AB's Jersey Ruined

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I hate seeing a sponsor on an international jersey. I admired France and New Zealand for not going down that route but clearly NZ's comparatively small market has made their traditional stance untenable. If it came down to putting a logo on the front of the home shirt or letting the biggest stars move abroad because of lack of finance, it was the right decision. Hopefully it's just a sticker rather than embroidered and it can be ironed off! The Ireland home shirt is a monstrosity.

I know they're different sports entirely but I'd be interested to see how the NFL, MLB and NHL in North America manage to keep sponsors off the front of jerseys. I suspect it has something to do with the size of the market over there making it possible and their collective bargaining where all the teams work together to grow the sport as a brand. Would such collective bargaining be possible in rugby?

 

[DuncTheDoodle]

It's not as hideous as I feared, truth be told. There are far uglier logos out there.

 

[nush]

It's not as hideous as I feared, truth be told. There are far uglier logos out there.

on the top of my head can't think of who has the worst sponsor on rugby shirt for an international team,

maybe wales with the admiral logo which i think it can be a bit higher on the shirt

 

[Big Ewis]

it looks pretty nice to me...

 

[Sweatybee]

OK, I accept that there is the Adidas logo there, but they ARE the manufacturer of the jersey after all. I could have accepted it if they had run the AIG logo around the outside of the sleeve, or on the back above the number, but to me, the front-centre of the All Black jersey is sacrosanct; Steve Tew and the NZRU have cheapened the All Black jersey in my eyes. Now its just like any other international jersey.

I agree with this post. Also the nz sevens team are now the all blacks sevens. Did this name change have something to do with the Aig sponsorship? Totally cheapened 100+ year of all black history.

 

[james5000]

What do you chap's mean by cheapening the All Blacks jersey?

It wont change the majority of young NZ boys dreaming of becoming All Blacks.
It definitely wont stop Adidas from charging ridiculous prices for jersey's here in NZ.
Richie McCaw will still cherish every jersey he ever gets from here on (He should probably expect to get a pay rise because of it, he deserves one)

The logo is tiny, get over it to be honest. If it doubles in size over the next few years then we'll have something to moan about.

 

[LittleGuy]

I hate seeing a sponsor on an international jersey. I admired France and New Zealand for not going down that route but clearly NZ's comparatively small market has made their traditional stance untenable. If it came down to putting a logo on the front of the home shirt or letting the biggest stars move abroad because of lack of finance, it was the right decision. Hopefully it's just a sticker rather than embroidered and it can be ironed off! The Ireland home shirt is a monstrosity.

I know they're different sports entirely but I'd be interested to see how the NFL, MLB and NHL in North America manage to keep sponsors off the front of jerseys. I suspect it has something to do with the size of the market over there making it possible and their collective bargaining where all the teams work together to grow the sport as a brand. Would such collective bargaining be possible in rugby?

Very easy TV commercials in the middle of the games, unfortunately it has the side effect( much more so in the case of the NFL) of making the game run very long and it gets extremely tedious. I would honestly rather see the Buffalo Bills covered in NASCAR level advertising rather than have to flip stations or watch a pile of ads. Baseball isn't so bad since the advertising takes place at natural breaks in the game, in between innings, substitutions other delays.

 

[nickdnz]

For my negativity I will say this.

While we don't know exactly how much the deal is worth, we can expect it to be worth alot. So as much as chucking AIG dead centre of the All Black jersey in larger letters than "New Zealand All Blacks" or even principal sponsor Adidas seems like sacrilege, it may well ensure our future as the best team in the world for the next eight years. What I DO expect however, is for it not only to boost our reserves for a long time, I expect not to be seeing any of our best and most promising players be lured overseas by more money. This deal better have made us extremely competitive in keeping players and potentially allow us to use these funds to recruit more overseas talent from Argentina, Samoa, Fiji etc into our Super Rugby teams (no more than 3 a team though).

Another pitch was that AIG could take the All Blacks to new markets. I expect that both literally and figuratively. I want to see the All Blacks play more games in places such as Canada, USA, Japan and parts of Europe where rugby isn't popular, with the expectation that a certain loss of funds are now affordable to growing the game and thus the All Blacks brand. Filling up our reserves is obviously important, but there needs to be some reason for me to embrace AIG other than the NZRU getting more money. I'd want to see that money go towards enhancing the All Blacks legacy, rather than selling it.

