Jump to content

NFL 2020


FormerLurker
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, 4_tattoos said:

 

Honestly wasn't all that noticeable watching live.

 

This is always said about on-field sports advertisements and it is very bizarre to me because it is an argument in favor of the millionaire advertisers. An acceptance of intrusive advertising solely to make millionaires richer at one's own expense. Not calling you out specifically of course, just a comment on the common pattern I always see when more and more ads get put in sports.

 

Also the helmet ad would be prominent and eye-catching every time a player is shown in close-up, which happens multiple times every minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MCM0313 said:

It’s probably a little different when the helmet ad is for the helmet manufacturer. 

 

It's really not.  It's still a logo that's not the team's that was put there for a price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/16/2020 at 4:38 AM, Chromatic said:

 

Man thats a gorgeous matchup.

 

No I think the endless helmet is silly. I like the solid 'M'. It has a nice traditional feel to it. The Dolphin wearing a picture of itself is kind of odd. I don't think if a character in a logo is wearing equipment it needs to be 100% the exact same as what the players are wearing.


I was hoping that the Dolphins were going to do something different with their initial color rush unis and go all teal with a white helmet with just that M logo on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

It's really not.  It's still a logo that's not the team's that was put there for a price.

I wonder if they actually PAID for that ad? I mean, did Riddell have to fork over money for their product placement?

I'm not arguing with you that it WASS in fact an ad, I just wonder if didn't dawn on the league to charge for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said:

I wonder if they actually PAID for that ad? I mean, did Riddell have to fork over money for their product placement?

I'm not arguing with you that it WASS in fact an ad, I just wonder if didn't dawn on the league to charge for it.

 

Riddell forked over money to be "the official helmet provider" the same way that Wilson forks over money to be "the official football" and Nike forks over money to pretend they make the uniforms.  The logo comes with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

That scene was pretty offensive even at the time, and yet it's somehow managed to age even more poorly.


That whole movie is pretty yikes these days, especially since Jim Carrey went into a bit of a dark place over the past decade or so (anti-vax for a bit and doing a bad Andy Kaufman approximation, among other incidents).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sec19Row53 said:

I wonder if they actually PAID for that ad? I mean, did Riddell have to fork over money for their product placement?

I'm not arguing with you that it WASS in fact an ad, I just wonder if didn't dawn on the league to charge for it.

 

Gothamite answered it pretty well, but yes - they did pay for it.  That's why while players could wear any helmet they wanted, only Riddell ones could have the logo.  It wasn't something that just slipped through the league's view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • TBGKon locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.