Drakonius26
-
Posts
1,385 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Drakonius26
-
-
We're arguing video games and counterfeit jerseys now? That's like arguing apples and pineapples. Sure, they sound similar, but they're totally different.
Not really. BlueSky had simply posted on the previous page that he believed the only reason to have an exclusive license is to simply take advantage of the consumer and raise prices. He also used the old comparison of 2K Sports and EA Sports 2005 football games as an example of his claim, while Ice and I refuted that claim by stating the other reasons why the NFL would want exclusive licensing agreements with other companies. That's all.
-
Icecap and Charger77 are hunched over their keyboards burning up the keys about now...
No, not really.
It's simple, really. The NFL has the right to grant a single manufacturer their exclusive licence. It's their IP. They're free to do with it what they want. I'm really not getting why this is such a hard concept to grasp.
Not to mention, when people talk about the 2K Sports vs. EA Sports they ALWAYS seem to gloss over that fact. Forget the fact that EA Sports produced critically acclaimed versions of football simulations year-after-year, and 2K took about four years to finally get it right, but they try to complain that was EA Sports did was illegal.
No, it's perfectly legal. If EA Sports/DirecTV/Reebok are the only companies that can represent a high-level of quality with the NFL's products, then it's the NFL's right to be able to strike an exclusive deal with that said company. Regardless of how you few the companies I mentioned, the fact still remains that if the NFL is ever called out for doing so, the league will probably be able to show that rival companies complaining about the licensing agreement didn't represent the NFL well with their quality of products. Granted, it can lead to customers being forced to pay higher costs, and can lead to a lack of quality competition, but it does keep some two-bit hack producing a piece of crap in their garage and selling whatever it might be to the general public as "authentic." Obviously, is a person buys that, they're going to complain about the quality of said product, and indirectly cause damage to the NFL's brand.
Weak. Real weak. The ONLY reason for granting exclusive deals is to jack up prices. Period.
You just glossed over the fact that I was trying to explain to you. Beyond higher costs, it keeps people from trying to take advantage of others by using the NFL's brand. Plus, Ice mentioned that the league would want to streamline their agreements with a select group of companies and how much that can cost. Them raising the prices of their goods and getting more money from the consumer is icing on the cake, so to speak.
By the way, prior to the 2005 versions of 2K Sports and EA Sports football simulations/video games, both priced their goods at 49.99, 2K Sports only priced theirs at 19.99 because they were getting the
beat out of them year after year by EA Sports. Not only did 2K Sports not truly beat EA Sports in 2005 (many publications gave Sports Game of the Year Awards to both of those games, plus, Madden 2005 had a higher AQR in the end), but EA Sports had a track record of producing quality football games. Therefore, it was only natural that the NFL would work an arrangement out like that with them."For all of its excellent modes and gameplay, which are not as great as Madden 2005, however, ESPN NFL 2K5's greatest asset comes in the form of its graphics. Hands down, flat out, undeniably, unarguably, this is the best-looking football game ever made. I'm not saying 2K5 is better than Madden - but it's finally, just as good."
Alex Navarro - GameInformer
-
Icecap and Charger77 are hunched over their keyboards burning up the keys about now...
No, not really.
It's simple, really. The NFL has the right to grant a single manufacturer their exclusive licence. It's their IP. They're free to do with it what they want. I'm really not getting why this is such a hard concept to grasp.
Not to mention, when people talk about the 2K Sports vs. EA Sports they ALWAYS seem to gloss over that fact. Forget the fact that EA Sports produced critically acclaimed versions of football simulations year-after-year, and 2K took about four years to finally get it right, but they try to complain that was EA Sports did was illegal.
No, it's perfectly legal. If EA Sports/DirecTV/Reebok are the only companies that can represent a high-level of quality with the NFL's products, then it's the NFL's right to be able to strike an exclusive deal with that said company. Regardless of how you few the companies I mentioned, the fact still remains that if the NFL is ever called out for doing so, the league will probably be able to show that rival companies complaining about the licensing agreement didn't represent the NFL well with their quality of products. Granted, it can lead to customers being forced to pay higher costs, and can lead to a lack of quality competition, but it does keep some two-bit hack producing a piece of crap in their garage and selling whatever it might be to the general public as "authentic." Obviously, is a person buys that, they're going to complain about the quality of said product, and indirectly cause damage to the NFL's brand.
-
If the cost of production is so much lower then the retail cost, why isn't it passed onto the customers?
Because the point of business to make as much money as the market will allow you to make?
