Thread: Will Football (Literally) Die As It Was Born?

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

Joel, I want to specifically know which advertisers dropped their sponsorship of NFL broadcasts over Ray Rice.

And not 10 billion words. A list of the advertisers.

None.

Although several of the NFL’s biggest sponsors have issued statements expressing concern about the situation, none of them have pulled advertisements or otherwise cut ties with the league.

Marriott Hotels released a statement saying, “As a league partner, we are closely following the situation. We trust that the NFL will address the matter appropriately.”

From FedEx: “We value our relationship with the NFL. We are watching developments in this matter closely and we are confident that the League will take the appropriate steps.”

From PepsiCo: “Domestic violence is completely unacceptable. We are encouraged to see the NFL is now treating this with the seriousness it deserves.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ray-rice-mess/

Now, Ray himself lost virtually all his PERSONAL sponsors - maybe Joel is confused, which isn't hard to believe.

Or, maybe this one from the Wall Street Journal:

As controversy swirls around the National Football League, brand marketers are facing a difficult task: how to make a strong statement against wrongdoing like domestic violence and child abuse without jeopardizing their lucrative and mutually beneficial deals with the league.

For now, big advertisers have stopped short of taking the most aggressive steps, such as pulling their TV ad dollars or canceling major league sponsorships and contracts. Instead, most are publicly condemning alleged misconduct by NFL players, while promising to monitor the situation.

Or, maybe this piece from Time Magazine?

But despite the finger-wagging, PR experts say it’s unlikely that major NFL sponsors like Verizon and PepsiCo would pull their sponsorship in light of the recent abuse scandals. “You didn’t see people immediately jumping ship—they’ve made multimillion investments in this,” says Joe Favorito, a sports media consultant who teaches strategic communications at Columbia University and once served as head of PR for the New York Knicks. “I don’t think that the massive brands that are tied to the NFL are in the blind on anything.”

“Everybody these days wants immediate results and immediate reactions,” he says. “Most brands will take their time, especially since most of them have very positive and lucrative experiences with the NFL, and then will act accordingly.” He noted that FedEx hasn’t pulled their sponsorship of the Redskins despite the controversy over their name, and Under Armor is still sponsoring the Ravens despite Ray Rice’s abuse scandal.

Or, maybe the NY Daily News?

Anheuser-Busch, which inked a six-year sponsorship deal with the NFL in 2011 worth $1.2 billon, stopped short of pulling its support from the league for not cracking down harder on Peterson and Rice.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

Joel, I want to specifically know which advertisers dropped their sponsorship of NFL broadcasts over Ray Rice.

And not 10 billion words. A list of the advertisers.

Okay, ya got me: TECHNICALLY no advertisers canceled contracts—they all "merely" THREATENED to, but relented when the NFL went from "2 game suspension" to "lifetime ban." Anheuser Busch even THREATENING to cancel Bud Bowl is still a big deal, hence one advertising mags article declaring Survey: NFL's Brand Score Plummets Amid Ray Rice Controversy and another of the professions journals saying After Ray Rice, the NFL Needs to Go Big to Restore Brand With Women. Again, if all is well, why all the big ongoing changes?

I guess Goodell just really REALLY likes pink, charitably donating $765 million to "undeserving" ingrates and having a federal judge tell him he doesn't know how to police his own league. That, and he absolutely LOVES being subpoenaed about ALL THREE: That's the ONLY rational explanation.

I guess Anheuser-Busch figures the NFL is worth $1.4 BILLION.

Anheuser-Busch and the NFL have agreed to extend Bud Light’s sponsorship of the league for another six years, through the 2022 Super Bowl. According to the Wall Street Journal, the deal will pay the NFL $1.4 billion, which works out to more than $7 million for each team, every year of the sponsorship.

That sponsorship will allow Bud Light to do things like put sponsored highlights on social media and award “Bud Light Players of the Game.” That’s on top of the enormous amount of money that Bud Light (and its rival beer makers) spend to buy commercials on NFL broadcasts.

“We’ve done the math and wouldn’t be renewing this sponsorship if we didn’t believe this would allow us to sell more beer,” Anheuser-Busch executive Lucas Herscovici said.

And that demonstrates once again just how powerful the NFL is. Nothing reaches more Americans — especially beer-drinking men in their 20s and 30s — than the NFL. And so for all the missteps the league has taken on everything from domestic violence to Deflategate, big companies want to do business with the NFL.

