NBA’s uniform ad plan hits a snag?
 

The irony is so rich you can almost taste it.

Paul Lukas of Uni Watch.com reports that the NBA’s plan to affix advertising to player uniforms, a la foreign soccer, has been shelved for the moment because, in his words, “the greedy participants are too greedy to figure out how to share the greed-generated wealth amongst their greedy selves.”

In other words, the owners couldn’t figure out how to share the profits, which promises to be an ongoing battle on multiple fronts with large-market franchises like the Los Angeles Lakers lining up massive new cable deals.

You’d have to imagine the situation would be similar in regards to uniform ads, with the Apple New York Knicks being reluctant to cut a share of their windfall with the Taco Cabana San Antonio Spurs. Hence, the plan to add 2 1/2 inch by 2 1/2 inch advertising patches for the 2013-14 season appears to have been put on hold.

Lukas was careful to couch his source, rating him/her a 6.5 out of 10 in terms of credibility. But as he notes, Yahoo! Sports ran an item recently about the owners being divided on the issue, followed by commissioner David Stern’s own admission that he does not support the plan. There’s also the fact that an owners vote originally slated for September has not yet taken place.

So it appears as if we might still have some time before one of the last unspoiled frontiers in U.S. professional sports is finally overrun.

Spurs Nation

Good! It's all or nothing it sounds like.. So then NO SOUP (Or Taco Cabana) FOR YOU!

This is great news. For the big market teams it looks like it isn't worth the cost to their brand if they can't get fair market value for the ads and for the small market teams it looks like it isn't worth the competitive disadvantage for the smaller amount of money they would get if they didn't share money equally. Lose lose for the owners is win win for the fans.:banana

Wow, I am sick and tired of anyone who wants to make money being called GREEDY. I think the greedy people are the ones who whine about how much athletes get paid, and NBA owners make.

Who out there wouldn't take a bunch of money to wear an add on their shirt?

Why is it a win for the fans to not have ads on the shirts? How would that effect the game?

Oh how easy it is for fans to sit back and call Owners and players greedy as they fight over revenues. Every one of you would be fighting to get your share of the money if you were in their shoes.

It is You, the envious fan, who complains about high salaries and profits who is the greedy one. It is none of your business how the NBA makes it's money.

The NBA exists in a competitive marketplace for my dollars and eyeballs, so yes it my business how the NBA makes its money if the NBA wants to continue to have my business. Also, when I see an idea role around that if implemented in a certain way will have a negative effect on the Spurs chance of success, you bet I'm going to have an opinion. When I see a group of owners get together to denigrate a product that we support with our tax dollars, you better believe I'm going to express an opinion.

You seem to want to spend loads of money that is not yours....... i.e. Tony Parker getting 15 million per year when it was not even close to being necessary. I'm more judicious on player salary and salary cap management than you are. I'm also more the tradionalist when it comes to sports and I'm not favor of ads on game jerseys during the regular season or playoffs. Practice jerseys maybe. As a fan I don't want to pay for a jersey with a Bank of America ad on it.....sorry. I'm also a fan of the game. I don't like ads on jerseys. even David Stern said he didn't like it but.........if the owners wanted it.......he would let them do it. Also I'm sure the NBAPA will want a cut too. Might cause another lockout or something. So keep it out of the game at least in the NBA at least. I'm not an old man here just 36 but sometimes it's nice to keep the game pure by not adding things to make it tacky and extremely gaudy. It's not something the game NEEDS!

:applause:applause

Where did that come from? Are you going back to when I made the argument that Tony could earn a max contract if he took over the team? I was saying I wouldn't be upset if they gave him that, if he earned it by leading the team to a championship (which he didn't by the way).

As far as your opinions about adds on jerseys. . . I can respect that opinion. I just don't like hearing people say the owners are greedy for trying to find more revenue sources. That is not greedy. Everyone tries to find new revenue, owners, players, fans, everyone.

I wonder how they are going to deal with one player being an endorser of a brand that is directly competing with the teams sponsoring brand.

Well at first it was give TP the money no matter what and later on you added the lead the team to a title add on after the fact. About the owners finding more revenue etc., That's fine and dandy but I think the real reason is some of the owner's businesses have tanked outside of basketball because of the recession. They are trying to make up for it with ads on jerseys to offset their personal losses not related to basketball operation. It's not the fans' fault the Sun's owner got screwed over in the real estate market. Money is important but as NBA owners have some integrity for the game at least.

Naa, I never wanted to just dole out the money to TP. And I can't find the exact quotes, but the contract I was originally suggesting wasn't a max contract either (though it was more than he is getting now).

In terms of putting adds on jerseys, I personally don't see anything wrong with it at all. There is nothing about putting adds on jerseys that lacks integrity? I understand you may personally not want it, by that doesn't' make it an integrity issue.

I didn't throw out 15 million just out of the blue.:smirk Never said you said it was max money either but what he got (real world) was market value. Than you wanted to trade him before last year and he had his best year ever. Mistake #2 on that one. It's ads not adds FYI. Respecting the game is something that should be held high. I think most people on here would prefer to leave them off. Like I said Stern doesn't even want them.

Damn Will, you dun gone petty on me.

You are like my wife, still mad about things I said back in 1997.

So here is one of the posts you were referring to. You consistently disregard the "if" part of my statement. If Tony had lead us to a championship, he would have proved to be a max player.

http://www.spursreport.com/forums/sp...et-max-if.html

If Tony Parker is the best player on the team this year, and we win a championship, he should get a max contract.

And what I mean by best player is. . .

Spurs get the 1st or 2nd seed in the West
Tony leads the team in scoring 24+ppg
Leads the team in assists 6.5+

If Tony can prove that he can lead us to a championship, I think we could build around him even after Duncan leaves.

But only if he proves he can do it this year!

And here is the post I made about his salary. Notice that I only proposed 3.5 million more a year than his actual contract. I call that difference the loyalty factor.

http://www.spursreport.com/forums/sp...whiteside.html

Well you used to be on my ace all the time in the past just giving you some payback lol:smirk

ONLY? That's a lot more per year to me than needed even with last year throw in after the fact.

But you wanted to trade him????????...............nice that YOU threw out that part of your reply.....lol. Just reminding you AGAIN!

Hate to interupt but i guess it really goes back to a fact that if like myself your sporting teams have had team sponsorship since the 80's then you won't have such an issue with it.

My footy team throwback has the original sponsor on it and people talk about versions of the jersey by the sponsor on it.

My only issue is if everyone start scrambling for part of it, as much as it may mean less for us being a small market team I believe it should be the team attracting the sponsor and collecting the rent just like the rest of the world. Then an owner has a reason to build their own product more rather than rely on other teams sales, which would mean less cost cutting and more put back into the team.

I don't remember wanting to trade him except for maybe a rant or two after bad games/series.

I do remember relentlessly defending parker against stupid trade ideas for losers like Devin Harris.

I have always argued that you can't trade parker unless you get an all-star in return.

I might have suggested tony get traded for Josh Smith. I also thought about possibilities when it seemed he was going to be traded before this years draft, but I have NEVER been a big proponent of trading Parker. I definitely didn't leave that out of my previous posts.

Rants,posts whatever you have implied some trade talk?lol. I get blasted for my trade ideas but notice the common theme.......they never include the Big 3 or getting Devin Harris! haha. On your third point I agree 110%