"How Marketers Can Bring Their A-Game to the Super Bowl"

From Ad Age

Review by Graham Sharples in SRM 435 (section 1)

As the Super bowl is fast approaching, many fans look forward to the commercials just as much as the big game. On January 22, 2014, Ad Age, wrote a special report on the super bowl and how revealing ads throughout the duration of the super bowl can either make or break marketers careers. The article noted that in order to be successful on the “big day,” marketers should be prepared to spend on average $6 million to $10 million but also to start focusing on their advertisement at least eight months in advance. The article focuses a lot on the planning for the one-day debut rather than just the advertisement itself. It was also stated in the article that “marketers now plan when and how they announce they bought a super bowl spot” and how that has become a part of a mini-marketing plan because of all the media interest surrounding it (McCarthy, 2014).

Super bowl Sunday has grown to be one of the most watched broadcasts and sporting events in the United States. Companies are quick to take advantage of the built-in audience to showcase their products and innovative ad campaigns. It is an unprecedented opportunity and a huge moment in sports and advertising.

This article relates to this course because the course relies heavily on the principles of promotions and marketing in the sports industry. The article analyzes the key to being a successful advertiser during a big event such as the super bowl. The class deals a lot with promotions and advertising and this is exactly what the article described. This article also recognizes the importance of preparation and marketing strategies in order to be profitable.

---

Review by Matt Williams in SRM 435 (section 1)

My article review will be on advertisements and marketing on the Superbowl ads. This opportunity for companies around the world is something they spend months and millions of dollars on. And this marketing prime time only comes around once a year therefore creates high stakes, money and time invested in these precious ad times. If your company is not willing to spend 6-10 million dollars Adam Komack chief client officer at Mediacom does not recommend you make this steep commitment just for a 30 second airtime. The Superbowl has become much more than a football game in our country it is practically a national holiday millions of people around the world watch the game football fan or not. The Super Bowl is the only time a year when marketers are guaranteed millions of people will be watching. Social media has impacted the marketing as well people sent out 26.1 million tweets during the game. This is exactly the attention that these companies want to generate consumers talking about their commercials and products. The after shock that these 30-60 seconds create is the key not just owning that add spot but having people talk about your add next week at work. Then the companies should offer some sort of retail event following the ad “to capitalize on all the noise the brand has made” Komack says. This opportunity to capture millions of peoples only comes once a year. This is why companies spend millions of dollars and fight for the most talked about ad for a reason. It works the most prosperous companies in the world shuffle ads out on this day. Marketers around the world take note on the messages and tactics made to try and make the best ad of year. This isn't only the National Football Leagues championship I believe this is also the title match for the marketing world. On one of the biggest stages of world a mega event when is their better time to take advantage of this marketing time.

"Peyton Manning's 'Omaha! Omaha!' Snap Count Creates Most Random Tourism Marketing Ever"

From Adweek

Review by Candynce Boney in KIN 501
During the San Diego vs. Denver NFL playoff game, quarterback Peyton Manning yelled out the play “Omaha Omaha” numerous times during the game before the ball was snapped back to him. During the game “Omaha” became a trending topic on twitter, with the tourism marketers of Omaha Nebraska tweeting “we certainly appreciate all the love from Peyton Manning #Omaha”. Marketing for tourism weren’t the only ones which saw the opportunity with Peyton’s “Omaha” play, “Omaha Steaks” also saw this as an opportunity to promote their restaurants name. One buffet in particular Omaha’s Warren Buffet is hoping for a promotional commercial from Peyton once the season comes to an end.

This is great marketing not only for Peyton Manning but the Bronco franchise as an entity. With Nebraska not having a home NFL team, marketers for the Broncos can use this as an opportunity to increase their fan base. Slowly starting with Peyton doing commercials in different businesses in Omaha, as the team and corporation begin to gain recognition in that part of the country they can begin to incorporate different athletes in their press. As sports marketers we can start to see how much social media can improve marketing abilities. With Twitter and Instagram being so popular in this day and age, sports marketers can use these tools to reach crowds all across the country, possibly other countries depending on the sport(s).

As a recent graduate with aspirations of going into sports marketing, whether it is for a professional team or a college team, it is important to stay up to date with the evolution of technology. Many times the most efficient way to reach a crowd is through social media or the Internet. A sports marketer should be able to follow the trending topics on twitter and decide whether they can relate that topic back to their company in a positive way, this will allow you to stay up to date with the constantly changing fads.

Realistically speaking, social media isn’t always the best route to take. There is also a possibility of social media hurting your company or organization more than it could help. For instance Stephanie Rice, an Olympic swimmer was criticized for a picture she posted on Instagram in a swimsuit. Which is pretty interesting because her career revolves around wearing a swimsuit. As a sport’s marketer it is important to understand the vision of your organization, doing something in the public eye that does not correspond with your company or organizations mission can be detrimental to a reputation. Therefore it is important to know how to reconcile any social issues that may arise with any of your athletes at any time during the year.

"Pinkwash? For Every $100 Of NFL Pink Merchandise Sales, Only $3.54 Goes Toward Cancer Research"

From SportsGrid.com

Analysis by Ryan Murakami in SRM 435 (section 1)

‘A Crucial Catch’ is a merchandising campaign that the NFL is apart of during the month of October. The purpose of the campaign is to support breast cancer research. In the article, the author debates how much this campaign actually benefits cancer research. According to Business Insiders, the NFL of keeping about 90 percent of the sales for the Breast Cancer Awareness gear, even though they claim to only keep 45 percent. Of the 10 percent of money that the American Cancer Society does receive, less than 80 percent actually goes toward the funding of research. So the bottom line is, is the NFL really helping a good cause or are they taking advantage of an opportunity to “look good” just to create more revenue?

From a marketing standpoint, this campaign creates a great opportunity for the NFL to market to different audiences and focus on female spectators, who are about 45 percent of the NFL fan base. Over the first four years the campaign has been in existence, it has brought in 4.5 million in revenue. On the outside the league will get positive publicity from the general public by teaming up with the American Cancer Society. If fans truly look into the actual numbers though they will figure out that it is not as beneficial for the cancer research. The NFL can push the Breast Cancer Awareness gear since it is only available for a certain time of year and target a specific market, with their female audience. This is a wonderful marketing tool for the NFL to look like they are “helping” a cause and gives the fans a chance to buy different apparel items that are not available year round. This article can definitely relate to what we have learned in class this semester I believe the NFL has a product that people want with the Breast Cancer Awareness gear. The league will use the campaign to show fans they are involved with the American Cancer Society, which will also prompt more fans to buy the gear. From a sales standpoint, Ticketmaster also gives a small percentage to cancer research during October. This could potentially encourage fans and people involved with breast cancer research to support the league this particular month. The NFL seems to be the only party benefiting from this partnership and I believe this needs to change very soon.

---

Analysis by Tyler Green in SRM 435 (section 1)

The article we decided to review and discuss in class was the big controversy rising up about the National Football League and its fifth annual partnership with the American Cancer Society and their campaign titled ‘A Crucial Catch’. Even though that campaign may appear to be selfless and compassionate of the NFL, others are beginning to think that underlying motives are simply to enhance their public image among the female fan base as well as take a large cut of the profits in merchandise sales. The agreement between organizations has the NFL putting pink in just about every aspect of the sport from player equipment to merchandise sold in stores to raise funds to support the fight against breast cancer and to advertise the Crucial Catches message (women over 40 getting annually screened for breast cancer). The issue is that for every $100 of merchandise purchased in the name of breast cancer research, only $3.54 is contributed to the fight. With all the money the NFL is generating, people cannot help but become angered at the mere 1% they will be contributing to their community causes this year.

