Why a Nike-NFL Pairing Is Horrible for the Sport
So, what is the last thing the brash, over-the-top NFL needed? How about some brash, over-the-top jerseys.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand the change.
The NFL is trying to get away from the high-flying, shoulder-charging, helmet-clanging brand of game. So what does it do? Introduces jerseys that looks like something of a cross between Starship Troopers and the XFL. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
To me, it just encourages more of what NFL detractors hate—the dancing, the showboating, the "hey look at me" divas. Unfortunately, the fresh new apparel that surely will have some (Stevie Johnson, anyone?) thinking they have to draw more attention to themselves now that they have these fresh new uniforms. What's next? A jersey reading "He Hate Me" on the back?
Don't get me wrong, football is a great game. No other sport out there can boast the entertainment value and dramatic effect of the NFL. Isn't this change a step in the wrong direction, though? The change from a blander, more historical brand of uniforms not only increases individual machismo, but opens the door for counterfeiters.
Here's what Ira Mayer, editor of the NFL's The Licensing Letter, had to say:
The mystery to me—and I made a comment on it in the daily I write—is I'm surprised that it wasn't in the NFL's best interests to try to make peace between the two parties [Reebok and Nike] for these couple of weeks. What happens when you have a high demand, which Nike is saying there is and Reebok feels there is, and you leave a void? That's the perfect storm for counterfeiters. Is that really where they wanted that to go.
I have always prescribed to the theory that if it isn't broke, don't fix it. This just seems like a multimillion-dollar waste of time by the league. Bad move, NFL.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?