No more Husker players' numbers on fan jerseys

Moiraine said:
It'd be nice if they could just give a part of the profits to the players after they are out of the program. This is probably against a rule though.
Click to expand...
That's what EA wanted to do, pay the players once they're done with school. NCAA nixed that.

 
Something tells me jersey sales just took a big hit. I'm not really into wearing jerseys but I gotta believe the people who are won't be real excited about having the exact same number as every other fan. Knew the EA ruling would snowball. Should just make the student athletes relinquish their rights in exchange for that scholarship. Sign here on the line.........or don't play college ball. Pretty simple.

 
ColoradoHusk said:
The sale of jerseys need to stop to anyone over 18 years old. A grown man wearing a jersey of someone half their age is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, that's a given. But I'm sure there'll be a lot of disappointed younger fans. Heck I remember getting a jersey almost every year, from the age of 5 up to probably 13 or 14. I'm fully expecting to do the same for my kid, if and when that day comes. Unfortunately for him, he won't be able to choose from Crouch or Newcombe, instead he'll have to settle for a 1 or some random 30 number.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I never buy the jerseys anyhow. But if I were going to, I would have definitely bought a specific jersey number for a specific player. Then try and get that sucker signed. This is definitely a big hit on the sports memorabilia market.

 
if other universities are doing this (and I believe they are), then this is a mistake (even if you ultimately have to pay a player or players).

 
This is a stupid idea, but before I get to that, I don't see jerseys as being the same as the NCAA football games. The digital recreations were almost exact copies of real life people, save the face. Height, weight, abilities, skin color and jersey number were identical. Multiple factors associating themselves to one person. Just one of those factors, to me, is not an association with a player.

That said, I guess if people did see a black #80 jersey from the 2013 season, they'd immediately think Kenny Bell. I get it.

I digress - however, the reason this particular idea is stupid is because you're still selling jerseys that directly correlate to another player! When the year 2022 roles around, given this policy is still in place, those jerseys are going to sell like hot cakes. Hmm... wonder why? Everybody just loves the year 2022? Or everybody just loves 2's!?

No, it'll be because of Rex Burkhead. You could go around and ask every Husker fan on the street that year who they associate the #22 with and, unless another great player comes along and wears it, most people will say Rex Burkhead.

The idea that they're being "safe" by doing a default 1 and the year, and this somehow protects them, is ludicrous in my opinion. The jerseys still represent real people to some fans, and limiting when you actually sell that jersey does NOT change that association.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it protects them very well, actually.

If you feel that a school shouldn't be profiting from their student athletes, then the school should definitely not be making money selling ($50? $80?) jerseys matching their star players every year.

A #1 jersey? A year number? "Matches" would be merely coincidental.

Of course, the argument can be made that they should be going even further, but it's likely they won't have to. They are still free to profit under their own brand, which arguably promotes the student-athletes wearing it as much as the other way around (in general).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Enhance89 said:
This is a stupid idea, but before I get to that, I don't see jerseys as being the same as the NCAA football games. The digital recreations were almost exact copies of real life people, save the face. Height, weight, abilities, skin color and jersey number were identical. Multiple factors associating themselves to one person. Just one of those factors, to me, is not an association with a player.

That said, I guess if people did see a black #80 jersey from the 2013 season, they'd immediately think Kenny Bell. I get it.

I digress - however, the reason this particular idea is stupid is because you're still selling jerseys that directly correlate to another player! When the year 2022 roles around, given this policy is still in place, those jerseys are going to sell like hot cakes. Hmm... wonder why? Everybody just loves the year 2022? Or everybody just loves 2's!?

No, it'll be because of Rex Burkhead. You could go around and ask every Husker fan on the street that year who they associate the #22 with and, unless another great player comes along and wears it, most people will say Rex Burkhead.

The idea that they're being "safe" by doing a default 1 and the year, and this somehow protects them, is ludicrous in my opinion. The jerseys still represent real people to some fans, and limiting when you actually sell that jersey does NOT change that association.
Click to expand...


People are not going to be clamoring over Rex Burkhead jerseys in 2022, sorry.

 
Back
Top