From a sales/marketing stand point with disregard to ethics and morals, I would say that this campaign is a pretty smart way to generate large quantities of revenue. They have pinpointed a target market and a topic that affects many Americans nationwide, so it is a no brainer that it will bring a lot of attention and support. In addition to the money made, they also are doing wonders for their image by acting like such a strong advocate of fighting breast cancer while keeping the profits behind closed doors. If they can attract new customers (primarily female ones) and establish a positive connection with them to retain their allegiance, the could consider this “marketing mission” accomplished.

This article relates to our class in a number of ways, the first one being advertising and publicity and the roles they play in this campaign. The NFL is obviously giving some of the profits from sales to the ACS, so as a result they are paying for a little bit of advertising by being associated with a powerful subject such as breast cancer. This then leads into publicity because it creates a positive image for the league with all the coverage that can be done on the matter without money coming out of the NFL’s pockets. In addition to these, there is also a greater behavioral response incentives put on buying the merchandise when one believes they are helping to fight breast cancer. Particularly in the affiliation/community and health/fitness portions of incentives due to the female community coming together as one, and the emphasis on being healthy and cancer free. Last but not least, a lot of sponsorship aspects can be seen for this topic with the commercial agreement/mutual benefits between the NFL and ACS, the sponsorship trends of how “everyone is doing it” for the month of October, and the many sponsorship platforms the NFL is operating out of, which is just about all of them discussed in class.

Overall the article really got Ryan and I thinking about the concepts learned in class, the strategy the NFL is using to approach this sales/marketing opportunity, and how the class could easily and openly discuss such a matter with strong opinions.

"What happened between Richie Incognito and Jonathan Martin?"

From Laces Out, Huffington Post, ESPN.com, and Bleacher Report

Analysis by Thomas Anzalone in SRM 334 (section 1)

Over the past week a member of the Miami Dolphins organization Jonathan Martin quit the team because other team members were bullying him. Richie Incognito was the targeted bully who left a viscous voicemail on Martin’s cell phone. Once upper level management heard this voicemail they suspended Incognito indefinitely. Richie Incognito has a history of getting kicked off teams and starting fights with players. With all this said many of the players on the Dolphins have came forward to say that Incognito is a great teammate and he took Martin under his wing to show him the way. When the media released the voicemail people started to attack Incognito through social media. He later retaliated on twitter to ESPN and Adam Schefter ESPN’s reporter. Incognito has taken his tweets off of his twitter page and neither Incognito nor Martin has yet to speak publicly about the incident. There are also numerous tweets between Martin and Incognito especially the picture posted of him and Incognito on Bourbon Street. When I first heard this story it immediately seemed like Richie Incognito had bullied Jonathan Martin to the point where he had to remove himself from the team. It didn’t even cross my mind to go online and write something about this incident or even go after Incognito’s twitter. 

I believe that social media can be good in certain ways but too many people abuse or misuse it. With social media growing so rapidly people feel the freedom to write what ever they want whenever they want. I think it’s just to easy now days to sit behind your computer or mobile device and say things to someone you wouldn’t say to their face. When the media found this voicemail they immediately started to attack Incognito and now that some of his teammates are having his back they are letting off him slightly. With the ability to communicate through technology so easily, a lot of things can get taken out of context. Since the audio of the voicemail hasn’t been released yet it’s hard to understand Incognitos tone of voice throughout the message. Incognito said some unacceptable things but it’s easy take Martins side after only hearing one side of the story. This story is relevant to our class because of all the media attention this story has drawn and all the talk throughout various types of social media networks. It shows us how members of the media are handling crises like this and how people on social media can react so quickly to one-sided evidence. This story also shows how not to respond to media reporters using social media and that things can easily be taken out of context through social networking.

---

Analysis by Wyatt Johnson in SRM 334 (section 1)

My current event was based on the Richie Incognito and Jonathan Martin situation that occurred over the past couple of weeks. Practical jokes and pranks are part of the culture in NFL locker rooms, but it seems that it went over board for the Miami Dolphins. They suspended guard Richie Incognito for conduct detrimental to the team for his alleged treatment of teammate second year player Jonathan Martin. It’s being portrayed that Incognito was bullying Martin but it went to another level once Fox Sports reported that the Dolphins and the NFL Player Association were informed that Incognito sent racial slurred text messages and left threatening voicemails to Jonathan Martin. Incognito allegedly made references to harming Martin’s family, calling him a half n****, and defecating in Martin’s mouth. It appears that Martin was fed up with a prank that occurred in the lunchroom. There were also reports of Incognito pressuring Martin to contribute $15,000 for player trip to Vegas which Martin did not attend. The Dolphins confirmed that they have reached out to the NFL to conduct a thorough review of this situation. It is uncertain if and when Martin will return to the team and Incognito’s future is up in air right now with the Dolphins Franchise.

I find this story puzzling, because both players seemed fairly close just from observing both their twitter accounts that have pics of them together doing numerous activities. I know when I first saw this story I was really shocked that this could even happen in the NFL. I feel like the media is bashing Incognito and I mean they have the right to. There is evidence of Incognito using words that he shouldn’t and his background is very sketchy from college to now. I do think that the media needs to pay more attention Jonathan Martin because obviously he has some self-esteem issues and may need some physiological help. Obviously Jonathan Martin didn’t feel he could trust anyone in the Dolphins organization to talk about the internal issues he was having. This story just shows how much impact the media can have on a particular situation. It’s all over the media markets and now people are starting to discuss the topic of bullying and how it can be stopped. I mean that is the basic overall take of this is the bullying and hazing being a critical factor in sports and society.

"Tribe seeks to force NFL Redskins name change"

From CNN.com

Analysis by Kyle Linn in SRM 435 (section 2)

This article is pertaining to the fact that a group of Native Americans, the Oneida Nation, is uncomfortable with the Washington Redskins using “Redskins” as their mascot. Both sides bring up valid points as to why they deem it offensive and why it is a cultured history of the Redskins franchise. Supporters of the name change feel that now is the time to change the name because this year marks the 81st year of the franchise since their move from Boston in 1932. Others like Dan Snyder for instance said that, “he will NEVER change his team’s name, even if they lose an ongoing federal trademark lawsuit that would stop the NFL team from exclusively profiting from the Redskins name” (Todd, Steinhauser 2013). 

The article states that two-thirds of Redskins fans in the D.C. area do not want the team to change their name. Although, eight out of ten said that they felt a name change would not matter to them. I value the two-thirds of Redskins fans who do not want the name change. My next question is then if the team name is changed, can you not as a fan wear clothing or other things to the stadium that say “Redskins” on it? I looked up the Oneida Native American Nation, and while the Oneida Native Americans make up about 45,000 of the population, there are only about 1000+ in the actual group from New York that is upset with the name. I greatly appreciate the fact that there is a group offended here, but the name is being used in greatness and jubilee as fans chant, “Hail to the Redskins!” at football games. This in terms of sales and merchandises makes up only a fraction of the entire Washington Redskins nation.

Promotionally is where I feel this is a big area of concern. Supporters of the name change could possibly boycott or continue to slander the Washington Redskin organization for its use of a “racial slur” to some. You could have protests in front of the stadium during game days and it makes for negative attention from the organizations point of view, especially in terms of sponsorships. Then, you have fans who have been fans all their lives and now suddenly, they have to call their team something different because we all now have to be politically correct in our society which hinders free speech and expression, in my opinion. Being a fan, I have never considered the name offensive and many of the Oneida Native Americans do not have a problem with Washington’s mascot. If you do change the name, you then have made a small group of people happy and now your fans can possibly become unhappy, possibly boycott games, and/or protest the name change, all of which again bring about negative publicity to the franchise. Why has it taken 80 years for there to be buzz about the name change now?Dan Snyder has an important decision to make. Either way, he is going to come out winning and losing. This pertains to our class and major because you have an ethical dilemma, a promotional/publicity crisis, and a managerial decision to make. If I were Snyder, I would not change the name (and no not because I am a fan). I think if you look at it from a promotional point of view, you don’t have to stop production and design of now and future Redskins merchandise and memorabilia, ask fans to not wear clothing that says “Redskins” on it, etc. Ethically it should be changed, without question. However, you are always going to have supporters and people who disagree and in this situation with a multi-billion dollar organization on the line, I would not risk upsetting the fan base that is the “lifeblood” of the Washington Redskins versus a group that in terms of geography makes up a small portion of the population. I do stand behind Mr. Snyder and his decision to not (at this point) change the name. 

