The Big Annoyance

As I mentioned during Saturday's post, the two weeks between the Conference Championships and the Super Bowl are some of the longest, more boring days on the sports calendar. At some point every story has been looked into, every player and coach has been interviewed and every second of game film has been broken down. After all that it's still only Tuesday... of the first week. I don't care how anticipated the game may be, waiting this long for anything is going to seem interminable. If you've read this blog before you also know what happens when I have that long to stare at something - I'm going to start nit-picking every aspect of it. Now, the NFL has gotten a little better at trying to keep smart asses like myself at bay by releasing a few of the Super Bowl ads the week before the game to distract us. However, that move has only prompted people who can't afford Super Bowl ads (which are about $3 million for 30 seconds) from trying to get in on the action by also releasing new commercials this week, hoping most people won't be able to tell them apart. The only problem is you can tell whose ads are official versus the ones that aren't by one simple difference - the official ones get to call the game "The Super Bowl" while the unofficial ones resort to calling it "The Big Game".

I can not tell you how annoying this tactic is to me. I know it seems silly, but that one simple world change makes a ton of difference in the world of copyright infringement. One means you are an official partner of the NFL, the other means you watch a lot of sports, but have no real connection to the game. (I have to say, I don't know why people are still paying all that money to be official partners of anything, because it is not like it makes a difference to most consumers. I want the best deal and whether the product is connect to a league makes literally no difference to me. Especially when the product has nothing to do with the sport. Seriously, has anyone ever been watching the Super Bowl and wondered which truck as the official vehicle of the NFL?) But the main reason it bothers me is that the NFL and their lawyers are forcing people to make a switch in the meekest way possible. Let's be honest, it is not like most people won't be able to see through that amazingly difficult code of calling the "Super Bowl" the "Big Game." It is like telling people they can't go through the one half of a double door while leaving the other side wide open. At some point you look like the idiot for enforcing such an easily-circumvented idea.

I completely understand why someone would want to protect a valuable name or brand against just anyone using it. If you aren't careful some random company could be slapping your logo on a product which is cheaply made or offensive in some way. A company's image is pretty much all they have and they have every right to go after someone who is harming their reputation. I know I would be thoroughly pissed if I found out someone was reprinting this stuff on another blog and claiming it as their own. However, that isn't what the NFL is doing here. They aren't mad because someone is making bootleg jerseys and selling them as the real thing, they are doing all this because one chip company wasn't willing to pay them as much as the next chip company. Their moral stance about wanting to only be associated with brands which meet their standards takes a pretty severe hit when you remember that on Sunday we are going to see ads from Coke and Pepsi, most likely back-to-back. If they really cared they would only deal with one of them, but instead they gladly take money from anyone willing to pay the asking price. That kind of talking out of both sides of their mouth makes it hard to feel bad for the NFL if someone uses their logo without expressed, written consent.

I'm pretty sure just about anyone could use the term Super Bowl... if they paid enough. As long as the check clears, at this point I feel like the NFL would be able to talk themselves into allowing their shield onto any product. That is why I don't understand this constant blocking of companies from using the term Super Bowl. Let them call the game by its official name and then charge them for it. The game gets a little more publicity (not that it needs it) and the NFL makes even more money (not that they need it). Plus, it would stop insulting our intelligence by insisting companies avoid a specific two-words phrase in favor of the most-easily broken code ever and assuming the average person is too stupid to tell the difference. Believe me, even non-football fans know what event you mean when you say "The Big Game." What is the NFL afraid of, that we would get sick of hearing about the Super Bowl if it was branded onto every possible package? I've got news for them - that pretty much already happens. If anything, that fatigue may be lessened if it leads to better deals on the products we actually use and the more products that applies to the better. Plenty of stores are having "Big Game" sales this week and they are not limited to NFL-licensed products. The NFL may not want to acknowledge non-sponsor products actually exist, but as someone with zero brand loyalty and whose team is not playing the game, whether the official Super Bowl logo is on the packaging makes no difference to me. Honestly, I think the league is acting like a bully for no reason on this issue and that could do more damage to their brand than being associated with the wrong car company ever would.