Anyone else fed up with the NFL?

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

If they sell him something, is he not entitled to expect that they, the NFL, won't deliberately do something that diminishes the value of what PJs bought?

Tangential thought 2: Based on this thread, and the 49er suppressor thread, is there any evidence to suggest the NFL thinks they are diminishing their value? They seem kind of proud of all of this. NFL and PJ may have something of a values mismatch.

[Rumline]

Maybe they've made the decision that red-blooded Americans aren't who they want to target anymore and that SJWs are a more lucrative audience.

[JohnnyDrama]

Ha! Quarterback and aspiring pizza mogul.

My subjectivity aside, I have to wonder if he wouldn’t do better with his own name.

What ever happened to Craig Morton?

[BladesNBarrels]

Papa John's paid the NFL X brazillian dollars to advertise with the expectation that they would get Y Brazilian eyeballs watching their commercials.
They got that expectation because the NFL told them "these are our ratings for 2016 and we project that in 2017 the ratings will go from Y Brazilian to Z Brazilian." That was the expectation that they SOLD to Papa John's.

Dang, I didn't know Papa John's was selling Brazilian Pizza's in Brazil to Brazilians for Brazilian dollars



watching Brazilian football.



Learn something new everyday.

[MrPrena]

I am getting strong urge to make a new thread with title, "anyone else fed up with papa Johns delivery?"

[Aloha_Shooter]

I cannot agree even a little. “Papa” is getting exactly what he paid for: airtime during a game. There is no way his contract has some sort of negotiated “behavior of the NFL” clause in it. I’d also be surprised if there were some sort of “declining ratings” clause.

Whenever someone pays big coin to advertise because of association with a celebrity or popular event, they are paying that coin to get a positive association. Papa John's pays the networks for the airtime, they pay the NFL to be an official sponsor because of the positive benefit that conveys. When said benefit is no longer positive because of misbehavior or failure to enforce behavior standards, the advertiser certainly does have the right to complain. S/he may not have a right to a refund but s/he can certainly complain that the NFL is mismanaging the situation.

The NFL is OK with letting Ray Lewis and Michael Vick back in, but hey guys - clean it up and follow the rules: pizza guy wants a clean image.

... and examples like that are why the NFL lost me before this new controversy started but it obviously didn't affect most of the fanbase. The new controversy is different, it definitely HAS had an effect on sales of all kinds of related products -- I would expect all the advertisers to have words with the NFL. If they didn't they should just suck up continued reductions in demand.

... and your post loses credibility when you claim Domino's has better pizza. I might give you Pizza Hut despite all the grease in their crust but Domino's with the cardboard crust? Never!

[00tec]

Whenever someone pays big coin to advertise because of association with a celebrity or popular event, they are paying that coin to get a positive association. Papa John's pays the networks for the airtime, they pay the NFL to be an official sponsor because of the positive benefit that conveys. When said benefit is no longer positive because of misbehavior or failure to enforce behavior standards, the advertiser certainly does have the right to complain. S/he may not have a right to a refund but s/he can certainly complain that the NFL is mismanaging the situation.




... and examples like that are why the NFL lost me before this new controversy started but it obviously didn't affect most of the fanbase. The new controversy is different, it definitely HAS had an effect on sales of all kinds of related products -- I would expect all the advertisers to have words with the NFL. If they didn't they should just suck up continued reductions in demand.

... and your post loses credibility when you claim Domino's has better pizza. I might give you Pizza Hut despite all the grease in their crust but Domino's with the cardboard crust? Never!

When was the last time you had Dominos? Haha

[Madeinhb]

I cannot agree even a little. “Papa” is getting exactly what he paid for: airtime during a game. There is no way his contract has some sort of negotiated “behavior of the NFL” clause in it. I’d also be surprised if there were some sort of “declining ratings” clause.

If you are dumb enough to expect a league of athletes to somehow behave and not manage to otherwise alienate sections of the fanbase, you get exactly what you deserve. That goes double if it is the child abusers, wife beaters, drug abusers, and assault & battery crew that is the NFL & NBA. How can you seriously think that is what you are getting when you sign on with the league that has been OK with this for generations?

The NFL is OK with letting Ray Lewis and Michael Vick back in, but hey guys - clean it up and follow the rules: pizza guy wants a clean image.

I don't have an issue with Michael Vick. He did his time and once out, still had some gas left. Now Ray Lewis - yes I agree.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Whenever someone pays big coin to advertise because of association with a celebrity or popular event, they are paying that coin to get a positive association. Papa John's pays the networks for the airtime, they pay the NFL to be an official sponsor because of the positive benefit that conveys. When said benefit is no longer positive because of misbehavior or failure to enforce behavior standards, the advertiser certainly does have the right to complain. S/he may not have a right to a refund but s/he can certainly complain that the NFL is mismanaging the situation.

Here are a couple of interesting articles on the NFL ratings:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...or-second-year
https://www.wsj.com/articles/overexp...oes-1509615005

The first one mentions Papa Schatt himself, and he blames revenue growth failure on the NFL, but meanwhile Bloomberg and WSJ are noting the decline definitely precedes this latest controversy and is more likely due to bad matchups, loss of superstars, dilution of product and overexposure, and they have data to back this.

So I stand by my original assertion - loser talk. Maybe lack of growth is also due to the fact that you’ve saturated the pizza market too. Your commercials are on non-stop and every township has one of your franchises. Even fat Americans can only consume so much low-grade pizza. Pizza Hut and Dominos aren’t complaining, but as several of you point out - they didn’t hitch their wagon to the controversy. That’s fine, but I’m betting football days are some of their biggest as well.

... and your post loses credibility when you claim Domino's has better pizza. I might give you Pizza Hut despite all the grease in their crust but Domino's with the cardboard crust? Never!

Roffles. That’s fine, taste is subjective. Clearly all of them sell a lot of pizza, but the sight of those dipping sauces that PJ offers (or did) just make me involuntarily shudder with disgust.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

I don't have an issue with Michael Vick. He did his time and once out, still had some gas left. Now Ray Lewis - yes I agree.

But many did and it was a PR problem. Neither were hot buttons for me (although I think both guys are pieces of shit), but merely other big NFL headaches.