---

Analysis by Steve Mashinski in SRM 435 (section 2)

"I want to say this to Redskins fans. No one blames you for having used a name that was always used as this team. They will only blame you if you continue to use it and if you use it will impunity," I think this was the perfect quote to be placed into the end of this article. It basically says you are either going to have to change your team name or you will have an ongoing battle with the ones you are offending and the media. One of the major problems is some of these Redskins fans have been supporting this organization for potentially 80 years, but the group it is offending is making it known that there is not another option other than to stop using a racial slur to gain revenue for an organization. From a promotions and marketing stand point if the Redskins happened to change their name it would open doors to ultimately give them a fresh start. The Redskins haven’t had a promising season for a while now so maybe a new look will give them that extra push to excite people and make them want to go out and buy the new gear or come to games to be a part of history. The organization would be looked at positively in the media’s eyes for respecting a group of individuals therefore could gain more supporters. Unfortunately, on the other side of the table you will have the long standing supporters of the redskins that will boycott the new name. This will lead to protests to get the Redskins name back and fans that are unwilling to support the new organization. This side of the tables major argument is that they are not putting the name redskins down in any way they are honoring the name and don’t support them for any other reason besides the fact that they are a good football team This topic directly relates to what we have covered in class especially the effect of ticket sales from this major decision. Personally I believe ticket sales will go down because a team being around for 80 years brings in tons of loyal supports and for most of them Washington Redskins football is all they know.

"Twitter Strikes Deal With NFL"

From the Wall Street Journal

Analysis by Allison Straley in SRM 435 (section 2)

The article “Twitter Strikes Deal With NFL” is an overview on the new relationship that has formed between Twitter and the NFL. This deal allows the NFL to tweet out news, analysis of games and players, as well as in-game highlights from the games on Thursday night and Sundays from the NFL Network as well as other programs such as CBS and Fox.

Adding the NFL highlights to Twitter is part of Twitter’s Amplify program. This is a revenue-generating program that lets organizations, such as the NFL, sponsor tweets that come up in users’ Twitter feeds. In every clip that the NFL puts out, there is a short ad embedded before the clip starts. The revenue generated from these ads is split between both companies. Coming from a marketing and promotion standpoint, I feel that there are positives and negatives to this new relationship. The main positive being that the NFL and Twitter both have such a huge following that what they are trying to accomplish will occur. With these tweets being ‘officially sponsored’ they automatically come up in a users’ Twitter feed so they are easily accessible during the game to see these highlights. However, and here is when the negatives arise, if for some reason a user is not going through Twitter during a game, when they go to check the next day they may have to scroll through multiple tweets before finding the clips. Being in a fast-paced society where consumers want things the quickest way possible, they might give up on finding the clips when they can possibly just YouTube them; especially having the ads play before. 

This deal is relevant to the course because promotion is a main component of the marketing mix. Within promotion itself there are also components, two being publicity and licensing. These mixes are the basis of marketing and without them marketing would not exist. The NFL is using the licensing from Twitter to promote their in-game highlights on users’ feeds and they are giving these companies the publicity by playing the short ads before the clips to help generate revenue. 

The President of Twitter’s Global Revenue, Adam Bain said, “putting the NFL's "highly coveted content" on Twitter "will not only offer our users a unique programming schedule which will deepen their engagement with our platform but will also provide our sponsors with a value proposition that few other partners can bring to the table” (Sharma, 2013). 
This deal is one that other major programs should consider looking into. Word of mouth is one of the best ways to get information across, and with Twitter having millions of followers the NFL’s new platform is definitely going to take off.

---

Analysis by Katherine Lampa in SRM 435 (section 2)

In our article “Twitter Strikes Deal With NFL”, the specifics of the deal between the two companies are discussed. It will be a twenty-four- seven service as the NFL plans to have a team “dedicated to producing programming for Twitter users seven days a week”(Sharma, 2013). Games that are aired on the NFL Network will be featured on Twitter during the game, while other highlights from other networks will come later. Every video tweeted will have a short advertisement before the start of the video and the NFL and whichever company is producing the ad will share the revenue. Verizon will be a main sponsor throughout the entire season including the Super Bowl as they will be the “exclusive Twitter advertiser”. They will be paying one billion dollars over the next four years to expand their “rights to air NFL games on cellphones through an NFL Mobile app”(Sharma, 2013). During Monday Night Football the NFL will be the only account tweeting out highlights as ESPN has not been awarded those rights. 

The usage of Twitter will help actually get the ads in the face of consumers because they are short and you cannot skip by them like you may be able to do on television. Twitter has billions of users that are checking in all day every day so promoting the relationship between the NFL and Twitter will not be a problem. I think the deal creates great opportunities for both parties as Twitter continues to grow as the most widely used social media network and the NFL continues to dominate the sports world. As more people find out that clips are in- game highlights I think that more people will join Twitter to consequently follow the NFL. Marketing will pretty much take care of itself because Twitter is so easy to use. Twitter makes for a great promotions platform for the NFL because so many people can view these clips from all over the world. The publicity both the NFL and Twitter are going to get from this deal is going to be huge as they will promote each other constantly.

This relates to our class in a few ways, but mostly because it is a perfect example of social media taking over the sports world as a main promoter. While there is no person to person contact to reinforce the advertisements general users can still communicate with people in charge much easier than ever before. The use of Twitter to promote sports creates many more opportunities for great customer relations and community relations as fans can come together over Twitter. Overall, I am surprised it took this long for the two to sign an official deal and it will be interesting to see how it plays out and how popular it becomes.

"Will Controversial Sports Team Names Be Gone in Five Years?"

From Adweek

Analysis by Natalie Bernstein in SRM 435 (section 1)

The article we chose to discuss was by Adweek and it was entitled “Will Controversial Sports Team Names Be Gone in Five Years? Prominent Native American Activist Says Yes” by David Gianatasio. In the article, Gianatasio shows how this year’s fight to change the Redskins name has gained a significant amount of momentum. He provides examples of this through quotes from various people who are closely linked to the Redskins name. While most people seem to agree that there needs to be an immediate change, people like Dan Snyder, owner of the Redskins, says he will never change the name.

From a marketing standpoint, this type of rebranding is going to cost a significant amount of money, not to mention the thousands of fans that will be infuriated. The question also arises that if they change the Redskins, a name that has been around for eighty-one years, will people even accept the change? Will they buy the new merchandise? This instantly makes me think of JMU’s Rose Library; the name was changed from east campus a couple years ago and students still refer to it by its old name, and this is just a library. When examining a multi-million dollar organization, changing the name will not solve all of the protestors’ problems. I doubt people will instantly stop referring to their favorite team as the Redskins, and I predict that it is going to be a challenge for several years after the official switch. However, with all of the negative sides to changing the team name, I believe the Redskins don’t have a choice. When broadcasters and other media sources refuse to even speak the team name, you have a major problem. Everyone is focusing more on the racism and less on the sport of football. So hopefully this change will bring people back to what this sport is all about with a politically correct name, that way both sides are happy. 

This topic is relevant to our course because it deals with a sports team who is about to undergo serious rebranding. When the name gets changed, the Redskins are going to have to come up with a completely different marketing strategy in hopes to make the name stick.

