More adventures in “it’s what’s on the front of the jersey that counts” land

Here’s Georgia’s 2014 schedule poster.

Recognize anyone?

Yeah, no way to know for sure that the big dude in the middle wearing number 3 is Todd Gur… or number 14 to his left setting up to throw the ball is Hutson Ma…  well, you get the idea.

Can I say thanks to the advertisers?


Filed under Georgia Football, It's Just Bidness

45 responses to “More adventures in “it’s what’s on the front of the jersey that counts” land

  1. TennesseeDawg

    GOOOOO Dopplegangers! Get ’em! Bark! Bark!

  2. And when those players leave, new ones will come up and have UGA fans excited…because they play for UGA. So, yeah, it is more about the G and not the name on the back. Always has been. Always will be. Not sure I get your point here.

    • Biggus Rickus

      Yeah, the endless harping on this is the only annoying thing about this site.

    • Gravidy

      Oh, I get his point. I just don’t agree with it.

    • So why not use a bunch of walk-ons/third stringers? Or why even use numbers and likenesses at all?

      • simpl_matter

        Booo Senator, me not like some postings, me booo you. Me read more your postings now….

      • Puffdawg

        Perhaps it’s a reward for the players who worked the hardest over the summer? 😉

        • masivatack

          Actually I think that has a lot to do with it. The seniors who have earned with their commitment to the program as well at the star players.

          I don’t think the move is very calculated at all concerning the likeness of the payers tho considering they use a lot of other images that show them with helmets off on billboards, posters, social posts, etc. But it certainly makes sense to not hang your hat on just a couple of guys and reward players who do things the right way.

          My wife actually took these pics, and the web version has been degraded significantly, or the image may be a picture of the poster. Heres a more accurate one that has a little better clarity (still not the final version tho).

          2014 Team Poster | Pick it up tomorrow at Picture Day from 2-6 PM at Sanford Stadium #GoDawgs #CommitToTheG— Georgia Football (@FootballUGA) August 15, 2014

    • Macallanlover

      Agree Parrish, Todd G is a helluva an athlete, and seems to be a fine young man, but if he played at Auburn would any UGA fan buy their son a TG jersey? No, but someone at Auburn would buy the Auburn version. Gurley will be gone next year and you can put the number 3 on another UGA jersey with Marshall on the back and sell some more. I don’t believe the players should get money for this in college, but they should get spending money and insurance protection to go with the current scholarship benefits they get for the time they invest in football.

      It is the program that opens the door for the adulation these athletes get, and there is over a century of goodwill built into creating the demand for anyone wearing a UGA jersey, they move through the system every 3-5 years but the value is retained because of the school, not the athlete.

      • Why is it all or nothing, Mac? Don’t school and player bring value? Again, if they don’t, why use player likeness at all?

        • sUGArdaddy

          Senator, you are EXACTLY right on this. It’s both ways. They both bring value. If Gurley and Co. formed a new semi-pro team called the Georgia Canines, we would not attend their games nor buy their jerseys. We will buy their NFL jerseys because they played for Georgia. And we will buy future Georgia jerseys from yet to be determined players because they play for Georgia. Their playing for Georgia gives them value to Georgia fans.

          But, the talent they have brings value to Georgia. Not too many are going out to buy Georgia State jerseys because they don’t have good players. All of a sudden across the South, everyone that has minimal affiliation is an Alabama fan now. Where were they in 2005? Mark Ingram and Julio Jones brought value back to Alabama.

          It’s both. Gurley and company wouldn’t get the same exposure at Georgia State, that’s why they come to Georgia. Playing in a great stadium with great tradition gets you on TV a lot. However, we get on TV a lot because we also have great players and great tradition was build on the work of great players winning a lot of games. There is no either/or…it’s both.

          • JCDAWG83

            As it currently stands, the players need the schools much more than the schools need the players. Without college football, the players would have no way to display their skills to the NFL. Gurley, Mason, etc would have to show up at some team’s practice facility and hope to get a tryout. The players get a free college degree, a chance to showcase their talents to the NFL, a chance to be a hero and the ability to play a game they love in an organized, well funded system with great facilities and support. If they feel exploited or taken advantage of, they are free to walk away at any time.

            Colleges, on the other hand, could adopt the high school model and simply hold tryouts for students to be on the football team. I doubt the attendance and money would be the same, but the colleges could still have a football team and a fan base. There was a time, not really that long ago, that college football did not generate the money it does today and the games were pretty well attended. I imagine that if athletic scholarships were done away with, programs like Georgia, AU, UF, etc would still draw large crowds.

            Honestly, I’m about ready to see things go more in the high school direction. Let the NFL create it’s own farm system and have actual students playing on college teams. If I want to see players who get paid to play football, I can watch the NFL.

