2011 Jersey & Sponsorship Discussion

[AlwaysGreen]

I would love to know if Harvey Norman are paying any extra $ for the second logo on the lower back, or did they just ask for the extra logo there because "Everyone else is doing it!".

I think apparel sponsorship needs to be regulated. I don't want to see our teams end up looking like NASCAR. The EPL is a big money league, but nearly all the major sponsors manage to promote their name without taking over the clubs they sponsor.

The IC should rule that teams can have 1 front of jersey sponsor, 1 sleeve sponsor each side and a lower back sponsor, with sponsorship integrated wherever possible. The upper back should be reserved for player names, which in turn increases marketing. It would make our league look more professional, because having massive Herbal World/ WOW style sponsorships on jerseys makes the NRL look like a 2nd rate park football competition.

Good post sir.

There should also be a limit on the size of the front of jersey sponsor.

Also, IMO short sponsorships should also go. Who is taking notice of the shorts?

It goes without saying that sponsors are vital to the game. Clubs should produce shirts that include how many sponsors they want which players can wear off the field for promotions or when being interviewed. On field limit the sponsors.

 

[hellteam]

The clubs logo's won't go anywhere.

Sponsor's logos will be incorporated more in the logo, even on jersey IMO.

example

 

[LESStar58]

I would love to know if Harvey Norman are paying any extra $ for the second logo on the lower back, or did they just ask for the extra logo there because "Everyone else is doing it!".

Hold up a minute; didn't the other 15 clubs all complain when the Titans had 2 different sponsors on the back of their shirt in 2007?

If Harvey Norman wanna throw major coin at Storm for the rest of the year then they can tell us to put it wherever the f**k they like IMHO! I can't say I'm a massive fan of the giant blue box for the Crown sponsorship but if they wanna throw a million a season at us after what happened last year then I'm all for the blue box!

That's what sport sponsorship is all about, paying big dollars for advertsing space. Look at what the Tigers did with the positioning of their sponsors this year. And don't they tell their players not to pose with crossed arms in photos so the sponsors can be seen clearly?

 

[Alex28]

I can guarantee its not. It's the beginning of putting heaps of small sponsors around the normal ones

Agreed, and I'm not a fan of it either. One sponsor on the front, two on the back and one on the sleeves is more than enough.

 

[Cumberland Throw]

Some AFL teams get over 2 mill a year for a 3 inch rectangle on the chest

Why do we whore ourselves with these massives foot wide boxes

 

[flippikat]

Some AFL teams get over 2 mill a year for a 3 inch rectangle on the chest

Why do we whore ourselves with these massives foot wide boxes

Advertising is all about "bang for buck" - if you get more exposure for your advertising dollar, you'll pay more. Remember, sponsorship is just another form of advertising.

That's why the NRL needs to be in Perth, and ultimately in Adelaide too.

That's why the NRL needs to DEMAND that free-to-air rights holders show games at reasonable hours in all states.

The AFL hasn't got it's financial house in order by sheer fluke: they've grown the top-level of the game far beyond it's suburban Melbourne origins, increased the advertising market and reaped the rewards.

(There's also the deeply ingrained culture of club membership that has traditionally meant a good revenue stream - but that's away from this topic of sponsorship..)

The challenge is increasing the games geographical footprint in a way that generates more sponsorship income AND maintains an even competition.

We all know that the AFL haven't struck the right balance - regardless of the money, expansion has weakened the standard of the football on the field.

The challenge for the NRL is made easier when we remember that the game has more players internationally than AFL (NZ & the islands are a HUGE nursery of talent), plus the huge pool of Rugby Union players whose skills are reasonably transferable to our game.

But umm.. yeah, to sum up & get back on topic - give sponsors more national exposure, and THEN we can look at shrinking the size of these signs.

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

AFL games, regardless of whether they're shown nation-wide or not, attract smaller television audiences than NRL matches, so how on Earth can that make their sponsorships more valuable? Whoever sponsors Collingwood or Carlton get their logo beamed into only a handful of houses in the first and third biggest advertising markets in the country - similar numbers to what we'd get with a team in Adelaide. Cronulla wouldn't suddenly be able to demand $2m a season for shirt sponsorship because 9,000 people watch their games in South Australia every few weeks.

 

[flippikat]

AFL games, regardless of whether they're shown nation-wide or not, attract smaller television audiences than NRL matches, so how on Earth can that make their sponsorships more valuable?

Whoever sponsors Collingwood or Carlton get their logo beamed into only a handful of houses in the first and third biggest advertising markets in the country - similar numbers to what we'd get with a team in Adelaide. Cronulla wouldn't suddenly be able to demand $2m a season for shirt sponsorship because 9,000 people watch their games in South Australia every few weeks.

I'm not saying that just putting a team in Adelaide will magically make our sponsorship deals skyrocket.

But the thing is, it has to be a priority for the NRL to have a truly national footprint - this gives the NRL clubs greater leverage when negotiating with sponsors, because their brand will have a greater reach.

By being a major sponsor of an AFL team, you get your brand on the front of a jersey that plays in every location with population over 1 million.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Australia_by_population )

Who wouldn't want a part of that??

THIS is what we should be striving for.

