheer leading squads, etc. and I can almost guarantee you that the servicemen/women and their families and the high school squads didn't pay for that recognition or honor.

I guess I might need clarification as to what the military is paying for and receiving. If it is merely recognizing local servicemen and women for their service to our country, then I feel strongly that the NFL and the 14 named teams should not get paid for that!

I think of it as the government paying the team to use the stadium during that time for recruitment. You are possibly getting a future enlistment from someone out of the 70,000+ people in attendance. The government is contracting for a service or platform. It would be nice to honor the military without strings attached, but it sounds like the overarching goal here was to advertise the military.

Money well spent, IMO.

Now, if we could curtail the other trillions of dollars the government is spending...

This is highly insignificant.

Originally Posted by King87

If the NFL wouldn't do it for free, do you fault the military for the contracts, Buff?

Yes, I think it's deceptive and a waste of money. It's being portrayed as the team honoring a member of the community, but is in fact a paid advertisement... Plus, as a marketer, if the goal is recruiting then I question the effectiveness of the campaign. Do they really feel like they're getting any meaningful lift in enlistments because someone saw a halftime ceremony at the Broncos game?

They are essentially paying for brand awareness, which is a waste of money for our armed services when everyone knows who they are and what they do... They would be better spending that money on a specific recruiting campaign.

Originally Posted by Buff

Yes, I think it's deceptive and a waste of money. It's being portrayed as the team honoring a member of the community, but is in fact a paid advertisement... Plus, as a marketer, if the goal is recruiting then I question the effectiveness of the campaign. Do they really feel like they're getting any meaningful lift in enlistments because someone saw a halftime ceremony at the Broncos game? They are essentially paying for brand awareness, which is a waste of money for our armed services when everyone knows who they are and what they do... They would be better spending that money on a specific recruiting campaign.

What effect do air shows have??

Originally Posted by SR

What effect do air shows have??

I mean, I think they are probably both wasteful... But I can more easily justify the occasional air show because it's a straight forward exhibition of our core competency, and I'd imagine some of those costs would be offset through ticket sales and such... Paying the NFL to recognize service members at halftime - and not disclosing the $$ changing hands - just feels like a shady use of public funds.

I think it said that the Falcons had received more than $1 million... That seems like pretty egregious mismanagement of taxpayer $$ to me.

Originally Posted by Buff

I mean, I think they are probably both wasteful... But I can more easily justify the occasional air show because it's a straight forward exhibition of our core competency, and I'd imagine some of those costs would be offset through ticket sales and such... Paying the NFL to recognize service members at halftime - and not disclosing the $$ changing hands - just feels like a shady use of public funds.

I think it said that the Falcons had received more than $1 million... That seems like pretty egregious mismanagement of taxpayer $$ to me.

Nothing is cheap at an NFL game. It's a good chunk of change to give up, but you get to have 70,000+ people's attention for several minutes. It's definitely a more "in your face" advertisement that's going to stick with you more than some advertisement in a newspaper or the Internet you can just gloss over.

Personally, I just don't feel shocked by this report at all or that the spending was outrageous. From the article, it sounds like this type of recruitment is at least successful enough to continue. The ACA cost damn near a billion dollars to promote and had a lot of dumb ads that probably cost a hell of a lot more than this did. I'll give you that recognizing service members seems like a deceptive form of advertisement.