Opinions on Shirt Sponsorship

Pigman II

One of my pet peeves when it comes to following a football club is the issue of replica shirts. In particular the issue of shirt sponsorship.

Prior to the late 1970's you'd probably never see a soccer club with large text advertising corporations emblasened across the front. However in 1979 Liverpool started a trend in when they adopted the brand of consumer electronics company "Hitachi". The other clubs soon followed suit and have never looked back since.

Now, personally I'd never pay for a replica shirt that had an advertisment for any company on it (discounting perhaps the typical small logo the manufacturer itself places upon the item). The way I see it is : "If some guy wants to have his company name scrawled across my chest in big letters then he can pay me, not the other way round!"

In fact it puzzles me to see footy fans of all shapes and sizes walking around this green earth seemingly oblivious to the fact that they have been effectively turned into polyester-clad sandwich boards.

But then this brings me to crux of this thread. My question to you all is how do you feel on this matter of wearing the shirt of the Liverpool Carlsergs or the Manchester Vodafones? Forgetting about hard fact that clubs generate income thru sponsorship do you even care that your supposed fashion statement is vandalised in consumer serving-suggestions or would you prefer to have a nice clean traditional jersey to wear out or whilst playing 5-a-side? Also if a clean version of your clubs replica kit was sold would you even buy it as it no longer looks like the ones the players wear?

Looking forward to getting peoples opinions on this curio.

herbieflowers

I think the current jerseys are over-ornamented anyway, much prefer the retro / older jerseys with the basic colours and the badge

Xavi6

I've no problem buying them but it hasn't made me a Thomas Cook customer or anything. I like to wear what the players wear, including name and number. I just like it, no other reason.

What really bugs me is the sponsor on the Ireland replica shirts. The team don't play with it yet it's all we're given the option to buy by the money grabbing FAI. I refuse to buy another Irealnd jersey until the sponsor comes off.

Guy:Incognito

I'm fine with it. People overthink things.

Liverpool played with no logo in Franc edue to alcohol advertisment ban. I thought the jersey looked crap and plain.

I get the feeling you are the type that brings black bags around so they dotn have to "advertise " any shops they buy things from.

Pigman II

Xavi6 wrote: »

I've no problem buying them but it hasn't made me a Thomas Cook customer or anything. I like to wear what the players wear, including name and number. I just like it, no other reason.

What really bugs me is the sponsor on the Ireland replica shirts. The team don't play with it yet it's all we're given the option to buy by the money grabbing FAI. I refuse to buy another Irealnd jersey until the sponsor comes off.

So do you mean if the lads were allowed to wear Eircom on the pitch you suddenly wouldn't have any problem with the jersey the FAI sell?

Mint Sauce

have thought about this my self as well, ie giving carlsberg free advertising on my liverpool jersey or o2 or toyota on my ireland and munster rugby jerseys, the one i have the main problem is the ireland soccer jersey, most other national teams have a sponsor, but cant think of any that have the sponsors printed on the replica shirts, apart from our own, was once discussed on this site that the FAI have a contract with eircom on this mater, however, there was recently the ireland jersey available without the sponsor, but it was pre printed with keane on the back

Xavi6

Pigman II wrote: »

So do you mean if the lads were allowed to wear Eircom on the pitch you suddenly wouldn't have any problem with the jersey the FAI sell?

Not really no because, as I said, I like to wear what the players wear.

The reason why I don't like it now is because FIFA doesn't allow international teams to be sponsored on the pitch yet our association once again prove where their heart lies by using any available opportunity to make a few quid. I don't understand why we do it if no other nation does.

Xavi6

irish-stew wrote: »

there was recently the ireland jersey available without the sponsor, but it was pre printed with keane on the back

Jays give me the sponsor any day over that

Guy:Incognito

irish-stew wrote: »

have thought about this my self as well, ie giving carlsberg free advertising on my liverpool jersey or o2 or toyota on my ireland and munster rugby jerseys, the one i have the main problem is the ireland soccer jersey, most other national teams have a sponsor, but cant think of any that have the sponsors printed on the replica shirts, apart from our own, was once discussed on this site that the FAI have a contract with eircom on this mater, however, there was recently the ireland jersey available without the sponsor, but it was pre printed with keane on the back

Your not giveing free advertisement away. Carlsberg etc pay for a package, which includes shirt sponsorship for the match shirst and replica ones. If they dotn sell replica shirts with the sponsorship, the sponsor doesnt pay the club as much. The sponsors paid for the space as it were.

kinaldo

I don't mind minimal sponsorship. My favourite was the Newcastle blue star (Brown Ale) jerseys from the early 90's (we had it in the 80's too actually). An image of the city instead of some horrible brand name.