LOL @ Joel.

Can we rename this thread "War and Peace"?

Originally Posted by chazoe60

Can we rename this thread "War and Peace"?

No.

But "Another Worthless Thread" would be a good start.

Originally Posted by Joel

Okay, ya got me: TECHNICALLY no advertisers canceled contracts—they all "merely" THREATENED to, but relented when the NFL went from "2 game suspension" to "lifetime ban." Anheuser Busch even THREATENING to cancel Bud Bowl is still a big deal, hence one advertising mags article declaring Survey: NFL's Brand Score Plummets Amid Ray Rice Controversy and another of the professions journals saying After Ray Rice, the NFL Needs to Go Big to Restore Brand With Women. Again, if all is well, why all the big ongoing changes?

I guess Goodell just really REALLY likes pink, charitably donating $765 million to "undeserving" ingrates and having a federal judge tell him he doesn't know how to police his own league. That, and he absolutely LOVES being subpoenaed about ALL THREE: That's the ONLY rational explanation.

Rice got a lifetime ban? I missed that.

Teams may not be signing him, but he didn't receive a lifetime ban from the NFL.

And at that SNF game I just went to....they aren't having any issues with women and the brand. That stadium was about 45% women. Just an FYI in case you didn't see it on tv....and every one of those women were decked out from head to toe in NFL gear, myself included. Guys, they buy a jersey....gals, we buy the jersey, the scarf, the boots, the socks, the little undereye stickers, the bags, the purses and much, much more. The NFL is making a killing with the female crowd.

Originally Posted by GEM

Rice got a lifetime ban? I missed that.

Teams may not be signing him, but he didn't receive a lifetime ban from the NFL.

And at that SNF game I just went to....they aren't having any issues with women and the brand. That stadium was about 45% women. Just an FYI in case you didn't see it on tv....and every one of those women were decked out from head to toe in NFL gear, myself included. Guys, they buy a jersey....gals, we buy the jersey, the scarf, the boots, the socks, the little undereye stickers, the bags, the purses and much, much more. The NFL is making a killing with the female crowd.

Great points. I'm still looking up this life-time ban, as well.

Tthe NFL started targeting women long bfore Ray Rice...and it was because they had already won the Men market. 50% of the Market was basically being untouched by them....and to increase the intrest... increase the markets.

I read that out of the THREE largest markets in the world...... #3) American Men 2)the country of Japan 1) American Women. 97% of all goods, services, and/or products are either purchased by, or go through, a woman. If you are marketing ANY product, from selling tractors to selling hair-spray.....you market to women. The NFL just took too long to really figure that out, and started about 5 years ago with their "jerseys cut for women" campaign.

Originally Posted by Ravage!!!

Great points. I'm still looking up this life-time ban, as well.

Tthe NFL started targeting women long bfore Ray Rice...and it was because they had already won the Men market. 50% of the Market was basically being untouched by them....and to increase the intrest... increase the markets.

I read that out of the THREE largest markets in the world...... #3) American Men 2)the country of Japan 1) American Women. 97% of all goods, services, and/or products are either purchased by, or go through, a woman. If you are marketing ANY product, from selling tractors to selling hair-spray.....you market to women. The NFL just took too long to really figure that out, and started about 5 years ago with their "jerseys cut for women" campaign.

Me personally, I don't blame the NFL for Ray Rice beating his wife....but then again, I take personal responsibility pretty seriously. That's like holding the American justice system responsible because their rules on domestic violence aren't strong enough. It falls squarely on the shoulders of the person that did it...as it should. The NFL brand to me wasn't tarnished, the player was tarnished.

It got awfully quiet in this thread...

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

It got awfully quiet in this thread...

It sure did.

Sorry, I thought everyone just moved to the Greg Hardy thread and flip-flopped.

Actually, I just got distracted by real life and fixated on Broncos Talk the rest of the time. But 5+ years of pointlessly parsing a consistently awful offensive line have worn themselves out now, so I'll move this threads rebuttals from my head to its pages in the next few days. Tuesday's Chore Day at preschool though, so ya'll might just have to wait a little longer. There: Only TWO clauses/sentence; easy enough to follow?

Joel, I usually try not to get into the bickering with you, but that post....just means you either really don't have an answer to it or you need more time to do some research to answer.