Skip to content

Goodell: NFL not interested in on-uniform advertising

Cam Newton AP

The NFL is not interested in following the NBA’s lead in selling advertising on uniforms.

While NBA Deputy Commissioner Adam Silver said in July the league was “likely” to approve small advertising patches on uniforms by 2013, the NFL has generally considered himself above such a shameless cash-grab.

It’s not something that’s actively being considered in the NFL,” Commissioner Roger Goodell said, via Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press. “We like the look that we have on the field. We have a very limited number of partners on our field in general, much less on the uniform, and we think that’s right for the NFL.”

The league has allowed teams to sell a little real estate on practice jerseys. The Panthers have been pushing Pepsi on theirs, as part of a larger advertising buy the team negotiated with the soft drink giant.

Silver told Business Week the NBA could generate a “loose projection” of $100 million for 30 teams by selling small patches on the upper chest of jerseys.

The simple reason the NFL doesn’t feel so compelled is they don’t have to. At a time when a team such as the Browns can sell for more than $1 billion dollars and television deals continue to climb, the possibility of another $3 million or so per team (though the NFL rights would almost certainly be worth more) seems like loose change Goodell would rather not have clanging around in his couch, or muddying up a look they wouldn’t even let Nike fiddle excessively with.

Permalink 14 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Carolina Panthers, Home, Rumor Mill
14 Responses to “Goodell: NFL not interested in on-uniform advertising”
  1. tlmoon2112 says: Aug 3, 2012 10:06 AM

    Good call Roger, we dont want to see the uniforms all jacked up either.

  2. garonm says: Aug 3, 2012 10:10 AM

    Oh Lord Thank You Goodell! If it’s one thing I can’t stand its the sellout of advertising space on anything and everything. If I see someone advertising on an NFL Jersey, I will make it a point to not buy that product!

  3. Pacific NW Mark says: Aug 3, 2012 10:10 AM

    No advertising except for Nike. Of course.

  4. vincentbojackson says: Aug 3, 2012 10:16 AM

    Apparently the truckload of cash Nike gave the league to put their logo on the uniforms is not considered advertising.

  5. steadypimpin says: Aug 3, 2012 10:26 AM

    Thank God!!! I think advertising ruins the look of jerseys. When you watch other sports you don’t really know who you’re watching. For example the DC United soccer team has a big Volkswagen logo on the front. I always think to myself, are they the DC Volkswagens??? Keep that lame look to inferior sports like Soccer.

  6. viceburgh says: Aug 3, 2012 10:33 AM

    This is one thing even the Goodell-haters should be able to get behind.

  7. waldoampere says: Aug 3, 2012 10:41 AM

    Good. The advertising on pro soccer teams around the world looks amateurish (like my Little League baseball uniform). Some English soccer team was playing on TV (Chelsea? Manchester United?) and the first thing I thought was “What country is the city of Samsung in?”

  8. nizzy2107 says: Aug 3, 2012 11:46 AM

    Id be fine with like one or two small patches. I just dont want it to be like NASCAR.

  9. halfie6 says: Aug 3, 2012 12:22 PM

    Hmmm, doesn’t the CBA require the NFL to attempt to maximize revenue? I wonder what the players think about missing their cut of that $100 million?

  10. sweepthleg says: Aug 3, 2012 12:23 PM

    Good! Advertising pataches on the pro sports teams competeing at the higest level in a 9 billion dollar indusrty is just ridiculous. IT’S BUSH LEAGUE! The NBA looks bush league doing this and I’m glad Goodell is keeping the NFL uniform clean of McD’s, American Airlines, the Silver Bullet, bud light and whatever else.

    If you say, “well NASCAR does it and the NBA does it and it’s really small”, really?!? You want the NFL to be NASCAR or the NBA. Idiot.

    And the Nike swoosh logo is different because they make the uniforms so their logo being on NFL there is acceptable. If some other clothing company makes the uniforms that’s okay to as long as it isn’t to big or gaudy.

    The only way it could possibly acceptable and not something totally ridiculous is if they took that $100 million they get from taking their brand down a notch and apply it to lowering ticket prices across the board.

  11. ninerempire says: Aug 3, 2012 2:18 PM

    It will happen. In our lifetimes, likely within 20 years. The revenue stream would be immense. Some teams are getting 20 million dollars a year for the stadium. Something that is visible on every player, every second of the coverage? How much is THAT worth? The cowboys would easily get 25 million a year.

  12. queenlivekillers says: Aug 3, 2012 4:48 PM

    God bless you, Mr. Goodell! Now if you could just have the same sensible attitude toward the current 16 game schedule: We like things as they are.

  13. footballer4ever says: Aug 4, 2012 7:38 PM

    It’s so hilarious how you all are hateful anything that has to do with football, not your fake football stuff either. once your revenues starts to drain because other companies will prefer to use their advertising money in other sports , eg. GM, then you will have to swallow your ego. Having a sponsor on a jersey is not the end, because having the team’s crest by your heart is what is important! (wink)

  14. footballer4ever says: Aug 5, 2012 11:44 AM

    For a sport who strives on commercials and sponsors shown more in a 3 hour span than actual game play, it’s ironic, but not surprising, some of you hate on your bigger football brother. Bush league? Amateurish? Sellouts? You are all a bunch of hipocrites for sure. LOL

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!