 

[nqcowboy87]

ill probably get forum bashed for this, but why is the england union side wearing a black jersey against argentina, if they need to weaer an alternate how about red, why do teams go and use colours for their alternate jerzseys that have no relationship to them like the raiders and knights grey jersey's

 

[nqcowboy87]

Sponsor's logos will be incorporated more in the logo, even on jersey IMO.

example

i dont think thats the way to go

 

[flippikat]

ill probably get forum bashed for this, but why is the england union side wearing a black jersey against argentina, if they need to weaer an alternate how about red, why do teams go and use colours for their alternate jerzseys that have no relationship to them like the raiders and knights grey jersey's

This is a psychological trick, to try and psyche-out the All Blacks & their fans.

It dates back to a couple of world cups ago, when France changed their shade of blue from something close to a royal blue to a dark (almost navy) shade..

When the ABs played them in the knockout stages, France used that dark strip so the ABs had to change - and controversially Adidas came up with a godawful Grey& Black change jersey, and the All Blacks choked.


Now, I'm pretty sure that if New Zealand have to play England in this year's cup that NZ will have the right to wear their first preference (black) and England will have to wear white.. but it's still kicked up a real sh*tstorm from the rugby fans here that England have used black.

Doesn't worry me (imitation is the best form of flattery), cause their style of play is still boring as all hell.

Oh yeah, and teams in English sports leagues have a habit of wearing away or alternate jerseys that are completely different colours to the teams true colours - it is rather distressing, and I hope it never catches on here.

 

[Scott Gourley's Lovechild]

Oh yeah, and teams in English sports leagues have a habit of wearing away or alternate jerseys that are completely different colours to the teams true colours - it is rather distressing, and I hope it never catches on here.

Brisbane's away jumper?

 

[innsaneink]

Brisbane's away jumper?

Raiders?
Panthers?

 

[hellteam]

Brisbane's away jumper?

This should be broncos away jersey...

 

[AlwaysGreen]

ill probably get forum bashed for this, but why is the england union side wearing a black jersey against argentina, if they need to weaer an alternate how about red, why do teams go and use colours for their alternate jerzseys that have no relationship to them like the raiders and knights grey jersey's

It's been scientifically proven that a dark coloured jersey enables you to kick penalties better. You'll find that all union teams will be changing to charcoal, black, navy, dark brown and midnight in the next 2 years.

The raiders alternate jersey should be white.

 

[Spitty]

Raiders?
Panthers?

Um.... How is white, teal and black not the Panthers colours?

Last time I checked our home jersey was black and teal and most of our merchandise was black, teal and white.

Not saying it should be that way, but it is.

To say that our away jersey isn't our club colours is blatant Panthers bashing, for the sake of Panthers bashing.

There are plenty of things about our club that are easy to bash, without inventing something.

 

[flippikat]

Raiders?
Panthers?

Fair points - but yeah, the NRL commission should establish stricter rules on club colours.

Specifically,

* Each NRL club must register a combination of up to four colours with the commission. These are the team's home colours. They cannot be changed - not even in shade (remember how Parramatta & Cronulla have varied their shade of blue in recent history..)

* Each NRL club must have a home jersey approved by the NRL comission, using a combination of these colours. This is the home jersey. It cannot be changed in design for a team of 3 years.

* Each NRL club must have an alternate jersey approved by the NRL commission.
- If the club's home jersey is predominantly non-white, the alternate jersey must be predominantly WHITE (with the trim being club colours)
- If the club's home jersey is predominantly white, the alternate jersey must have be predominantly non-white. (In the club colours)

* Alternate jersey should only be worn if two teams are deemed by the NRL commission to have clashing colours.

I mean, how hard can it be....? The only exemption I can think of from this rule is Parramatta with their away jersey being mostly gold instead of white - but apart from that, the above rules surely would work?

 

[Craegus]

Fair points - but yeah, the NRL commission should establish stricter rules on club colours.

Specifically,

* Each NRL club must register a combination of up to four colours with the commission. These are the team's home colours. They cannot be changed - not even in shade (remember how Parramatta & Cronulla have varied their shade of blue in recent history..)

* Each NRL club must have a home jersey approved by the NRL comission, using a combination of these colours. This is the home jersey. It cannot be changed in design for a team of 3 years.

* Each NRL club must have an alternate jersey approved by the NRL commission.
- If the club's home jersey is predominantly non-white, the alternate jersey must be predominantly WHITE (with the trim being club colours)
- If the club's home jersey is predominantly white, the alternate jersey must have be predominantly non-white. (In the club colours)

* Alternate jersey should only be worn if two teams are deemed by the NRL commission to have clashing colours.

I mean, how hard can it be....? The only exemption I can think of from this rule is Parramatta with their away jersey being mostly gold instead of white - but apart from that, the above rules surely would work?

Sounds good.

The only change I would make is change the rules to dark and light colours instead of just white. Then teams like Parramatta, Wests, Brisbane (if they wanted to go with a majority yellow alternate), etc, could wear their alternate colours rather than white, if they choose to.

It also removes the issue in your plan with Canberra who wear light colours at home but the colour is not white. In your plan they would have to wear a white alternate even though the home colour is very light in colour (even though they really don't clash with anyone). Same currently goes for Cronulla with their light blue.

 

[M2D2]

- If the club's home jersey is predominantly non-white, the alternate jersey must be predominantly WHITE (with the trim being club colours)
- If the club's home jersey is predominantly white, the alternate jersey must have be predominantly non-white. (In the club colours)

No. f**k off.

 

[Tyler Durden]

love the rugby world cup jerseys - NO SPONSORS !!!!!!!!

this must be brought in for all rep jerseys in league. ( origin and australia ). limit the sponsorship to maybe a sleeve patch or a small patch on the front near the badge, but for goodness sakes, a rep jersey is something that is earned and should not be turned into a walking billboard.