The NBA May Soon Look Very Different

March 22, 2012

When it next meets, the governing board of the National Basketball Association will consider allowing corporate advertising on players' official game jerseys. According to the Sporting News, the NBA is the last major American sport to have no logos other than the team name on its official game uniforms -- Adidas currently has logos only on NBA warm-ups.

Sports such as soccer, NASCAR and even the Women's National Basketball Association have no qualms about giving corporate sponsors prominent placement on vehicles, equipment and jerseys. For example, in 2009 the WNBA's Phoenix Mercury signed a deal with LifeLock -- a company that helps its customers fight identity theft -- for logo placement on players' jerseys. Ironically, the LifeLock name has essentially replaced the team's logo, causing many to wonder what the impact would be on the NBA should it follow suit.

Monetarily, insiders estimate the advertising could generate additional revenues in excess of $31 million per NBA team each year and that figure doesn't even include ancillary exposure on video highlights and news shows, nor does it account for any online exposure. But many question whether succumbing to marketing money would diminish the purity of the game.

Increased sponsorship might only further commercialize what is already a big business. Some worry that allowing corporate advertising to take a more prominent role in the game itself could give sponsors too much control over how teams function. However, it may prove difficult to put controls on these emerging, outside corporate brand influences.

From a league perspective, corporate money could be enough to peddle influence over the actual rules of the game. Sponsors may want to sensationalize the games by allowing new rules they believe will attract more eyeballs, enabling sponsors and corporate advertisers to get more bang for their buck.

Outside money and pressure could affect the way teams trade and use individual players. Instead of acquiring athletes for their talent or their fit in the team dynamic, corporate brand influence could favor players the sponsor wants representing the company for nonathletic reasons. Not to mention that injecting more cash into a sport with multi-million dollar player contracts could further shift players' focus away from the love of the game itself.

Many individual players already have their own endorsement deals. These deals could be in jeopardy if players are forced to wear jerseys with advertisements for competitors' products. For example, a player with a private endorsement deal with Gatorade might be faced with the dilemma of wearing a team jersey advertising for Powerade, Gatorade's biggest rival. Player contracts will need to be carefully tailored in anticipation of what many believe will eventually become a reality in professional sports marketing.

While allowing corporate brands to be displayed on team uniforms could bring in substantial amounts of money, the NBA board of governors must carefully balance a number of other considerations. As Golden State Warriors president and COO Rick Welts said, the big question everyone must consider is, "What is it worth?" Only time will tell.

Article provided by Entertainment, Intellectual Property, Internet & New Media Law Group
Visit us at www.entertainmentiplaw.com/