Digital Marketing Trending in Sports

Marketing has reached a whole new level in the world today-- especially in the world of sports.  Sponsorships used to be a major source when it came to marketing a big company.  For instance, NIKE would sponsor popular, big name athletes to get their brand advertised across the country.  But they are actually changing the way they market and advertise their brand.  Marketing with new digital technology is a new direction that not only NIKE will go in, but a lot of other areas of the sports world as well.

For example, in an article I found called, "Nike's New Marketing Mojo".  It discusses the new program that NIKE created in 2010 and the new direction they want to go in as far as marketing in concerned.  They discuss the new technologies their team is creating, such as The Fuelband, which is a wristband that tracks energy output.  They want to make it known that they aren’t about just creating new gadgets but gadgets that will help bring an online, social community together in hopes of earning their trust well enough to keep bringing business back to them.  Creating partnerships with other brands is a huge way of creating a community.

An important part of digital marketing in sports is fan interaction.  Fans love being involved, and it’s easier to do this more today than ever.  Companies and brands are taking advantage of this marketing tool.  For instance, Doritos held a contest for fans to make their own commercial.  The winner would be able to have their video air during the Super Bowl.  This contest got the word out about Doritos as well as had the fans interact during one of the biggest games of the year.  They placed the rules on Facebook and still have the winners posted there today.  You can view the videos on their page at:  http://www.superbowl-commercials.org/15486.html.

These are just a few ways that digital marketing is taking over.  Not only is it more cost effective, but it is becoming more effective today.  Everyone is on the internet, has a smartphone or tablet, so it only makes sense to move in this direction when it comes to promoting and selling your business and brand.

Good Sportsmanship Is Still Alive

The news is usually filled with bad news.  I mean, kids can’t even go to a junior high or high school sporting event without a fight breaking out or something bad happening.  So, when I hear an inspiring story that happened during a middle school basketball game, I get goose bumps and find myself smiling.

It was the last home game for Van Hoosen’s boy’s basketball team and it was important to let one player play.  That player’s name is Owen Groesser.  Groesser was unable to play because he has down syndrome so the coach hired him as the team’s manager instead.  Not only did Groesser help the coach with his duties but also practiced with the team everyday.  On the night of the last game, the coach talked with the coach of the opposing team and told him he wanted to let Groesser play.  They both agreed and in the last two minutes of the game, Groesser was able to come into the game. 

Oh, but that’s not even the best part of the story.  The players were all set-up so that Groesser was able to get the ball and shoot it.  The team called this play, “The Owen.”  Little did they know that Groesser would get the ball, take a step, shoot a 3-pointer and sink it in the basket!  The crowd went wild!  Not only did he do this once, but twice in the last two minutes of the game!  

As in any other game, it was caught on camera.  Groesser’s team, family and friends all thought that he deserved to be recognized.  Instead of just posting his video on YouTube, they started a campaign on Twitter called, #GetOwenOnSportsCenter.  Of course, ESPN saw it and had to air it.  It was a huge success and his highlights were shown on ESPN’s “SportsCenter’s” Top-10 highlights on January 23, 2013. 

It’s finally nice to see inspirational news!  It’s important to show that with hard work and dedication, you can do anything!  The last thing I want to point out is that this team showed the definition of good sportsmanship.  Not only with Groesser’s team and coach, but with the opposing team and coach.  I love seeing the younger generation still has it in them to do kind acts for other people.  Even if that means “giving” 6 points to the opposing team in order to let a player with a disability play his last game. 

This blog has nothing to do with professional or college sports, but sometimes those stories aren’t the most important ones at the end of the day.  This one has a good lesson to learn from it and I thought I’d share my views on it.  Just in case you haven’t seen the video of the game, I’ve posted that link below as well as the link of Groesser and his father on ESPN for a live interview.  I hope you enjoy!

Owen Is In The Game
ESPN Interview

Team Teo: Manti is Innocent

For anyone that knows me personally, they know I’m a HUGE Notre Dame fan.  I was blessed to be a fan of such an amazing team this year (2012), because, as most of us know, it’s been a long time since they’ve had a winning season.  Manti Teo and the rest of the front seven defensive players were a huge part in the success of the team this year.  Teo did so well this season that he was one of the top NFL drafts picks and even the runner up for the Heisman Trophy.  It’s not every year you see a defensive player up for the Heisman.  He also won numerous awards during the year because of his proven leadership and his athletic ability.  So, my question is, why is the media making him out to be such a bad person because of a “catfishing” hoax? 