http://www.classicfootballshirts.co.uk/images/imagecache/Newcastle-90-Home-Star.jpg

http://www.classicfootballshirts.co.uk/images/imagecache/Newcastle-Home-93.jpg

The worst I've seen lately is Real Mallorca's. Their sponsor is just taking the piss!

http://infodeportiva.iespana.es/images/mallorca.jpg

Mint Sauce

Xavi6 wrote: »

Jays give me the sponsor any day over that

was going to add a similar comment but wasn't sure how it would go down

Unearthly

Don't really care tbh

Marketing is all around you

dc69

thats the way the game is,its a business.you wouldnt have your torres or drogba's or rooneys or fabregases without sponsorship.personally i prefer to see these players even though it means writing on the shirt

Helix

ok put it like this:

company a sponsors your football team, and pays a LOT of money to do it. in exchange for that they get their name on the jersey, as well as prime advertising space around the teams stadium.

now, if you remove the logo from jerseys, youre defeating one of the main purposes for companies to sponsor teams, therefore making sponsorship worth far less to your club, and everone elses

that said i think droghedas is a bit much (funtasia, murphys environmental AND scotch hall all on the one jersey)

Mr_Roger_Bongos

For some reason I used to love the Sharp Viewcam on the united jersey! As a kid, the sponsor on the front just makes you feel more like your heroes when you imagine playing in the cup final!

On Pigman II original comment - It's a good observation, i'd never considered myself a 'walking advertisement' before! Obviously if you ask someone they'll say the shirt and the home colours are what's most important and if I had the choice i would probably buy without, especially in the case of the MingDog A.I.G.

But Most Importantly -

BRING BACK COLLARS!!! WTF?! Where did they go??

Unfortunately my mum threw all my old United jersey's out when i went to college........(cue me crying in the rain, screaming into the Sky..."WHY?!!")...so no more Cantona moments at the 5 a side.

OPENROAD

I loved the JVC and Arsenal sponsorship, and yes it did work as I always used to buy a JVC equipment.

Xavi6

OPENROAD wrote: »

I loved the JVC and Arsenal sponsorship, and yes it did work as I always used to buy a JVC equipment.

And I would never EVER let anything Sharp into my house

OPENROAD

Xavi6 wrote: »

And I would never EVER let anything Sharp into my house

spot on, never have and never will

Helix

Xavi6 wrote: »

And I would never EVER let anything Sharp into my house

must be tough eating steak

dulpit

The one thing that would annoy me about sponsorship is when it makes the jersey look crap. Now while not soccer, the Cork GAA jerseys of a few years ago were sponsored by Esat Digifone, and the logo on the front was quite cool. But now seen as how digifone turned into 02, we have a retched logo on the front.

And the same can be said about some soccer logos. Some look cool, some look crap. But any sponsor is better than buying a jersey with no sponsor (unless it's from a team with no sponsor) it just looks wrong...

And no, I've never considered myself as a walking billboard, i am not supporting the sponsor, i am supporting the club.

Guy:Incognito

Helix wrote: »

ok put it like this:

company a sponsors your football team, and pays a LOT of money to do it. in exchange for that they get their name on the jersey, as well as prime advertising space around the teams stadium.

now, if you remove the logo from jerseys, youre defeating one of the main purposes for companies to sponsor teams, therefore making sponsorship worth far less to your club, and everone elses

that said i think droghedas is a bit much (funtasia, murphys environmental AND scotch hall all on the one jersey)

Did you just take my post and shuffle the words about a bit?

kinaldo

There's some sponsors I really like. JVC, SHARP, OPEL, SONY and Newcastle Brown Ale in my mind will always be associated with specific teams.

leninbenjamin

i'm weird like this but in my younger days i used love to design jerseys (among other things). the logo was always a key design focus, often it makes or breaks a design in my opinon, and with that in mind i don't mind wearing it as long as the logo adds something to the jersey. i hate the eircom logo on the Irish jersey, but i actually think the AIG design is very elegent, simple but not overpowering. and then some jerseys only work without a logo. At the end of the day the fact you're wearing a walking billboard doesn't bother me, it's just part and parcel of modern day football. When i was younger i stopped following football when i became aware of the increasing commerialism, but now i'm older it just doesn't bother me. it's just capitalism, you can't live it selectively and i refer to live with it than the alternative.

DSB

dc69 wrote: »

you wouldnt have your torres or drogba's or rooneys or fabregases without sponsorship.

Why not Rooney? Your posts greatly confuse me sometimes.