This isn't a hard concept to grasp. The NFL has the right to sell their own products at whatever price they want. If the consumer base is willing to pay that price, then the NFL's justified in continuing to sell their products at that price.
If you think the price is to high, then don't buy the product. If enough people think it's to high and similarly refuse to buy the product then the NFL will lower the price.
It's not your place to tell the NFL they're wrong for selling their own products at a price the market is willing to support.
Thanks for replying to that so I didn't have to.
But it's fine with you guys that they use their power to grant exclusive licenses to take money out of your pocket? That's the part I just don't get. I've argued the NFL2K5 example before and this (from Wikipedia) sums it up nicely:
===
Notably, ESPN NFL 2K5 was the first in the 2K series priced at $19.99 the day it shipped. The competitive pricing eventually led EA Sports to reduce Madden 2005's price to a mere $29.95, a 40 percent reduction of the series usual rate at the time of $49.99. Following 2005 editions of both games, EA Sports acquired an exclusive rights agreement with the NFL and Player's Association to be the sole creator of NFL video games. The deal terminated 2K Sports production of any further NFL games. The ensuing season, Madden 2006, saw pricing returned to the $49.99 MSRP.
===
They stick it to consumers and you NFL apologists just say, "Thank you sir, may I have another?" Help me understand why you enjoy being taken advantage of?
In all fairness, ESPN NFL 2K5 is an overrated game to begin with, and got most of its press by valuing style over substance, along with the fact it was so cheap. Personally, I'd like to see 2K Sports back producing football games, if for no other reasons to force EA Sports to enhance the quality of their product, as Madden 2004, in my mind was the last, truly great version of Madden. Though Madden 2011 was pretty fun to play.
As for as counterfeit jerseys go isn't it pretty much a reality that NO jerseys the public buys are truly authentic, and that you're pretty much just buying a higher-quality of replica than something that won't stay truly intact after a couple dozens washes or so?
-
And I thought he was hard to look at on the sidelines.
my god why they don't kill that with fire is beyond me!
I'm going to go out on a stretch here and say that Rex Ryan isn't going to be earning the moniker Sexy Rexy anytime soon.
And who knew he liked so many NHL teams.
-
Hmmm... interesting topics, so why not do what the NFL will look like in 10 years...
National Football League
American Football Conference
Western Division
Denver Broncos
Kansas City Chiefs
Oakland Raiders
San Diego Chargers
Northern Division
Baltimore Ravens
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Pittsburgh Steelers
Southern Division
Houston Texans
Indianapolis Colts
San Antonio Stars (Expansion team, though one can hope...)
St. Louis Bombers (Perhaps a nod to the Greatest Show On Turf)
Eastern Division
Buffalo Bills
Miami Dolphins
New England Patriots
New York Jets
National Football Conference
Western Division
Los Angeles Rams (The Rams are relocated back to Los Angeles after Ed Roski and his ownership group buy out Stanley Kroenke, who later purchases and then moves the Jacksonville Jaguars to St. Louis)
Phoenix Firebirds (I know, shameless plug...)
San Francisco 49ers
Seattle Seahawks
Northern Division
Chicago Bears
Detroit Lions
Green Bay Packers
Minnesota Vikings
Southern Division
Atlanta Falcons
Carolina Panthers
New Orleans Saints
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Eastern Division
Dallas Cowboys
New York Giants
Philadelphia Eagles
Washington Warriors (The politically correct crowd finally wins, after Daniel Snyder loses ownership of the team to a richer and more left-leaning owner)
-
Yeah, your response wasn't offensive Darth. I just know it's unpopular opinion for someone to say they love the Buffaslug and the uniforms. If Buffalo really wants to get it right, they just need to copy the Boston Bruins' post-edge template, substitute black for navy, eliminate silver completely to make the retro look work, and then use the original logo, while creating a retro-styled version of the B-Sabre shoulder logo, and finally keep the current number and letter fonts to make the jersey appear modern like the Capitals too.
Some more unpopular opinions that I forgot about...
NBA: The "new" Los Angeles Clipper uniforms are horrible, and the NBA should limit teams to only a home and away uniform, with throwbacks only being used once at home and once on the road for meaningful anniversaries (25 years, 50 years, 75 years, etc.). To make it 10 years isn't an accomplishment, in this sports climate, it's expected. Hell, the Jacksonville Jaguars and Florida Panthers have been around for at least 10 years.
NFL: The New England Patriots have a solid identity, "flying elvis" and jerseys included, even their silver alternate jersey was flawless and one of my favorite jerseys to wear around town.