            Okay, no one is perfect, especially people in the media.  Manti Teo fell in love with a girl he’s never met.  And?  What’s the big deal?  He’s not perfect either.  He isn’t the one that ran story after story about himself on every station after the death of his loved ones.  He isn’t the one that brought the story up after every victory they had.  The media did it.  And now since this hoax came about, the media is making him become the bad person by reporting news without having the facts.  I mean, why not throw away everything he did for the team this year.  Also, let’s forget all the charity work he did too.  The “REAL” news is Manti Teo could possibly be a liar.  Oh no!  Not that!  I understand that scandal sells, but come on.  Catfishing happens everyday.  There was a documentary made about a real-life situation as well as a show on MTV that follows real-life people that do this all the time.  In case anyone is wondering, catfishing is where someone makes up a fake social media page and pretends to be someone they are not for months and even years.  Since he is a well-known individual, he was an easy target.

            I was finally happy when Teo sat down for an interview and explained everything.  You can find this interview HERE.  To me, everything made sense.  I felt like he was too embarrassed to admit he was dating someone he never met, especially since he is well known.  Even though Internet dating is so popular today, I could see how it would look bad for such a well-known athlete.  Athletes are known to have ladies throw themselves at them so there really isn’t a need for him to date online and especially someone he’s never met.  In his defense, he is a man of faith and he probably thought he found a woman that was on his same level. 

            My point is that no one is perfect.  Even though the media wants to make Teo out as a bad person now because of how they portrayed him as being a “perfect” man before, he is still a good guy.  Well, at least in my eyes he is.  Maybe he did lead people to believe he met this girl, but honestly, why is that anyone’s business anyways.  I think it’s time to let this go in the news because, after all, he still did lose someone he loved, his grandmother.  This was a hoax done by friends of his family that just went too far.  People will think what they want regardless, so there is no point in pressing the issue and trying to get facts.  Enough is enough.

Media Rights....Where Do You Draw The Line?

Just in case anyone was wondering, there are a lot of issues in sports regarding media rights, broadcasting and press credentials.  Some people think that if a NCAA tournament is held at a college, that the NCAA has all the media and broadcasting rights to that tournament.  That couldn’t be more wrong.  A good example is the NCAA Division I Women’s Tournament in Kingston, Rhode Island, at the University of Rhode Island. 

When it comes to managing the local, regional, and national media contingent covering the event, the NCAA is hands off.  All the responsibility is on the educational venue hosting the event.  The school and their sports information department were responsible for organizing the media needs for this tournament.  URI Coordinator of Sports Communications Shane Donaldson was the head guy that was in charge of making this happen.  It was a hug project for him to deal with though because he’s not used to so many media requests for women’s tournament compared to the men’s.  He stated, “more than 160 credentials were issued for the two-day tournament, 96 of which were to reporters and photographers.  For a typical men’s game total media is around 30-40 on a given night, so you’re talking more than double than what we typically have.” 

Now, a big issue that’s been going around when it comes to broadcasting a sporting event has a lot to do with Tweeting about it on Twitter.  Recently there was reporter that tweeted numerous times during a basketball game.  He was later “reprimanded” for his actions for excessive tweeting during the game.  There were threats of punishment, including the revocation of the reporters press credentials for breaking the live-update limit.  This seems pretty extreme because this is becoming more and more popular.  I’m a huge Notre Dame fan and when I can’t watch the games, I look forward to the live updates from the reporters at the games.  If the reporters aren’t going to do it, then a fan will.  What exactly is the difference?

 In an article I found, “College sports, broadcasting rights, and the digital space”, author, Elizabeth Wiley commented on this story by stating, “It may seem ludicrous for a reporter to be reprimanded for sending one or two tweets too many, but a 20 tweet limit for 40 minutes of live action on the basketball court doesn’t seem that restrictive. Reporters are allowed to tweet as much as they want pre-game, post-game, and even at halftime.”  She also points out a few more good points by stating that those posts alone, could equal more than 20 tweets that are “allowed” during the game.  Also, what stops the stations from actually sending a reporter into the stands to send out live tweets rather than in the press box?  Essentially there’s really no way this can stop.  I feel like there will be ways around it whether or not the school wants it to stop or not. There has to be a way to compromise with this situation, just like any other media rights issues.

SOURCES

http://sportsmediajournal.com/tag/on-press-row/

http://mashable.com/2012/11/12/live-tweeting-broadcast-rights/

http://flipthemedia.com/2012/12/college-sports-broadcasting-rights-and-the-digital-space/

NFL Lockout: Biggest Sports Business Conflict of 2011

            When I think of any sports lockout, the only word that comes to mind is “greed.”  I have researched lockouts from the NHL, NBA and NFL and it all boils down to the owners wanting more money than the millions, or even billions, that they are already worth.  What irks me the most is the owners asking a salary cut from the players, the ones that make the league, to put more money in their own pockets.  Between the three lockouts, I feel the one with the NFL was the biggest sports business conflict in the last five years. 

