Photos of the hated NFL vest
Cory Bergman July 24th, 2007
As you probably know, the NFL has a new rule that will require sideline photographers to wear a red NFL vest with Canon and Reebok logos plastered on it. Photo District News has photos of what it will look like here. (Thanks, Allen!)
Adds Jeri in comments: “I think the vests could’ve been a hell of a lot worse. The logos are actually pretty small. I was expecting CANON across my back.”
8 Comments Add your own
1. John | July 24th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Does anyone have any pictures of what the Miami Dolphins cheerleaders will be required to wear this year?
Cory, I hope your utter disgust in this NFL access BS is behind your blatant mispell of Reebok! Two points off.
2. Cory Bergman | July 24th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
i fixed. i should’ve spelled Canon wrong, too.
3. Amanda | July 24th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
Yes, Canon should be spelled N-I-K-O-N
(runs from the flamewar I just started)
4. Jeri | July 24th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
I think the vests could’ve been a hell of a lot worse. The logos are actually pretty small. I was expecting CANON across my back.
5. Michael Gay | July 24th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
It kind of reminds me of the vests the nice people at Target wear…
6. Mike | July 24th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
I’m an on-field official on game days but my day job is in television so I should be able to see both sides of the issue. But I honestly don’t. You guys are whining and crying about next to nothing. I’ve worked for overprotective stations which regulated bumper stickers on employee’s cars and such and as much as that sucked I could understand their neutrality concerns. But that’s not the case with these vests. It’s a required uniform (barely). Unfortunately it does have a sponsor logo on it and I wish the NFL hadn’t sold out like that but I fail to see how anybody would confuse this standardized NFL gear with the station’s endorsement of the advertiser (which isn’t even a controversial sponsor in the first place). And being on the sideline, there’s way too many people walking around, getting in the way, without being easily able to identify why they’re there. Everybody else on the field has special attire and it’s perfectly reasonable to expect the press to be subject to the same rules.
7. Allen | July 24th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
Mike,
I think the beef is just with the sponsors, not the vest. Teams I’ve covered have had us use vests for years, so that’s not a big deal. To be honest, the logo is a lot smaller than what I would have expected. It sort of defeats the purpose of the ad…most people won’t even notice it.
8. Cameron | September 23rd, 2007 at 2:28 pm
We are complaining about a vest… think what Mike has to wear… knee high socks, little league pants, and a shirt that better suited for distracting lions on the swahili plains then work. I would just take the vest and keep shooting…
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed