| Should the NCAA hold naming rights to bowl games? |
|
I think all these corporate names for bowls has gotten too far. I understand these businesses get involved to promote advertising and stuff like that, but when it gets too far is when these corporations just rip the name right out the bowl name and replace it with themselves (i.e. Capital One Bowl, Chick-Fil-A bowl, remember the Copper bowl? I believe that's now the insight bowl) These bowls have been around long before these corporations started getting involved. I remember when it was just Orange bowl, fiesta bowl, rose bowl, and sugar bowl, nothing in front of it. IMO, if these corporations want to sponsor a bowl game , the NCAA should tell these sponsors to leave the name alone but they can still put their names in front as most of them do anyway. What do you think? |
|
These bowl games need to generate money to exist. So, if it's between the Capital One Bowl and no bowl at all, I say sell the naming rights. |
|
thats just dumb I AGREE 100%. I think the way they name them now is one of the major reasons people are calling for a different system- LOL....you are 100% right but NCAA is making whole lots of money by doing it.... no no its the papajohns.com bowl Well, The Rose Bowl is "Presented by Citi". I wish they would keep with this form of advertisements, becasue you still hear it, but the history of the bowl lives on instead of it getting renamed year after year with different sponsors. But unfortunately, everything comes down to money. It's kind of the same thing with the naming of new stadiums--there are few today without corporate names now. |
| Topic Related |
|
|