            First off, in case no one knows what a lockout is, I’ll get that out of the way.  It’s basically a strike but instead of the employees refusing to work until a pay negotiation is reached, the owners refuse to let the players play until a new negotiation is reached.  In the case of the 2011 NFL lockout, it lasted 132 days.  Here is how it started:

            In March of 2006, with a vote of 30-2, the owners voted to extend the CBA for 6-years, with the Bills and the Giants opposing it.  However in May of 2008, the owners had a change of mind and wanted to opt out of the CBA following the 2010 season.  According to an article on ESPN.GO, the NFL stated, "The current labor agreement does not adequately recognize the cost of generating the revenues of which the players receive the largest shares; nor does the agreement recognize that those costs have increased substantially -- and at an ever increasing rate -- in recent years during a difficult economic climate in our country."  This is when things started to change.

            March of 2010 came around and it was the final league year under the current CBA.  This was also the first time since 1993 that the league had started the season without a salary cap.  On top of that, player movements will be restricted.  Some examples include the number of accrued seasons needed to become a free agent and additional franchise player tags.

            Skipping down the timeline to February 2011 where the NFL walks away from a negotiating session with the NFLPA on how to divide the league revenue.  From this time all the way to March 11, 2011, no negotiations have been made.   Now it’s time for the courts to step in.  On April 6, 2011, Judge Susan Nelson holds a hearing on the plaintiff’s request to end the lockout.  After several meetings and court dates with the players, owners and the Commissioner, the NFL owners approved a proposed 10-year labor agreement with the NFLPA on July 21, 2011, leaving the end of the lockout up to the players.  It finally ended on July 25, 2011.

            What’s funny is I don’t think the owner’s really cared if the season went on or not because they would receive $4 billion in TV money.  Of course the NFLPA would expect money from that $4 billion, but it’s said that the owners would most likely appeal that.  Luckily it didn’t get to that point.  To add to the losses that would’ve happened if this lockout didn’t end are:

-Rookies andEndorsement Deals:  No company in the right mind is going to endorse a player and spend millions of dollars if there is not going to be a season.

-Networks andAdvertisers: The Super Bowl is the highest rated show…EVER!  All football advertisers would have to go elsewhere if there’s no football.  This could mean to less appealing products and services. 

- Fans:  Fans will miss our on America’s favorite sport.  This means no fantasy football, no video’s to watch, highlights to email, Facebook statues to post, etc. 

- Stadium Cities andEmployees:  Without football, several employees of each stadium are out of a job.  The city also suffers from not having home games to help bring in revenue for local businesses.  If they aren’t making money, they can’t keep their employees.

- Merchandise Sales:  With merchandise up to $2.1 billion in 2010, it shows that it brings in a lot of revenue for the teams.  That’s a big chunk of revenue subtracted from the league if this lockout didn’t end.

Thank goodness this lockout DID end in a negotiation that would benefit all parties.  Instead of the owners worrying about how much more money they can fit into their pockets and bank accounts, they should look at the bigger picture in how a lockout could ruin things for a lot of people.  These are just a few reasons why the NFL Lockout of 2011 was one of the biggest sports business conflicts in the last five years.

Catchphrase Trademarks Issues

"Tebowing."   

"Ball So Hard University." 

 "Linsanity."  

These are popular catchphrases in the wonderful world of sports.  However, they are are catchphrases that could make a lot of money if trademarked, and that is exactly why there were lawsuits battling who had the right to these phrases.

Now, I'm sure you are asking why these phrases are going to court when it's obvious "Tebowing" is referring to the New York Jets Tim Tebow, "Ball So Hard University" is in reference to the Baltimore Ravens Terrell Suggs and "Linsanity" was made to reference to New York Knicks Jeremy Lin.  Well it's pretty simple.  With trademarking, the law requires that the OWNER of the catchphrase can use the mark first.  This means that a fan, YES FAN, could've actually came up with all those catchphrases for the players and could trademark it before the player does.  Why?  Because it was their idea first.  BUT if the original owner doesn't step up and trademark their territory within a certain amount of time, someone else can step in.  This was a big problem for the three listed above.   They weren't fast enough to apply for a trademark and someone beat them to it so it had to end up in a court battle.  Suggs actually bought a t-shirt from the internet made from someone else saying "Ball So Hard University."  That was his first mistake.



According to the article, "Losing the Race to Trademark Sports Catchphrases", there are two ways in order to establish priority in a trademark.  The first way is to use the phrase in connection with certain goods and services.  Examples of this would be to put their phrase on cups, hats or t-shirts, which is exactly what the owner of "Ball So Hard University" did.  The second to file an “intent to use” (“ITU”) application with the USPTO under Section 1(b) of the Lanham Act governing trademarks.  These two steps are extremely important, especially if you are the player who the catchphrase is about because if someone else has the rights, they will make money off of you and what you do.  Of course there are ways around this such as suing for infringement or, in the case of Tebow, simply commence use of the phrase before the owner of an earlier-filed ITU application can establish use.