---

Analysis by Connor Massei in SRM 435 (section 1)

This article questions whether or not the Washington Redskins and other controversial professional sports franchises will change their name within the next five or ten years. The article gives quotes and examples for reasons as to why these franchises will change their names as well as to why they will not. The article explains that with current pressure and support from Native Americans as well as from other groups, these organizations and the Washington Redskins in particular may not be able to resist changing their name in the near future. However, Redskins owner Dan Snyder has been quoted as saying he will never change the team name.

Analyzing this article from a marketing perspective brings up some interesting points. I feel that if the Redskins were to change their name, sales in different departments would, at least initially, decrease. I think fans would shy away from buying new team merchandise because they have previously spent money on merchandise when the team was still referred to as the Redskins. I also believe that ticket sales would initially decrease. I think the organization would lose a substantial amount of supporters because so many people are against a name change. I wouldn’t be surprised if some fans boycotted going to games as long as the Redskins have their new name. It could be difficult to market the franchise as the Washington-anything-other-than Redskins. Redskin fans and NFL fans in general are so used to seeing and hearing the Redskins’ name that it could cause problems for marketing and promotion teams when trying to make a different team name catch on.

This article is relevant to the course because whether or not you think controversial team names should change, it undoubtedly would affect these franchises from a marketing standpoint. They would have to figure out ways to promote the new name, logo, or even fight song. Fans would have to be persuaded to continue to buy game tickets whether they supported the name change or not. Marketing teams would have to use many of the strategies and things learned in class in order to successfully deal with the changing of any professional sports team name.

"NFL playoff expansion would come at a price"

From USA Today

Analysis by Sean Cunningham in SRM 435 (section 1)

The article that James and I did for our presentation talked about the recent owners meetings where the commissioner of the NFL Roger Goodell proposed a plan to expand the NFL postseason from 12 teams to 14 teams. The article was written in USA Today on October 9th and was titled, “NFL Playoff Expansion Would Come at a Price”. The way this expansion would happen is by adding an extra wildcard team to both the NFC and AFC. By doing this it would allow for more meaningful games at the end of the season because more teams will have a chance of making the playoffs. This proposed expansion would be put into place at the earliest for the 2015 NFL season and would eliminate one preseason. Commissioner Roger Goodell believes the NFL is in strongest position it has been in during his 32 years with the NFL, and by expanding the playoffs, would only make it stronger.

In my opinion and coming from a marketing and sales standpoint this is a win, win situation for the NFL as a league and its players. The player’s union was strongly against extending the regular season form 16 games to 18 games so by only expanding the playoffs it seems to be a compromise between both parties. The NFL as a league will gain extra revenue through TV contracts, more fans watching or buying tickets for meaningful games, and more marketing and sponsorship opportunities for the NFL. From the player’s side, every team and player wants to play in the playoffs, so by expanding the playoffs them it only increases those chances of making the playoffs and achieving the ultimate goal of winning a Superbowl. The only cons I can see from expanding the playoffs are that it could increase the risk of injuries, it could create a watered down playoff product by having too many teams, and that if the NFL is the strongest its ever been why mess with it. The NFL playoffs have been set at 12 teams since 1990, which has been the time when the NFL are grown the most so why fix something that has got you to become the most popular sport in our nation. 

This topic is relevant to our Sports Marketing and Sales course because a move like this by the NFL has a ripple effect on the marketing and sales of each individual team, along with the league as a whole. New marketing plans and sponsorship will need to be put in place for the two extra playoff games and the new playoff format. Also, new TV deals will need to be made for the extra games along with having more advertisement space for the NFL to sell. In conclusion, like I said before I believe this is a win, win situation for both the NFL and the players and if it is implemented it could only increase the popularity of the NFL, not hurt it.

---

Analysis by James Daniel in SRM 435 (section 1)

NFL owners are always looking for ways not only to expand its product (generate more revenue, increase marketability, etc...). As Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said, “They can find another way to grow the pie.” Which brings us to the NFL’s proposal to expand the NFL playoffs from 12 teams (six per conference) to 14 teams (seven per conference). The expansion in terms of logistics would create only one means for a 1st round bye, win the number one overall seed. The league sees this as a tool to generate more revenue of course through more games competitive and meaningful games being shown towards the season’s end. A huge part of the league's toolbox to generate more from its deals with television networks is its ability to use flex scheduling. Flex scheduling allows NBC (the network that hosts NFL Sunday Night Football) starting week 11 to the end of the regular season, to select a different game from its regularly scheduled contest to broadcast. It is used to bump less relevant games in favor of games with playoff implications. This of course generates a good portion of money from network deals due to the fact that highly competitive games will be aired in primetime, when everyone watches. Fox & CBS however do have protected games that cannot be flex scheduled and there are regulations behind how many times a team can be on primetime games, a small form of revenue sharing. Another aspect of scheduling would be whether the games in the opening round would be a three-three format or a two-two-two format. Essentially, the league would have to decide whether to broadcast triple header on Saturday & Sunday of wild card weekend or to air two games on a Friday evening. 

Another aspect of the proposal would be a removal of preseason games (one) in favor of the expanded postseason. Players are not a fan of this as it cuts the offseason calendar, which was altered by the league under the new CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) to limit player injuries before the start of regular season action, an effort to protect a better product. Also, they believe it will dilute the quality that the playoffs bring by having average or subpar to making the playoffs, which could back fire it such were to happen. Roger Goodell has been on record saying that the quality of preseason games is not up to league standards. Of course, NFL teams normally do not play their starters in the final preseason contest. The expansion would not take place before the 2015 NFL season so it has time to further evaluate. It is seen as a compromise as the NFLPA shutdown the idea of an 18 game regular season schedule. At the beginning, the expansion would without a doubt, reap rewards from where it currently is. The question is in the long run, how will this pan out for the NFL.

"NFL of a controversy: Pressure mounts on Washington Redskins to change ‘racist’ name"

From Metro

Analysis by Kevin Barr in SRM 334 (section 1)

The article I read was released by Metro which is an online publication. The article discusses the recent surge for the Redskins to change their name due to the fact that the team’s mascot is actually an offensive slur towards Native Americans. The article shared opinions and quotes of multiple notable news sources such as ESPN, Sports Illustrated, and the Washington Post. The entire article had varying opinions about why they think the Redskins should change their names, but all had come to the same conclusion that a name change should be imminent. It also described a poll of Native Americans trying to seek out how they felt about the name and the results varied from year to year making the evidence inconclusive.

The media is whole heartedly attacking the Redskins organization. I believe it has a lot to do with the big media outlets attempting to be politically correct. The major news outlets know the difference between getting the best ratings and coming off as respectful and politically correct. I am sure producers and editors are forcing their particular media journalists and analysts to give off the most nationally accepted opinion when it comes to serious topics such as offensive slurs. We have learned in class how the media has evolved over the past century. The media no longer controls everything that is put out, but when they do publicize something, they must be wary of the consequences of that particular action. This directly relates to the Redskins name change conversation because it doesn’t seem possible for a news source to vocalize their opinion on this topic unless it would please the masses overall.

Based on research and statistics I found while doing this current event project, I learned that the average fan and the media had completely opposite opinions of the name change decision. I realized that because fans now have the majority of the power in the media due to their seemingly limitless access to social media and blog spots. Everyone is able to put out their opinions without being put under the microscope unlike major news outlets that have consistent pressure to say the “right” thing.

The media is constantly becoming more wide open in today’s world and it gives the outside public an opportunity to be involved. Social Media and debate TV shows are leading the way in this opinionated society and I see no sign of this new era media stride slowing down.

---


Analysis by Will Pompa in SRM 334 (section 1)

The Washington Redskins name was established in 1933 starting what is said to be one of the most recognizable and followed franchises in professional sports. According to the Metro sports section article “NFL of a Controversy” the Redskins name is a racial slur towards Native Americans. Many Native Americans have protested for a name change since the Redskins name is derogatory towards their culture. Starting in 1993 when the Redskins were in the Super Bowl, Native American tribes expressed their discontent with the name and it has spread like a wild fire by means of the media ever since.