        • rocksalt

          Are the players not compensated for the portion of the value they bring?

          • Are the players not fairly compensated for the portion of the value they bring?


            • JCDAWG83

              In my opinion, they are very fairly compensated. They have no fear of being fired for not performing to expectations, their benefits are guaranteed regardless of whether or not they end up being a contributor to the team. I don’t know if you have sent a kid to college, but I can tell you it is not a cheap exercise even without the extras scholarship athletes receive.

              Again, if you want to watch professional football players, watch the NFL or one of the other pro leagues. If players are going to get paid in college, why not let NFL players who don’t pan out and still have eligibility left come back and play at the college level?

              • UnionJack

                No fear of being fired? The scholarship is renewable each and every year.

                Go back and look at some of our own players language about the dismissal from the off-season and the word “fired” was used.

                Also, go back ask the kids from Alabama who have been medically disqualified by Saban & staff if they were “fired.” You know those recruits who didn’t pan out as football players in years 1, 2 or 3 but are in good academic and disciplinary standing. The ones whose scholarships are not being renewed because Alabama has oversigned recruits to LOI’s and want to give a scholarship to freshman with more upside.

                • Puffdawg

                  Serious question: how does a medical redshirt work? Doesn’t the school still pay for their tuition? Do they pay room and board? If so, the ones Saban did not “renew” their football scholarship are still being compensated technically, right? So technically they were’t “fired” per se, but they were reassigned. We’re going to pull you off the job you suck at, but we’re still going to pay you. Not a bad trade I guess. If that’s how medical scholarships work.

        • Macallanlover

          Senator, no one is saying they bring zero value, but without the UGA jersey they have no value in sales. I have yet to a Tarboro HS jersey with Gurley on the back, and probably wouldn’t if I went back to Tarboro (yes, I have been there.) He was in the Top 15 RBs in the nation in HS but college gave him the platform and marketed him. He will reap the benefits down the road but if the $35 K per year scholarship UGA gave him for 3 years now is worth over $100K now, and could be worth millions down the road in earning potential. If he had come in and been a bust, UGA would have still invested over $100K on their “gamble” but got little back in return.

          How do you know I wouldn’t be buying that poster because I like what Conley or Bennett stood for? You are a man of the law, which tooth of the saw cuts the most? It is the team, the institution, and the history that a fan is buying with that jersey or poster. The school is risking the money in return for the scholarship and training costs, the “amateur” athlete is getting development skills, counseling, training, etc. for a future return. He is free to do that on his own if he wishes and doesn’t like the system, or he could go to the Arena Football, or Canadian League. Splitting revenues amongst teammates is a slippery slope to me, one I don’t feel is beneficial long term to the school or players. Golden Goose will die if they have to spend millions fighting lawyer fees that didn’t exist before. Not just football revenues that will be impacted either.

          • Senator, no one is saying they bring zero value, but without the UGA jersey they have no value in sales.

            Mac, which do you think brings the most value: a Georgia jersey with no number; a Georgia jersey with the number 3; or a Georgia jersey with the number 3, signed by Todd Gurley?

            • JCDAWG83

              Todd Gurley’s signature would be totally worthless at this point in his life without the University of Georgia or some other college football program. The NFL rule (which I think is illegal, but that’s another discussion) about players having to be 21 to play makes football players from high school graduation to their 21st birthday totally dependent on college football programs if they have any desire to be a professional football player. The value of the scholarship, the value of the exposure and the value of the training are more than fair compensation for the players. How much the football program makes or loses is irrelevant to the argument. If a football program loses money (many do), I don’t think the players should be asked to pay to be a part of the team. The argument could be made that if the players did a better job and the program won more games, the university could collect more money and the program would be profitable, so the players owe money to the university for not doing a good enough job. Likewise, if the program is profitable, the players shouldn’t expect to share in the profits. The players are given a scholarship, training and exposure in return for playing. If the players don’t think they are getting enough out of the deal, they need to choose another path. No one is forcing them to play for a college team.

              • That’s a nice theory.

                Barring Congress stepping in and granting the NCAA an antitrust exemption, it’s got no connection to reality at this point, though.

                BTW, the NFL rule has been upheld in court. That would be the opposite of “illegal”.

                • JCDAWG83

                  I guess I just don’t understand how a business can have a policy that blatantly discriminates based on age. In the US, anyone can have any job they desire as long as they have the qualifications at age 18, except being an NFL player. The fact that it is part of a collective bargaining agreement is the only thing that makes it legal. I can’t help but wonder if a collective bargaining agreement could restrict employment to only white people? If age discrimination can be done under union employment rules, why not race discrimination?

                  You are correct about Congress stepping in, and that could very well happen. However; if they don’t, I think you will see a number of football programs either disappear or step down to D3 where they do not give scholarships. There are quite a few football programs that lose money now. If they are suddenly faced with having to pay players they are already giving scholarships to, they may opt to get out of the football scholarship business altogether.

