Stadiums' names

[pjohns]

I am currently watching the Cowboys-Redskins NFL game from AT&T Stadium in Dallas. 

Just yesterday (Sunday)--and Saturday, and Friday--I watched the Giants oppose the Royals in AT&T Park in San Francisco.

One need not go all the way back to Ebbets Field (the home of the former Brooklyn Dodgers), Forbes Field (the former home of the Pittsburgh Pirates), or the Polo Grounds (the former home of several professional sports teams), in order to get a certain panache.  Even the San Francisco Giants' former home--Candlestick Park--had a much more pleasing ring to the name. 

This seems to be the trend nowadays:  Stadiums are named for their respective sponsors, rather than for something a bit more appropriate.  (The now-defunct RCA Dome, in Indianapolis--the former home of the Indiana Pacers--is another good example of this.  Its former name--the Hoosier Dome--seemed much more appropriate for an Indiana-based sports team.) 

I suppose this is really not a matter of monumental consequence.  But it is mildly irritating...

[DCPatriot]

I am currently watching the Cowboys-Redskins NFL game from AT&T Stadium in Dallas. 

snip...

I suppose this is really not a matter of monumental consequence.  But it is mildly irritating...

"Mildly irritating"...that despite a panel of twelve broadcasters and analysts unanimously picked the Cowboys...the Redskins win in overtime, 20-17.

What else is "mildly irritating", is that we're fed another public service commercial spot about domestic abuse.  And another one about breast cancer.

This, on top of the World Series' commercial featuring the young GIRL who can throw 80 mph.

Why not show a young little league BOY who 'dreams' of being [fill-in-the-blank] with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th?  IT'S THE WORLD SERIES, for chrissakes.

Why do the freaking libs have to get their agenda into EVERYTHING?   Men can't even have football and baseball without us being fed this crap?

It's not "mildly irritating".  It's VERY IRRITATING!   

[Scottftlc]

It's because the left rules everything in American culture.  If you don't bow down to the left and their causes, you do not survive in America.  The left rules here.

[jmyrlefuller]

Remember that the NFL (MLB, too, but not quite so much) is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. Those corporations will pay millions of dollars—tens of millions in some cases—per year for the right to have their name on that stadium (and thus get mentioned on well-watched national TV every time a team plays there).

It's also part of a shift in the whole idea of stadium making. They used to be works projects, buildings built for civic use. A lot of them were built as memorial monuments (hence why you saw a lot of "Memorial Stadiums" in various places), since many of the earliest baseball parks and football fields were chinsy and made of wood. Of course, back then, pro sports was not as profitable, as there was no TV and attendance wasn't as high, nor were ticket prices. Now, with these teams being billion-dollar enterprises, it seems more like corporate welfare to build these huge stadiums. What used to be done by the WPA is now done by private construction.

Ironically, one of the first stadiums to have it was the stadium in Buffalo. For dirt cheap, Rich Products bought the naming rights to Rich Stadium. Then, after 25 years, Ralph Wilson decided things have gone too far. So he decided not to renew the deal and slapped his own name on the stadium! (He didn't even own it.)

[pjohns]

Remember that the NFL (MLB, too, but not quite so much) is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. Those corporations will pay millions of dollars—tens of millions in some cases—per year for the right to have their name on that stadium (and thus get mentioned on well-watched national TV every time a team plays there).

It's also part of a shift in the whole idea of stadium making. They used to be works projects, buildings built for civic use. A lot of them were built as memorial monuments (hence why you saw a lot of "Memorial Stadiums" in various places), since many of the earliest baseball parks and football fields were chinsy and made of wood. Of course, back then, pro sports was not as profitable, as there was no TV and attendance wasn't as high, nor were ticket prices. Now, with these teams being billion-dollar enterprises, it seems more like corporate welfare to build these huge stadiums. What used to be done by the WPA is now done by private construction.

Ironically, one of the first stadiums to have it was the stadium in Buffalo. For dirt cheap, Rich Products bought the naming rights to Rich Stadium. Then, after 25 years, Ralph Wilson decided things have gone too far. So he decided not to renew the deal and slapped his own name on the stadium! (He didn't even own it.)

You make some valid points.

Nonetheless, your observation that "[t]hose corporations will pay millions of dollars—tens of millions in some cases—per year for the right to have their name on that stadium" necessarily begs the question:  Why would anyone offer "millions of dollars" (let alone "tens of millions") for the mere privilege of having their corporate name on the stadium in question?

If I were considering Comcast as my landline-phone provider--or if I were considering T-Mobile, Verizon, or Sprint as my cell-phone provider--I certainly would not be influenced by the "AT&T" name on a ballpark.

Would you?

[DCPatriot]

You make some valid points.

Nonetheless, your observation that "[t]hose corporations will pay millions of dollars—tens of millions in some cases—per year for the right to have their name on that stadium" necessarily begs the question:  Why would anyone offer "millions of dollars" (let alone "tens of millions") for the mere privilege of having their corporate name on the stadium in question?

If I were considering Comcast as my landline-phone provider--or if I were considering T-Mobile, Verizon, or Sprint as my cell-phone provider--I certainly would not be influenced by the "AT&T" name on a ballpark.

Would you?

It's simply word association.  Maybe a subliminal drumming into the subconscious.

My sons own an EXIT Realty franchise which is headquartered in Toronto, Canada.  The logo is in GREEN.

One of their main selling points to prospective new agents is that all government regulations here in the States use the same typeface and color in all buildings...subways, movie theaters.  Used to be in 'red'...now it's green...as in "go".

You sit in a dark movie theater during a movie and the ONLY thing other than the screen that is visible is the "EXIT" sign.


I still laugh at the suggestion....I was a REMAX disciple myself.   

[pjohns]

It's simply word association.  Maybe a subliminal drumming into the subconscious.

Perhaps.

But I would much prefer to do a calculated cost-benefit analysis before choosing one provider over another.  And I think most others would also.

I have simply never understood (on a related matter) why various companies are willing to pay celebrities mega-bucks for their endorsements.  Those endorsements look very cynical to me--they are not steeped in principle, but in painstaking negotiations--and, in most cases, the endorser is not even an expert in the matter of whatever he (or she) is endorsing. 

[NavyCanDo]

I’m more bothered by what they did to the naming of the College Bowls

TaxSlayer Bowl   
Outback Bowl   
Russell  Athletic  Bowl
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl
GoDaddy Bowl
Belk Bowl
Pinstripe Bowl
Camellia Bowl
Quick Lane Bowl
Cure Bowl

[pjohns]

I guess I just have much more faith in the analytical abilities of the typical American than some people do.  That is why, as regarding stock prices, I am a fundamentalist (which is to say, I believe that company fundamentals--such as price-to-earnings ratio and price-to-book ratio--trump the behavioral theory of technical analysts).