 

[GHUNIT50]

I think the AIG logo is alright, I was surprised that having sponsored a team as big as Man United that they would go for something like the Miami Heat or the Lakers instead seeing as rugby is pretty small as a sport in comparison.

 

[petite]

im s0 dissapointed with this new shirt! it the final victoriy of buisiness over sport
a disgrace for all nz people you had the best outfit of the world including all sports and you ruin it..
the good news is that i have last ab shirt with no logo!!!! lucky me

 

[admartian]

im s0 dissapointed with this new shirt! it the final victoriy of buisiness over sport
a disgrace for all nz people you had the best outfit of the world including all sports and you ruin it..
the good news is that i have last ab shirt with no logo!!!! lucky me

lol we had absolutely no say in this matter.

Go email [email protected].

(speculative email address of coruse).

 

[erwanseb]

The french jersey remains the only major one without a sponsor, but for how long.

It's like Asterix resisting the crawling herds of corporate blood suckers.

 

[usausa]

I hate seeing a sponsor on an international jersey. I admired France and New Zealand for not going down that route but clearly NZ's comparatively small market has made their traditional stance untenable. If it came down to putting a logo on the front of the home shirt or letting the biggest stars move abroad because of lack of finance, it was the right decision. Hopefully it's just a sticker rather than embroidered and it can be ironed off! The Ireland home shirt is a monstrosity.

I know they're different sports entirely but I'd be interested to see how the NFL, MLB and NHL in North America manage to keep sponsors off the front of jerseys. I suspect it has something to do with the size of the market over there making it possible and their collective bargaining where all the teams work together to grow the sport as a brand. Would such collective bargaining be possible in rugby?

Few things:
1. As Little Guy mentioned, TV revenues. The NFL I know is making 20 billion now off their deals, and they're standing to make 40 billion on their next deals. The NFL is unique because the NFL negotiates the TV rights as a league rather than individual teams going out to make deals. In 1962, the NFL first sold their TV rights for 4.65 million. All revenues (TV and some other revenue streams) are distributed first among league and players based on a scale determined and written into the league's collective bargaining agreement. The league share is then split evenly among all the teams. This creates the competitive balance in NFL, and I believe the once a week playing from August-February makes it popular to the public because it is easy to follow.

2. Individual teams are owned by owners or a ownership group. For the most part, money invested into the organization and facilities comes from ownership in addition to revenue sharing.

3. Jersey sponsorships I believe are bid upon by different companies (Nike, Addidas, Under Armour) and the league decides from there. They get their logo on the jersey and right to design all the jerseys. The logo is small, but like any other jersey they cost a lot of money.
The NBA is allowing small sponsorship patches (2.5 inch square patches) on the jersey starting next season. The league is actually losing money, and a lot of the teams are losing money every season so in my opinion it makes sense to do this. the WNBA (Womens pro basketball) has started to allow sponsors on their jerseys, and are pretty much the main focus on the jerseys now, similar to European football.

NZRU probably stands to make a lot of money off this patch, and while it sucks that we lose the classical look, it will help the Union in the future to help the smaller unions within NZ and help fund other things. Unfortunately, modern sport has become expensive, and money is needed to run everything. After all, the sole purpose of a business is to make money.

 

[admartian]

^ This is why the NFL is the best run league in the world IMO. There's parity within teams (no BS buying championships - i.e. EPL/pretty much most soccer leagues, MLB and the NBA) and the majority of owners actually care about the sport itself and how to better it.

I think, if rugby franchises go corporate, I would hope they would be as united and efficient as the 32 NFL owners are.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

The last two posts have hit the nail on the head. Rugby needs to realize it's teams aren't competing with each other but in the greater scheme of things they're competing with other forms of entertainment.

Unions need to work together to grow the sport globally rather than being concerned with short termist profiteering. Clubs need to work together to increase their marketability and exposure. Perhaps the bickering Heineken Cup competing nations should keep this in mind when in-fighting over their slice of the pie in that competition.

Think big, grow the market and hopefully we'll see a day when national jerseys aren't spoiled with gaudy corporate logos. New Zealand are brought to you by the kind people at AIG and adidas........

 

[dasNdanger]

Could be worse. I prefer it sans box, though.


das

 

[Kiwiwomble]

anyone know why AIG isn't on the Maori AB's jersey for their northern tour?

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

It's on the shorts - MABs have a pre-existing sponsor, which ends next year. AG will become the main sponsor then.

 

[Kiwiwomble]

OH...fair enough then