As most of you probably already know, Oregon lost the title game to Auburn on Monday, January 10, 2011 by a score of 22-19. Nike has a special place in its heart for the ducks because co-founder Phil Knight is an alumnus of the school. Knight also donated a $100 million to Oregon athletics along with tons of uniform combinations for the team to wear on the field. To love your school is something I understand completely but why does a big client like Nike approve an ad like the one shown above? When I read the copy I saw it as praise for the losing team.
As Americans, do we ever remember those who finished second? No, we’re a country that likes winners. Why didn’t Wieden + Kennedy feature the winning helmet? Oh yeah, Auburn isn’t sponsored by Nike, Auburn belongs to the Under Armour camp.
The question is, would W+K have ran this ad if Oregon wasn’t Nike’s pet school? Not if they wanted to stay profitable and keep their client happy. Also, I can’t believe that there is actually a division one school that Nike doesn’t sponsor. I absolutely loved everything about the uniform except for the neon green socks. The socks made the Oregon players look like they threw up on their shoes before the game started.
The helmet looks awesome but I would have changed the headline somehow. Also, I just can’t get over the idea that the ad shown above is a consolation ad, an ad praising the loser for how hard they tried. This is why, I think of the ad above as the Special Olympics ad, because everyone’s a winner! What do you guys think?
As a side not, I do appreciate what the Special Olympics tries to accomplish, but I don’t appreciate the fact that all disabled sports have been overshadowed by this event which is meant for mentally disabled athletes only and not “ALL” athletes with a disability.
Best,
-A.B.
No comments:
Post a Comment