            • Macallanlover

              Was that a rhetorical question Senator? I think the issue is how far you can push the definition of “amateur” before you are an NFL minor league. I can support a regional minor league concept and just pull away from the schools entirely if we go to the extreme you propose is needed. Makes a lot sense but the current stipend proposal to handle expenses related to attending college offers enough cover for “amateurism” and maintaining the game we have. Going further to me says cut the guys who want/demand that loose and go back to something closer to “student athlete”. The game will survive and be competitive, imo.

              • Mac, with regard to player likenesses, the train’s already left the station. It’s nice to know what you support, but ultimately, that’s irrelevant without an antitrust exemption.

                • JCDAWG83

                  Don’t be too surprised if you see that exemption.

                  • DawgPhan

                    Dont be surprised to see the NCAA slam their dick in the door a few more times before we even come close to any sort of anti trust exemption.

                    • JCDAWG83

                      No doubt, they are like a big clumsy oaf in a fight. They will stumble around, make a lot of terrible mistakes and say a lot of really stupid things and generally look like fools. In the end, however, they are a RICH, clumsy oaf and they will buy their way out of their problem by paying off politicians.

                    • JCDAWG83

                      Money. The NCAA will throw money at politicians to get what they want and they have a lot of money to throw. The athletes don’t have any money to match the NCAA. The politicians will grant the exemption because they will view it as a “nobody gets hurt” situation. They can justify the exemption as simply maintaining the student athlete model and they can line their pockets while they do it.

                    • These are your assumptions, or you’ve actually heard people in Congress indicate that?

                      And don’t forget that the POTUS would have to sign the bill into law. If a Democrat occupies that office, you still think that’s likely?

    • Studawg

      Glad Im not the only one.

  3. Hogbody Spradlin

    Gee, they look almost as real as the players on EA Sports games.

  4. Brcdavis

    So ready to read about football.

  5. It’s nice that they are showing some love (rather prominently, i might add) to the 2nd teamers.

  6. Cousin Eddie

    Which poster would you, or your 10 year old son, rather have the one with the players who are getting, for sake of argument, a free education or the coaching staff who are pulling down actual monetary value?

  7. charlottedawg

    By this argument your employer owes you nOthing more than a dorm room, a workout facility, meals, and the opportunity to listen to some lectures as fair compensation for your services. After all they provided the infrastructure and brand name so that must mean they are the only component of the value chain.

    Let’s call this what it is, collusion among a cartel (among institutions of higher learning no less, to take hypocrisy up a notch) to ensure that labor gets and will continue to get zero slices of the very large economic pie.

    • charlottedawg

      This was supposed to be a reply to mac

      • DawgPhan

        meh. it just the same tired arguments about paying the players. I am glad that no one decided that analysts should be happy to get what we give them. I am glad that I am free to move at a whim and test the market of my skills without out collusion between the different companies that might be interested in my skills.

        It’s all these liberals that want to teach and keep these players suckling at the government teet once they get to voting age. I say let them test the markets and find our what their skills are worth without more big government regulations.

        Free markets, baby.

    • Macallanlover

      I don’t feel it is even close to any sort of “evil collusion”, nor that different from apprenticeships, internships, etc. Doctors learn their trade at hospitals and make less per hour than some minimum wage jobs. Come on, attending college on a full ride, now to include spending money in many cases, isn’t being enslaved. In three years those who succeed will have their chance at the big bucks. As I said to the Senator, break away and go for it as a minor league professional if they want. That is what pro golfers, baseball players, etc., do. But don’t bring that level of professionalism to the college game. Let them learn their trade, and act like an equal teammate for a few years, stop the greed and impatience.

      • Brcdavis

        But to not have it all, and have it now is so old fashioned! The root of this in my opinion is the same thing that drives all class warfare…people wanting to dictate how much money the people at the top can make and using their “heartfelt” concern for the downtrodden as cover. Not to say nobody has genuine concern for college athletes that wants to see them paid more, and I don’t have a problem with them being paid more. But the demonization of huge swaths of people is emblematic of what’s wrong with this country. Only one side is right and they are 100% right and anyone who raises a single objection is the enemy. It’s the opposite of open-mindedness, and that’s the irony to me.

        • brcdavis

          Also, I realize that I am making a broader commentary and maybe I shouldn’t do that. I wouldn’t want to come across as doing the very thing I’m criticizing. To me, these are difficult topics and there are genuinely good people on both sides. Everyone should be concerned about the ones that are in position of less influence and do what can be done to disallow exploitation. That’s true of a college athlete as well as a front line worker. I just wish people would refrain from blanket statements that villify whole classes of people, be they leaders or anyone else.