Nobody connects more emotionally to a sport than soccer fans. Look at their kits.
For sure, but that sucks to me. I realize it's normalized in soccer but I strongly dislike it, and the fact that uniforms are deeply enmeshed with a specific "era" demarcated by the team's giant sponsor is insanely sad and pernicious to me. This is exactly why I am so disappointed by this decision, it was the one thing in this sport that wasn't turned into a cheap ad and now that line is forever broken and it's only a matter of time before there's 4-6 ad patches or more on every uniform.
I agree that I and most fans will "get over" it in the sense of I won't be sitting on the couch raging with anger about it 3 months into the season, but I don't think I will ever get used to this being the norm. I do think at the very least the NHL will avoid the soccer style where the sponsor becomes the main crest, the NHL is so brand/team driven in its marketing that I don't think they would allow a sponsor to override the team crest, so the "worst" case scenario of a Euro hockey jersey won't happen, but I still am going to be disappointed about this forever and it is always going to bother me.
I've said it before but another part of it that bugs me is at the very least if you are a fan of European soccer or Formula 1 you can rationalize it as a bargain the sport makes with the fans, they'll cover the field/track and the players/drivers/cars with advertising, but you won't see any commercials at all during play. If that was the bargain the NHL was making, fill the ice up with ads and Euro hockey-style jerseys in exchange for no commercial breaks outside of intermissions I would probably take that swap as a fan to never see another f***ing gambling commercial ever again. But they're not going to do that, we're just getting the worst of both.
For the most part, those that hate it are going to see it as a nuisance , but I highly doubt most people are going to care enough to do anything meaningful about it (ie. A mass drop in viewership and sales).
I agree, I don't think it's going to move the needle at all, the most I think the public reaction could potentially "force" is a change to an all white colour-matched logo instead of using RBC's actual blue/yellow crest. They're not going to remove the ad and I don't think it's going to drive a change in sales, especially because the logos won't be on the jerseys fans buy for a while. Eventually it'll be like soccer where fans WANT the sponsor because that's the authentic kit - which I find extremely sad but it's definitely the long game here. Especially if the rebuild works out and we go on a run or win a cup, fans are going to want the jersey with the RBC or whatever logo on them. That's gross to me but it's definitely what's coming.
It hot markets, sports are a step below religion. This is true in all sports. Imagine a Bank of America logo on the Yankees jersey. That is almost as absurd as a sponsor logo on the Mona Lisa. There now will be jerseys with logos hanging in the Hall of Fame.
FWIW Major League Baseball is going to start selling jersey ads next year too. It's possible the Yankees will choose not to do it but I doubt it (and even if they do hold off, it will just be a matter of time so that in 2-3 years they can charge a higher price for the sponsor to be the brand that broke the seal on the Yankees pinstripes). The ad space on the Yankees uniform is going to cost "bank" money so I think a bank logo is pretty likely.
Not that they're in any way of equal standing to the Yankees but I'd assume the Blue Jays will get one of the Canadian banks as well. Rogers owns the team so they won't sell it to another telecom, nor would they "waste" the revenue opportunity. They own the team and it's already a
Rogers Sportsnet broadcast at the
Rogers Centre as part of
Rogers Blue Jays Baseball Partnership full of ads for
Rogers TV/phone service, so a bank would be the most likely choice since banks/telecoms are basically the only public-facing companies in Canada with the money for an MLB/Canadiens/Leafs jersey sponsor.
Not at all...i'm fascinated by why it bothers people. I find the discussion interesting and I happen to be bored.
I have all the stock anti-capitalist reasons to dislike it and they're a part of it, but at the end of the day it's just extremely ugly to me. I really like the aesthetics of most of the classic hockey uniforms including Montreal of course, and all the sponsors that can afford to pay for these spaces are going to be big brands that have well-designed ads specifically developed to draw your eyes. It is just a plain eye-sore to me and it makes me really disappointed that from this point forward every iconic hockey photo is going to have a big sponsor logo front and centre. Ovechkin is going to break Gretzky's goal record with a sportsbook ad front and centre, every big moment for the Canadiens going forward is going to include close-up pictures and video with the RBC crest front and centre immediately drawing your eye to the sponsor's logo, and so on. It was just one of the last things left where you wouldn't have sponsors up close and in focus and now that's gone and it's never coming back, and it makes me sad.
It's not so much about the storied tradition or whatever (that's admittedly still a small part of it for me but I think at this point we can mostly agree that the mystique of the Canadiens is waning or gone), I just plain and simply think it's an eye sore and I really liked that hockey jerseys were one of the few remaining
"public" design elements that weren't covered with advertising. Iconic timeless blue white and red design that now includes a big eye-catching yellow patch that is more visually distinct than the C or the A on a jersey. It's just ugly and looks extremely cheap and crass to me, and it is exhausting that every facet of life now involves constantly mentally filtering out advertising that is specifically designed to grab your attention. A less distinct colour-matched logo would be "better" to me but only by a degree as it's inherently going to involve a colour contrast.