Terrell Suggs is taking this matter very seriously.  It seems pretty obvious he was coached to this this because three days after his game in November he showed up at a news conference wearing a "Ball So Hard University" t-shirt and told reporters "there is some way you can get them … that has nothing to do with me."  Suggs did say he came up with the phrase, just not the shirts.  You can watch his interview here.  However, the shirt came from a man named Brian Brussells.  Brussells was the man that beat Suggs to trademark the catchphrase.  The only problem is, there is a "right to publicity" law that Suggs can file basically stating that Brussells can't make money off his name....even though, technically, he isn't using Suggs' name.  You can find the rest of that information in the article, "'Ball So Hard University' big enough for only one person?"
 
Now, not all these catchphrase cases end up in court.  Some athletes are quick enough to see a good thing in front of them and snatch up the rights to it right away.  A good example is with NBA's #1 draft pick Anthony Davis and his 'unibrow.'  That ugly brow got him a few catchphrases such as,  "Raise the Brow," "Fear the Brow," and "Brow Down."  In an article published by CNBC on June 25, Davis told CNBC sports business reporter Darren Rovell: “I don’t want anyone to try to grow a unibrow because of me and then try to make money off of it. Me and my family decided to trademark it because it’s very unique.”  Davis is now the first and only person to file for this trademark so he is safe.  If you want more information about this story, you can read the article, "A Slam Dunk For Catch Phrases".

In sports, it doesn't take long for a catchphrase to catch on and grow.  Especially if it's for a top team or player.  Fans stay on top of their game too, which Tebow, Suggs and Lin had to learn the hard way.  Suggs will most likely get his way in the end because money does talk, but in order to avoid this whole process, take the necessary steps right away.  Because if you don't, a broke fan is waiting to jump on it to make money off your name, or in this case, off your catch phrase.

The End May Be Near for Dodger's

-->

The Dodger’s are the face for baseball.  Well at least I think so.  Entering into the National League in 1890 and winning the pennant, showed this was a special team and the beginning of a long road of amazing history.  Well, until 2011 when owner Frank McCourt took the team in a different direction.  Not only did he show how little he actually cared for the fans and the team itself, but also he put them in a financial crisis that only benefitted him and his family.

The team started spiraling in the wrong direction when the O’Malley family, after owning the team for 30 years, decided to sell it in 1998.  Murdoch’s News Corp jumped right on the deal, but not to manage the team how it was before, but by trying to build a network surrounding the team.  After six short years, they succeeded and decided to sell it to make a lot of money.

In the meantime, Boston native, Frank McCourt was looking into purchasing the Boston Red Sox.  Unfortunately this wouldn’t work out for him because of his lack of assets and credibility.  He then saw an opportunity with the Dodgers and jumped right on it.  The only problem was he didn’t have the funds to actually buy the team so he started off on the wrong foot in debt.  He had to loan $150m from Bank of America, $75m from MLB, and $196m from FOX.  

With $421 million in debt, Frank had to figure out ways to pay this off but he wouldn’t be able to do that without benefitting himself.  He was trying to be slick by trading his Boston parking lots to FOX to forgive some of his debt with them, borrowed $250m from Dodger Tickets, LLC, to refinance most of the remaining acquisition debt and cashed in $50m of “rebates” from FOX.  So he basically paid for the team with the team’s money.

So while the team is suffering from this extreme debt, he used the money that was coming in for his luxurious lifestyle.  Not only was he paying himself $5m a year and his wife $2m a year, but he was paying his children at least $600,000 each.  The only problem with that was his children weren’t even working for the team yet they were on the payroll.  On top of that, they spent more money than they were making, which caused more uproar.  They couldn’t spend money on decent players because they couldn’t afford it so that caused fans to stop coming to games.  McCourt wasn’t worried about it because he had the money coming in to support his lifestyle.  He also had “other businesses” which he claimed was paying his salary and his lifestyle.

 

Unfortunately there is so much more to this story that can be written.  Frank McCourt is a selfish man that is going through a divorce now, which might cost even more money.  Plus he wants to make a deal with FOX that would pay the Dodgers $200m to try to get the team back on track.  However, if this deal goes through, it only leaves an open door for McCourt to use that money for his personal use. 

This story was a big deal because Frank McCourt was taking one of baseball’s first team’s ever and running it into the ground.  The worst part was that he probably didn’t care as long as he was benefitting from it.  The Commissioner of the MLB needs to deny the deal McCourt wants with FOX and take the team away from him.  There was a reason he was denied purchasing the Red Sox.  It should’ve put up a red flag when he purchased the Dodgers. 

If you want to learn more about this story, check out a couple of these sites!

Frank McCourt Goes to Court 

Frank McCourt MUST Go!