THIS WEEK
Cover News
Opinion A & E
Sports Intramurals
Calendar Comics
 
YH FEATURES
Exclusive
Archives/Search
Planet of Sound
Speak Your Mind
Pick the Pros
Crossword
 
ONLINE TOOLS
Ground Zero
Sublet Search
Rideboard
Book Shopper
Blue Book Search
 
ABOUT US
the Yale Herald
YH Online
 


From the Sidelines: Derek Jeter, brought to you by Intel

Not that anyone watches NASCAR or anything, but doesn't it bug you that Jeff Gordon is a walking billboard? Does anyone really want to buy GoldBond's antifungal powder after seeing it advertised on his crotch? Most of us, however, are willing to accept the tastelessness of NASCAR uniforms, because car racing isn't really a sport.

Baseball is. We could never tolerate having "Intel Inside" plastered on Derek Jeter's arm, or "CNN" appearing next to the famous Braves tomahawk. According to the Official Baseball Rules, Section 1.1, paragraph h, "No part of the uniform shall include patches or designs relating to commercial advertisements."

But if baseball's notoriously greedy owners have their way, an important tradition will be sold out--literally. In recent weeks, baseball's powers that be have considered allowing advertisers to place their logos on the sleeves of players' uniforms. Once again, the almighty dollar is threatening a baseball tradition once thought to be untouchable. This is unacceptable.

We understand that these days many baseball teams struggle to compete in the baseball world, where a team's revenue can determine whether it will seriously contend for postseason play. Obviously, a small-market team like the Kansas City Royals has a tough time competing with financial giants like the New York Yankees and the Los Angeles Dodgers. Each winter, almost every high-priced free agent ends up on one of the eight or nine richest teams. This trend almost guarantees that other teams don't have a realistic chance to compete even before the first pitch is thrown. These small market teams must seek a new source of revenue. We've seen Gap ads in the outfield gaps and stadiums renamed for large corporations. But advertising on uniforms is one step too far. What's next, logos spray-painted on the outfield grass?

Advertisements on uniforms might bring short-term relief for financially strapped teams, but ultimately they won't help level the financial playing field. Instead, this scheme will eventually put the smaller teams in an even more unequal situation than they are in today. The Yankees and Braves have so much money because they are located in the two of the largest media markets in America. These teams collect millions of dollars from television contracts because the TV companies know advertisers are willing to pay exorbitant sums to reach these huge audiences. Uniform advertisers will follow the same logic. Accordingly, the Yankees would get Coke (as much as Darryl might like that), while the Minnesota Twins would get RC Cola. Or, even worse, the Dodgers would get Pizza Hut, while the Montreal Expos would get Broadway Pizza.

A plan like this would also produce irritating logistical controversies. For example, McDonald's now pays Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire millions of dollars to promote its food. What would happen if Burger King sponsored the Cubs or Kentucky Fried Chicken backed the Cardinals? There would be months of meetings between the players' agents, team management, and corporate lawyers. If you were annoyed that the McGwire androestinedione controversy detracted from a historic season, imagine what distractions could occur when so much money is involved.

Baseball has already promised to forbid alcohol and tobacco companies from advertising on the uniforms. Boy, they always keep the kids in mind. But when baseball begins to make moral judgments on advertisements, where do we draw the line? When Larry Flynt seeks to advertise on the New York Mets' sleeves, what would Bud Selig say? Would we want "Bush 2000" to be on every Texas Ranger's arm? Some of these scenarios may sound ridiculous, but that's the point. Every bad idea comes with silly controversies. Ads on uniforms would be no different.

It has become unusual for a player to stay with the same team for more than five years. Free agency has left us rooting for the uniforms of our favorite team, not the players who put them on every day. If baseball gets its way, the one thing we have left to cheer for will be tarnished by corporate opportunism. Imagine a Cooperstown where Mickey Mouse stands alongside Mickey Mantle. We surely don't want to bring our sons and daughters to a Hall of Fame where retired jerseys are marred by corporate logos. The major leagues have always been better than that--and they should stay that way. To quote Anaheim Angels right fielder Tim Salmon, "You don't want it to be like Little League, where you're playing for Tony's Tortilla's or something."

Back to Sports...

 

 


All materials © 1999 The Yale Herald, Inc., and its staff.
Got any questions, comments, or advice? Email the online editors at
online@yaleherald.com.
Like to join us?