NHL: The Anaheim Ducks/Mighty Ducks of Anaheim have always had a bad identity, logo, uniform and all. The Vancouver Canucks should go back to black/gold/and red uniforms, since those have been the only times that the franchise has appeared in the Stanley Cup Finals, and while I hated their V-jerseys, I loved their 1994 uniforms, both home and away. The league should also put a ban on this influx of double-blue jerseys, first the Pittsburgh Penguins, and now the Florida Panthers... disgusting...
-
Well, hopefully I don't get flamed too badly for this, but as far as unpopular opinions go I probably have a lot more of them than other members do. So where to start...
NBA: The new throwback trend, (other than the Detroit Pistons and Milwaukee Bucks, since they were the only ones to get it right) have all been eyesores. That includes the Utah Jazz rebrand (if you can call it that), which is a major downgrade. Yes, the previous double-blue uniforms were dull, but ten-times better than any of their previous identities, including the New Orleans-era Jazz.
Next, ban pinstripes from basketball uniforms, they never look good, and the New Orleans Hornets destroyed a perfectly fine uniform with their latest rebrand. It's no wonder they haven't been nearly as good since changing their uniforms in 2009.
MLB: I prefer the new look Arizona Diamondbacks and Tampa Bay Rays to their previous incarnations. The only complaint with either is that I don't like Arizona's black alternative uniforms, and that I wish the "Ray" was featured more than it is now. Some concepts on these boards have nailed it perfectly. But when it comes to those teams' colors, they're perfect, don't change a thing.
NFL: Ban all monochrome jersey combinations, and force the teams to wear colored pants on the road. The only teams that can manage to have a decent all-white look are the Chicago Bears, Cleveland Browns, Indianapolis Colts, Miami Dolphins, Minnesota Vikings, and the New York Jets, but those all-white combinations should be classified as once-a-year alternate looks.
The powder-blue San Diego Charger jerseys of the 1960's are overrated and inferior to the Tampa Bay Buccaneer expansion-era uniforms. Now, Bucco Bruce wasn't an eyesore, but definitely not a professional logo for an NFL team to take the field in. However, I'd much rather have a Tampa Bay throwback than San Diego throwback any day of the week, since the main reason people harp on the creamsicle uniforms is the fact that they started off 0-26 in them.
NHL: This one I'm sure to get blasted on, but here it goes... The Buffaslug and 2007-2010 uniforms were perfect. They along with the new-look Washington Capitals, have uniforms that I would classify as modern classics. It's 2010, not 1970, so stop living in the past. I loved the original Buffalo Sabre uniforms, but guess what, even as a fan, a change is good now and again. They were sure better than the black-and-red disasters that honestly, and thankfully we never won a Stanley Cup in. Those looked minor-league, and were a shameless ripoff of the New Jersey Devils, when in the late 1990's a lot of teams were going with the black/red/and silver combo, and Buffalo decided to canuckify their identity. And if they are to revert back to the retros, go 100% back to the original designs around the new template, and don't include silver. I'm sick of half-a** throwbacks.
beat out of them year after year by EA Sports. Not only did 2K Sports not truly beat EA Sports in 2005 (many publications gave Sports Game of the Year Awards to both of those games, plus, Madden 2005 had a higher AQR in the end), but EA Sports had a track record of producing quality football games. Therefore, it was only natural that the NFL would work an arrangement out like that with them.
The Big Ol' Counterfeit Jersey Thread
in Sports Logo General Discussion
Posted
If you're talking about my support of Madden, then that's because making the 2K Sports/EA Sports argument in a thread about Sports and Logos is not only off-base, but irrelevant to this discussion. Personally, a pet-peeve of mine is when people start an argument or discussion about a topic and then introduce something that's unrelated, because of their obvious hatred of that unrelated item. Especially when that item isn't bad, nor is it the main reason why exclusive licensing is a bad thing. Like I said before, I didn't start the discussion of video games, it was BlueSky. I've mostly kept quiet and enjoyed looking at some of the terrible counterfeit jerseys pictured in this thread, but I'm not going to stay quiet after a stupid and unrelated remark like that. BBTV said it the best, it's a business, and those kind of agreement are also made to not "cheapen" the NFL's brand. I understand the arguments for both sides, but I'm not going to standby and watch as someone makes a stupid statement like that, when it fits under the aforementioned qualities.
By the way, I don't endorse counterfeit jerseys, nor do I think I'm entitled to have a ticket, hat, or jersey, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from.