“NFL of a Controversy” article has shown that the Native Americans would like the Redskins to change their name but the Redskins are opposed to doing so. Daniel Snyder stated “We’ll never change the name. NEVER—you can use caps.” The article showed that the Redskins organization and those who are tied to the organization in some way are against changing the name. Those that are not tied to the organization emotionally or financially such as the media have a different view. For the most part the media wants the Redskins to change their name. Ever since the Native Americans brought the idea of a name change to the media in 1993 the media has coincided with the Native Americans to bring about a name change. This controversy creates great story material for the media which in turn shows why the media would be pushing for something to change in the NFL.

The media has to be politically correct. They are presenting their material to all types of audiences and being politically correct will please the majority of readers. The media views the Redskins name as a racial slur because they have to be politically correct and professional with their views on not only sports news but political news as well. This story is no longer just a local sports story. This is a story that local media outlets have brought from a small controversy to a national political debate with even President Obama weighing in with his opinion. With the help of the media the Native Americans have been able to voice their opinions and have very powerful people in the United States take their side on the name change controversy. After reading this article I was able to connect what I have learned from class to this ongoing controversy. The media is a powerful tool today (the new model of media) as it connects to many different audiences. All types of people with many different views are able to use social media, blogs and other media forms to voice their opinions. The Redskins are feeling extra pressure to change the name because of the ability of the public to interact and voice their opinions. The power of the media is driving this story. It developed from a local controversy to a national debate by means of the media developing the story, asking the Redskins organization questions, informing the general public about the meaning of the Redskins name and persuading them to join the side of the media and Native Americans to cause a change in sports. As long as there is change there will be a subject for the media to report and write about for the public’s interest.

NFL Player Safety and the Media Effect

From ESPN.com

Analysis by Anthony Brown in SRM 334 (section 2)

A recent ESPN, Outside the Lines story, focused on a $765 million proposed concussion settlement between the NFL and its former players. The settlement concludes the NFL will pay $765 million plus legal costs, but will admit no wrongdoing. The lawsuit included over 4,500 former players, however, the settlement went beyond just those who filed suits to cover all of the league’s retired players, making the number able to receive compensation total over 18,000. The money from the settlement would go toward medical exams and concussion-related compensation for retired players and their families. In addition, $10 million will go towards medical research (Steve F. & Mark F., 2013). 

This settlement is of an incredible importance to the media. Over the course of the last decade, there has been an increased emphasis on the injuries sustained within a player’s career and how that affects their life post NFL. In the past two and a half years alone, there have been three suicides committed by former NFL players with ties to brain damage. In one instance, former Chicago Bear Dave Duerson, committed suicide with a gunshot wound to the chest so that his brain could be researched for chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). The university of Boston researchers found CTE in the brain, which is the same disease found in other deceased NFL players. This is important because it has been known over the past few years that these injuries are being caused during player’s careers but the extent has been unknown (Josh, L., Steve, A., & Joe, S., 2013). These extreme cases resulting in death have forced the media, as well as the NFL, to take a closer look. The available research has led to this settlement, which now will provide former players with funding to better assist their condition, support their families, and provide medical research not only for themselves, but for future players as well.

The NFL has not solved their player safety issues entirely. While the proper steps seem to be taking place off the field, on the field is another issue. New rules have been implemented to insure player safety, including leading with the crown of the helmet, launching into a player, and/or targeting defenseless players. Breaking these rules can result in fines and possible suspensions. However, there are many questions now as to what is legal, and what is not. Bernard Pollard, safety for the Tennessee Titans, was recently fined $42,000 for a play that was not flagged and deemed legal.

"The bad part of it is, for us as players, for the fans, for the coaches, for the refs, there's a lot of gray area. So they don't know what to call and what not to call. There's no call and now you come back and fine me $42,000 for ... a play that was legal… But like I said, if you don't want us to play defense, don't call us defense. Take us off the field. Just let them go against air. Let's see what that does to the ratings,” Pollard said.

Situations such as these are the NFL’s biggest media issue surrounding player safety. Players such as Pollard who are repeat offenders of the conduct policy continue to speak out against the policy, its effect on the game, and television ratings. The media coverage continues to focus on these player’s comments because it is a noteworthy story. There are not any players making statements about the positive aspects of the policies, just those who are negatively affected. The issue with this is that it takes away from the true meaning of the rules. The rules are being incorporated solely to focus on player safety. The media spins this into being more focused on the player, the hit, the fine, and/or the suspension. Using this instance for example, the story has no focus on the concussion the player hit received. The entire story is based on dollar amounts, ripping the NFL, and television ratings. This completely misses the point the NFL is trying to establish. Until the NFL, its players, and the media can get on the same page, all publicity surrounding these policies will continue to focus on all the penalties players receive, not the injuries the NFL is trying to prevent. This is a shame because the since the NFL has introduced these rules, the percentages of concussions have dropped tremendously. CNN reports that in 2010, there were .679 concussions per game (218 in 321 combined preseason & regular season games). In 2011, there were only .594 concussions per game (190 in 320 combined preseason & regular season games) (Library, C. 2013).

The last issue the NFL faces within the media is its own hypocrisy. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell once wrote in a letter to personnel and fans, "There is no higher priority for the National Football League than the health and wellness of our players." However, the NFL continues to insist on an 18 game schedule being implemented, more games in London being played, and Thursday night games every week. All of the desired changes are completely revenue oriented and not a bit focused on player safety. Adding more games to the schedule, shortening player preparation during the week, and adding more travel is only going to make players more susceptible to injury. The NFL is trying to have the best of both worlds. Implement safety policies to cover the league, while increase marketability to put more dollars in their pockets. It’s a very thin line that they are toying with and the media continues to cover all angles in this billion dollar industry. The NFL must be careful with their choice of words and the decisions they make going forward. Everyone is watching, not just the media, and the most prominent sports league in America has some decisions to make regarding the future of their sport. The before mentioned player suit was considered by many to be a potential demise of the league, they were able to escape that, going forward they must not be greedy and look out for the best interest of the players, not their wallets in they want to maintain credibility.

---

Analysis by Trevor Nichols in SRM 334 (section 2)

In the Outside the Lines report, written by Steve Fainaru and Mark Fainaru-Wada, details in the $765 million settlement between the NFL and former players are discussed. They highlight key parts of the settlement, including individual caps based on what type of injury a player sustained while playing football. They also discuss some players that will be left out of the settlement because the injuries occurred before 2006. The authors go on to discuss the number of brain injuries that are occurring in the NFL and the impact this has on players for the rest of their life. They close the article by describing how some lawyers may get paid multiple times.

The authors do a great job of presenting the details of the settlement and offering opinions of former players involved with the settlement. They present different quotes and thoughts from players that are both happy and unhappy with the settlement. They also dig deeper into the story when they talk about the increase in concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). 52 out of 54 players who signed agreements to have their brain studied after death had CTE. Currently, it can only be tested postmortem but some doctors believe there could be a way to test and treat the disease for living athletes in the next few years. The authors also incorporate how much players will get paid based on the settlement regarding different diseases. They write that relatives of deceased players would be eligible to collect nearly 1 billion dollars, which is almost 33% more than what the settlement was agreed upon. The last part talks about how the NFL agreed to pay a “common benefit” fund for lawyers so all the settlement money could go to the players; however, within individual contracts between players and lawyers many of them already agreed upon a number at the beginning of the process. Potentially lawyers may be getting paid out multiple times by the NFL and then individual players as well. The article closes with a quote from Boyd when he talks about his frustration and how the settlement seems to not have accomplished anything and that players are back to where they started.

This is relevant to the course because it is a high profile case in the sports world. The media covering the story need to be able to present the facts to the public so the public can make their own opinion on the NFL and their take on player safety. The media always highlights big hits because that’s what makes them the most money. They also seem to only interview athletes that do not like the rule changes which may distort the opinions of the public. The media should make bigger stories out of some of these players that commit suicide and suffer from CTE. In an industry that makes 10 billion a year, they only agree on 765 million to cover players that have made them all the money. The media has the power to influence the public and they seem to only cover one side of the story.

"NFL Strikes Large-Scale Deal With Twitter To Share Highlights, Other Material"

From SportsBusiness Journal

Analysis by Brad Taake in SRM 334 (section 2)

The article we chose for our current event was about the National Football League and the well known social media site Twitter striking a deal to share highlights and other game material and statistics. The new found deal was helped to be put in place by a company that specializes in digital technology and learning technology, Amplify. Some advantages that the Twitter-verse will see is video clips from the game on Thursday nights, and as far as the Sunday and Monday games go you will still get the same amount of coverage but it will not be “live” tweeting, the highlights will be shown after the telecast is finished. Information will be concentrated primarily to Sundays, looking at fantasy football tips and other up to kickoff statistics and information.

I think what the NFL is trying to do to get media to everyone is a great idea, especially for those that cannot either go to or watch the games; however, other than the Thursday game I am not sure that fans are going to want to wait until after the telecast is over to consume all the game information. Other websites, such as ESPN or NFL, and social media might be quicker providing scores and statistics that we as the consumers are looking for right away, not until after the game is already over. Having said that, being provided with in game video clips to see the play to go along with the text in a tweet is going to be a great new way to begin staying connected to your team wherever you are. Sponsorship and ad revenues will surely see a spike within the NFL seeing as how the NFL’s twitter handle already has over 5 million followers so now companies and business will be able to reach out to these fans in a variety of ways. The NFL stated that this extra revenue was not the main factor in getting this deal done, but more so for the fans to view NFL content on their mobile phones in a completely new way.

Since social media is one of the main focus points of class it was obvious to me how this topic fits hand in hand with class. So far this article would tie in with multiple days of the lecture topics such as, Introduction to media and sport, Broadcast media, and other class discussions. Sharing the subject of Twitter and the NFL made this article fun and easy to read while also providing and innovative and potentially completely new way we consume football on the weekends.

---

Analysis by Ryan Watson in SRM 334 (section 2)

The article that we are using for our class discussion is about Twitter striking a deal with the National Football League. The main details of this deal are: Twitter has gained rights to “tweet” clips from games. They are not allowed to tweet these videos until after the games have aired on Sunday, but on Thursdays they can post the videos while the game is being played. Other than highlights, there will also be videos with fantasy tips to help fellow fantasy footballers manage their teams. Monday night football is still off limits because this is a big viewing night for the NFL. This deal is significant because the National Football League is known to be very strict about who they let have rights to their content. Twitter will most likely be putting up highlights and big plays of games so fans can easily view them at their convenience without having to deal with commercials on TV. The only thing you need to have access to these videos is a twitter account.

This deal is mutually beneficial because Twitter now gets to put videos up and the NFL can reach a bigger audience of fans with mobile phones. Twitter can also use these videos to put ads on them to generate ad revenue. Verizon is sponsoring these videos in hopes of getting more customers. At the beginning of the videos there will be a quick commercial from Verizon that is probably around eight-seconds. These quick commercials are very common on websites like YouTube and any other video sharing websites. The ad revenue will be split between Twitter and the NFL (does not give a percentage of how the revenues will be split precisely). The big benefit to the NFL is the amount of fans this is enabling to watch the videos mobile. In our world of quickly growing technology people are starting to have access to videos anywhere and everywhere. This new deal gives fans the chance to watch football highlights and fantasy tip videos on current games/players that have happened/are happening that day without having to be at home on the television. From a media/communications standpoint this is huge. In class we have constantly talked about social media and how it has helped open a new world to collaborating and giving people immediate information on breaking news. Twitter in particular gives people the chance to follow sport celebrities and famous organizations that allow them to be up to date on information. I think that we are heading towards a direction where people are going to be able to watch TV shows and other events from Twitter. We probably won’t get to watch a lot of stuff live to start out with, but if Twitter keeps heading down the path of buying rights to content, then who knows what will happen. I personally think this is really smart for Twitter because you can basically watch Football plays in real time without dealing with long commercial breaks on TV. This is also smart for Twitter because companies are having harder times reaching consumers on TV because a lot of people are using DVR to record shows, games etc. and fast forward through any commercial ads, or just going online to stream videos. With this video streaming on Twitter, people are forced to watch a short commercial before they can watch the highlight, which creates a market that companies like Verizon are jumping on. Over a four-year period Verizon is paying one billion dollars to be the exclusive “Twitter super bowl advertiser” so obviously the market for Twitter ad revenue is remarkable.

Owners planning to have players miked up

From ESPN.com and Wall Street Journal

Review by Steve Robertson III in SRM 435 (section 1)

Over the past few years, the NFL, believe it or not, has been struggling to fill its stadiums. Fan turnout to games is nowhere near as high as they have been in years past; in fact over the past 6 years the a average fan attendance has dropped by 4.5%. Why is this? Some would say the economy, why others believe the prices that are being charged not only for tickets but concession are absurd, but also the advances in the at-home viewing experience has improved immensely too. My group decided to do our presentation on the changes that the NFL plans to make in the coming season and beyond through the use of two articles we found. The first is by Kevin Clark of the Wall Street Journal, whose article is titled, “Game Changer: NFL Scrambles to Fill Seats.” The second article is by Daniel Kaplan, writer for the Sports Business Journal, whose article is titled, “Listen Up: NFL Moving to Mike Players.”

The NFL is pushing out new perks for season ticket holders and well as fan that attend the game at their respected stadium. Some of these new features include, a free NFL RedZone Subscription, In-Booth Camera review (aka Challenge Camera), locker room camera access, Wifi, and now installing microphones on the players! These a drastic improvements that have really caught the fans attention because of all of this up-to-date technology being executed. The only issue is that if the fans can get/or have access to this perks at home, has the NFL really won the competition. I would think not.

If you think about why an average fan would want to watch a game at their own home, typically it is because they enjoy the own comfort of their home. Think about it, you can have people over, you have an unlimited number of snacks that costs a quarter of what you would be charge to eat at the game, and you have some many more options of games to watch, whether it is live streaming of a game or another game being shown on a different network, and let’s not forget you can drink as much as you want and not have to worry about getting home because you are already there! It is insane! Why would a fan ever want to give up an opportunity like that?

I feel it’s because of two reasons, fan loyalty and tradition. If you were to think about it, season ticket holders for fans who have been apart of the Green Bay Packers and Redskins whose seat are on the 50 yard line and 3 rows back from the field, I can guarantee those tickets have been past down for nearly 3 generations. That is where tradition plays a huge role. It is a big way to bring a family together and have them all share an amazing game day atmosphere whether it is 90 degrees outside or even 10 degrees. The fact of the matter is that the loyalty that they have for their team is one that doesn’t truly need all the perks to keep them coming back for more. I mean sure it might help, but the fact of the matter is that a true die-hard fan will attend these football games because these football games impact their lives in so many ways.So in conclusion, I feel with the additions that the NFL has/plan to implement in the coming seasons, I do think it will work but not forever. I feel more fans will begin to get pulled back to the stadiums because of these new perks and I think these new traditions and fan loyalties will grow again among a new generation. If the NFL can keep up with the in-game home experience for the most part, with integrated technology at these games that fans can relate to, I feel the NFL will be just fine!

