Hoops

VJBL Melb Utd logo for all club uniforms?

HO is right, this is not an original idea, I have seen this kind of arrangement at local football level, district cricket level and I am sure it has been done by Associations where they have their logo put onto uniforms of teams who play exclusively under their banner.

What I would have liked to read is an agreement from MU that they would join and accept assistance in all junior development by another Victorian based NBL team, should one appear in the next year or at least during the sponsorship deal.

Just to give us the understanding that they are not looking to be the only NBL franchise that wants to help build the future of junior basketball. A big ask, I know, just what I would have liked to have read in the press release, that's all...

#514504 agree with a lot of your post but the VJBL do NOT own club uniforms., the clubs do. They do not own the clubs either. The BV board are voted in by the clubs I believe. Although please correct if this is not true. Will be interesting to see whether this has any longer term ramifications.

Re club sponsorship, clubs are not for profit entities so the monies they receive for uniform sponsorship are reinvested into development programs for the players. $75k to put a logo on every singlet in this competition is nothing. Regrettably for Melbourne United, there is so much angst about this that it is having the opposite effect, people are turning off MU instead of being positive.

One positive of this sponsorships it may benefit the smaller clubs who don't have directors of coaching or the resources to educate their coaches. It does nothing for the clubs like Nunawading, Eltham, Knox, Kilsyth, Bulleen, Dandenong and particularly Melbourne Tigers.

I also resent the incorporation of the MU logo into the VJBL logo. Does the AFL logo have naming rights sponsors embedded into it's logo for instance.

Hey #514324, you say the league sponsor takes priority over the club sponsor for the benefit of all. Tell me, what is the benefit ? It was an I'll conceived sponsorship that BV did not think through the consequences. They are supposed to represent all Victorian basketball. How do they support the WNBL teams in Victoria ? They don't!

Tell me how an admin person benefits the clubs? BA have sold club properties without consultation for no money. They are taking positions on uniforms that clubs could sell to their own sponsors.

No one wants Melbourne United on their uniform, particularly Melbourne Tigers!

So naming rights for the entire competition is worth $75,000. Are you kidding? BA have kept the lion share of the money for their own use and the clubs that are represented in the VJBL get jack.

I agree with an earlier post, it is driving people away from supporting Melbourne United because of the way this has been forced on clubs.

Anon^ is it ahead of an Association's own sponsorship agreement? As I see it, any Association can still benefit by promoting an individual sponsor on their playing top and it would not interfere with the VJBL/MU logo on the shorts.

Example, the Supercats major sponsor 'McDonalds' is blazoned on our kid's playing uniforms and warm up tops, it is a three year deal, but when the kids get their shorts back they will have an additional logo on them. Yet this should not affect the original deal with Maccas, as I see it...

Without contacting Kylie on her email, my first impressions and comments on the proposal and deal made here are as follows:

1. The positive aspects of development proposals for players, officials and Associations is a grand idea, however how does this fit within the current structures of the NITP and NPP currently in place for players? I expect the officials will be supported via their Associations and an additional pathway will be created for the benefit of referee development, however this is a massive undertaking for one NBL club.

2. Segway into my next concern, if we do get a second NBL team in Melbourne (Vic), should there not be a clause where MU accept that another NBL team here also gets on board to provide such development and community partnership opportunities? If not, then I fear what I though would happen is happening, that is what appears to be an ideal of utopia by the MU board, trying to capture all of the Vic market before a second or third team can make any impact.

3. The only saving grace I have here is that this would never have been possible under the Melbourne Tigers banner, only because they have a Melbourne Tigers VJBL consortium and of course their junior program would be seen as the associated beneficiaries, incorrectly so, but perception would have been too strong and the idea rejected.

Like I said firstly, I would like to digest further detail, however as with my first impressions of the MU take over of the Tigers, that take over seems to be moving in exactly the direction I feared it would...

The partnership will also see an injection of funds into the VJBL of seventy-five thousand dollars per annum over the course of the three-year deal

So $75K across 3 years equals $25K across 3 seasons.

"The partnership will also see an injection of funds into the VJBL of seventy-five thousand dollars per annum over the course of the three-year deal, which will see a direct and positive impact on the development of affiliate associations of the league.

The funds will be used to employ a dedicated VJBL employee, whose sole responsibility will be to work closely with the associations of the VJBL on issues of development, management and guidance."
So $75K across 3 years equals $25K across 3 seasons. Is that a problem so long as they do the work?

"MU don't represent all Victorians or all Melbournians,"

I was lead to believe the same was said of the Tigers?

"MU don't represent all Victorians or all Melbournians,"

I was lead to believe the same was said of the Tigers?