---

Review by Connor Butler in SRM 435 (section 1)

Having players get mic’d up for a game is a promotional concept the NFL has used for years. Now, NFL teams are attempting to mike players for in-stadium use to go along with many other promotions. Recently, I read two articles: One from the Wall Street Journal article entitled Game Changer: NFL Scrambles to Fill Seats, and one entitled Listen Up: NFL Moving to Mike Players from the Sports Business Journal. This brief review will give a brief summary of both articles, a critical analysis of each article from a marketing and promotional standpoint, and discuss how this is all relevant to our class, SRM 435. 

The first article, Game Changer: NFL Scrambles to Fill Seats, written by Kevin Clark, gives a broad overview of the issues currently affecting the NFL, and the many steps, including miking players, that the NFL is taking to address it. After bluntly stating the issue, the writer offers out many ways in which the NFL is attempting to address the issue, such as miking players and coaches for in-stadium use, stadium wifi, watering down the blackout rule, and “liberalizing” restraints on crowd noise to give stadiums college like atmospheres. As the article wraps up, the article states that some developments in using these new technologies as vehicles may be a long way off.

Fast forward a little over one year when Listen Up: NFL Moving to Mike Players written by Daniel Kaplan, a staff writer for the sports business journal was released. The article, in support of the previous article, begins by stating the NFL is moving to put microphones on players and coaches as another step in the leagues ongoing push to improve fans’ in-stadium experience. The article continues on to compare the situation to NASCAR, stating that the professional racing league has never hesitated to let fans hear the conversation between spotters and drivers, and that multiple teams are equally enthused by the idea. Towards the end of the article, the writer discusses the censorship, or lack of, of the miking. The current debate in player miking is over whether audio should be exclusive stadium use, and whether the audio would be broadly available, or available on an individual basis, like using an online app.

From a sports marketing, promotion, and sales standpoint, I believe that these many new promotions would be a great idea for encouraging the average fan to come spend money in your stadium. Often times, the average fan is a much harder sell than your hardcore follower and is going to need much more promotionally to attract them to an event. These many new features could provide the extra push to help increase ticket sales. This all, of course, hinges on all of these features staying free. If they are not free or will cost extra, I think it serves no purpose in attracting the average fan. When it comes to your hardcore fans, I think that these many new promotions serve no purpose. A team’s hardcore fans will be there no matter what and often times won’t need a promotion to get them there. While the incentives could serve as a cool addition to their experience, I don’t see these things being deal breakers.

When I think of how this relates to class, the first thing I think of is my experience working the St. Francis game with the marketing department. Before the game, some students were going around passing out promotional items, and inside of the gate before kickoff we were all passing out thunder sticks as even more promotional items. Obviously what the NFL is attempting to do is on a much larger scale, but I feel as though it’s a similar concept. Promotions are a very large part of marketing, which helps increase sales; the two main subjects of our course.These articles were two very well written articles that were fun to review and enjoyable to read. Because of these articles, I am now hooked to see where the NFL goes when it comes to the in-stadium experience.

"Eagles receiver Riley Cooper uses racial slur at a Kenny Chesney concert"

(Disclaimer: this video contains a sensitive subject matter)

From USA Today

Analysis by Sean Wheeler in SRM 334 (section 2)

On June 9th, 2013, Riley Cooper, Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver, alone with his coach and some of his teammates attended a Kenny Chesney concert in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Cooper, teammate Jason Kelch, and coach Chip Kelly were invited on stage by Kenny Chesney to perform his song, “Boys of Fall.” Cooper then, after a security guard did not allow him to go backstage, said a racial slur regarding African-Americans. On top of that, Cooper also got into a verbal altercation with people outside of the concert. After all of this hit the fan, Cooper released a serious of tweets apologizes for the incident, as well as, personally apologizing to his black teammates. He was eventually fined and sentenced to three days of sensitivity training.

From a media standpoint, this was blown way out of proportion. The media has the power to “blow-up” stories and this was exactly the case. The media made it seem like Cooper committed a serious crime and even publically viewed him as someone like Aaron Hernandez, New England Patriots wide receiver who was recently charged with murder. Cooper understandably did and said a horrible thing, but he did not commit a crime and, therefore, should not have made national news.

Another point to be made, regarding the media, is that everything is documented now-a-days. Because of the advancement in technology this past decade, not so important stories like this are being viewed and taken to levels they should not be taken to. For example, without cell phones and cameras this incident never would have been made publically like it did. People in this generation care more about taking a picture or video of something rather than fully enjoying the experience firsthand and not through a lens. Sure, people would talk and a good amount would have found out about it, but it would not have been talked about around the entire world (twitter). Furthermore, because of twitter, it allowed anyone to voice their opinions on Cooper to millions of people, which they absolutely did. Other athletes, like Marcus Vick, and many non-athletes showed their anger and attacked Cooper via twitter. This would have never happened ten years ago before twitter and all of this advanced technology was created. The Riley Cooper incident is relevant to this course because this is a textbook situation that we could be in and might have to deal with in the future. Whether it be working in PR or being an SID, you never know what you might have to deal with or the decisions regarding players’ actions that you are going to have to make, especially due to the fact that athletes are constantly acting as they should not be and doing “stupid” things. Furthermore, this is relevant because we learned about the advancement in technology and how it took over the media; one little slip-up can make national news and really turn someone’s life around.

---

Analysis by Brooks Shyman in SRM 334 (section 2)

For our current event Sean and I chose the topic of Riley Cooper and we chose the article “Eagles Receiver Riley Cooper Uses Racial Slur at Kenny Chesney Concert.” The article starts by giving you background on what happened before the event. It tells you that Cooper and some of his teammates were even invited on stage to perform the song “Boys of Fall” with Chesney. Then the article goes on to explain the event behind Cooper using the racial slur. It also tells you that Cooper got into another verbal altercation with a group of people outside the concert, and has videos of both incidents. The article concludes by telling you how the Eagles organization feels about the article and tells whether or not they think the NFL will discipline Cooper.

The media took this story and ran with it. It was major news the second the video became public. This happened in large part to technology improving. Think about it, would this have even been a story 10 years ago in a time before cell phones and cell phone cameras? Now a day for athletes everything you do is documented and can be out in the media within 10 seconds of you doing it. Another media aspect to this story is twitter. Many athletes and celebrities were able to tweet out there opinions to millions of people in an instant. Even Cooper’s teammates were going out on twitter and criticizing him. But not only were people able to tweet their opinions; they could tweet directly to Riley Cooper themselves. And while I did not tweet to him, I can only imagine the kind of messages he was receiving. This story also shows you the power the media holds. This Riley Cooper incident in the media was about as big a story as Aaron Hernandez; and Aaron Hernandez is accused of murder. And of course, what Riley Cooper did was terrible, but to be held on virtually the same level as someone who’s accused and likely guilty of murder really shows you the power the media has over public opinion.

This article/incident is very relevant to us as a class. We all want to go into different jobs in this field, and some of us are bound to end up working in media. Whether its being in PR and having to clean up an incident in, or being a journalist and writing an article; it’s a predicament any one of us can be caught in the middle of. Also the media is changing, and it’s something that we will all have to adjust to. With all different kinds of social media out there, there are a lot more ways to break a story.

"Hawks fans ready for record roar"

From The Seattle Times

Analysis by Danielle Poplawski in SRM 435 (section 2)

On September 15, 2013, the Seattle Seahawks set the Guinness World Record for the “loudest crowd roar at a sports stadium” at CenturyLink Field. The Seahawks were playing their rivals, the San Francisco 49ers. This record-setting event was organized by the group Volume 12 and was not directly related to the Seattle Seahawks organization.

Seahawks fans pride themselves as being the loudest in the NFL. The crowd at the stadium is known as the 12th Man. Volume 12 is a group specifically for those who consider themselves to be a part of the 12th Man fan base for the Seahawks.

In July, Volume 12 announced that they would attempt to set the world record. To excite fans, the group held a tailgate outside of the stadium. The previous record of 131.76 decibels took place at Turk Telekom Arena in Istanbul on March 18, 2005 during a soccer match. Seattle’s CenturyLife Field broke this record twice in the same game. The first time in the first quarter with a level of 131.9 decibels while the second time took place in the third quarter with a level of 136.6 decibels.

To market the event, Volume 12 sent information, such as news releases, out to the media. In addition to this, they also made a YouTube video and posted on their various social media pages including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Pinterest. The week before the game, Sunday Night Football discussed the record-setting event and just how loud they thought it would be. The Seattle Seahawks have added the world record to their 12th Man page on the official website.

Holding the Guinness World Record for the loudest stadium will likely bring in some spectators who wish to see what all of the hype is about. Because of the 12th Man pride in Seattle, it also gives fans another commonality; thus uniting them more and providing the fans with more motivation to attend games rather than watch them on television. In a sense, a large part of the Seahawks game-day experience is the crowd, which requires a person to attend the game at CenturyLink Field.

The media attention gained from this event also brought attention to the Seahawks and their 12th Man. It is free publicity for the team. While discussing the world record, media outlets are also likely to discuss things such as the team’s record and other information. Volume 12 has also been able to gain from this event. The attention from media outlets has helped to spread their name and who they are. I believe that the Seahawks organization made a good decision in not being directly a part of the record-setting event. First, they were able to save time and money on promotions. Volume 12 took care of this all themselves and the Seahawks were still gaining attention. Secondly, by not becoming involved, it was less likely for the NFL to be able to intervene and cancel the event for any reason. Finally, by not putting their name on the event, the Seahawks organization can boast of the accomplishment that took place in their stadium without having to directly answer to any backlash.

---

Analysis by Eric Brent in SRM 435 (section 2)

In the Seattle Times article “Hawks fans ready for record roar,” the author discusses the fans of the Seattle attempting to set the record of the loudest crowd at a sports stadium. This was set to take place on September 15, 2013 at the Seahawk’s home opener against the San Francisco 49ers. All of the planning and execution was put on by Volume 12, which is a direct link to Seattle’s “12th Man” fan base. Joe Tafoya, co-founder of Volume 12, sent in an application without thinking too much of it, but a week and a half later to his surprise Guinness World Records was on board. Even with having knowledge of the approval the Seattle Seahawks organization itself continued to keep its distance from the event. No marketing or promotion of any kind was put on or linked to the organization.

At a time where it is difficult to get fans to come to experience a game at the stadium rather than sitting at home watching from their television, the Volume 12 found a way. Once Volume 12 found out Guinness World Records was on board, advertisements were placed on the Volume 12 social media sites (i.e. Facebook, Twitter), news releases were completed, YouTube videos were made, and NBC Sunday Night Football even mentioned the plan a week prior to the Seahawks Sunday Night Football game. The game not only sold out, but Seattle had its largest crowd ever a record breaking 68,338. This is the first time I have seen a marketing strategy involving fans setting a Guinness World Record, and it gave each person the opportunity to be a part of history. Not too many people can say they have been a part of breaking a world record.

This relates to the course due to the fact of all the conversation and discussion about how can we get people to the games and stay at the games and what are some unique ways to market a game. The opportunity to set a record caused the Seahawks to break another record that was not even being promoted, which was having the largest crowd attendance in Seattle Seahawks history. The reason I say it got people to stay at the game is because after the record was broken earlier in the game, it was not until the third quarter where the Seahawks fans set the highest mark of 136.6 decibels. From a marketing standpoint everyone involved indirectly or directly received great exposure. Seahawk’s organization probably benefited the most indirectly due to it being at their stadium and their team but having nothing to do with the planning. Volume 12 benefited the most directly because all of the planning and organizing was through that organization. NBC’s Sunday Night Football and Guinness World Records also received some good marketing because the game was held on NBC and Guinness was the reason Seahawk’s fans had this opportunity.

"Rolling Stone Writer Believes Aaron Hernandez Could Be Back in NFL ‘Within Three or Four Years’"

From NESN

Analysis by Adam McElrath in SRM 334 (section 2)

With the Boston Marathon Bombings and the Aaron Hernandez arrest happening all within the month of June, the New England area has been the center of attention for the media in recent months. Jake and I have focused our attention to how the Hernandez arrest became all that was talked about on numerous television and social networks. We also wanted to take a different approach to our presentation and look at the future of Hernandez after coming across an article by Mike Cole of the New England Sports Network titled, “Rolling Stone Writer Believes Aaron Hernandez Could Be Back in NFL ‘Within Three or Four Years’” This article is interesting in many different ways. First off, at this point in time it seems farfetched that a return to the NFL for Hernandez is remotely possible. Also, in this article Cole interviewed Rolling Stones journalist Paul Solotaroff, who is responsible for writing a polarizing article delving into the criminal’s dark past with interviews involving close family and friends of Hernandez. From Cole’s interview with Solotaroff and his viewpoints on the legality of the case, we see a distant possibility of the John Mackey Award winner returning to the league. If this ever does happen and Hernandez is found innocent or completes a short term in prison, the media will have a frenzy speculating which teams will be willing to take the risk.

The media was in uproar when the story first broke back in the middle of June. With the bulk of the action being located in the town of Bristol, Connecticut, ESPN was one of the first to report on the subject. Shortly after ESPN arrived at Hernandez’s home, the word was out everywhere and from a viewers standpoint, it was almost impossible to escape the talk as Twitter and Facebook exploded with rumors and stories and how all major television networks were right in the heart of it all, covering it 24/7.

The mass media continues to put large emphasis when any new, developing stories arise involving the possible sentence Hernandez will face. TMZ outbid Barstool Sports for $20,000 over a handwritten letter from Hernandez in his jail cell to one of his friends as Hernandez kept pleading his innocence and how “God” has a plan for him all while begging his friend to keep this off social media. In this day in age, no matter how close of a friend he might be to the former Patriots’ tight end, no way was he not going to take this opportunity to bank a lot of cash.
All in all, as a student in a Sports in Media class, it is easy to see how the media loves to get their hands on intriguing stories before their competition does. And it is also obvious to see how these same people feel the urgency to be the first to break a story to the public. But with this being the case many rumors can start making their audience “trust” that they are being provided with facts ultimately leaving no chance for other opinions on the subject matter. In the Aaron Hernandez situation, the media has portrayed him in any way possible as a criminal, a convict, and a murderer.

---

Analysis by Jake Porter in SRM 334 (section 2)

While researching articles for this presentation Adam and I found a vast amount of reports that have detailed the Aaron Hernandez murder case. This made it very easy to find a relevant report even though we had to sift through and find what was fact and what was speculation. Our main article written by Mike Cole gives a somewhat fresh viewpoint on a story that has already been blown out of the water by major news outlets like ESPN, CNN, CBS, etc. This article introduces the idea that Aaron Hernandez could possibly be integrated back into the NFL, given that he beats the multiple murder charges standing in front of him.

In the article Mike Cole interviews Paul Solotaroff, writer for the Rolling Stones, who claims that Hernandez can easily beat the alleged murder charges set before him. The article explains that Hernandez is likely looking at about 3 years of jail time for gun charges, but Aaron is young and pending his release will have, "very low mileage on those legs of his and a lot of time to heal up" (Cole). Paul is later quoted in the article that he would not be surprised if some NFL teams pursued Hernandez if or when the charges are dropped against him.

No one knows what the future really holds for Aaron Hernandez. The future may l look grim to some, but there are plenty of optimists out there that would not be surprised to see Hernandez back in the league within the next half decade. During the course of this project it has been interesting to see the role the media has played in this case. From the day the story broke to the weeks following it seemed that most major news outlets covered every minute detail. Even though the story has died off in recent months, the media can still play a big role in the future. Hypothetically if Hernandez is released and charges are dropped, the media will play a huge role integrating him back into the league, because they have the influence to turn a man once seen as a monster back into a cherished NFL superstar.