Paris Saint-Germain might be willing to pay David Beckham $18 million to sign with them now that his contract with the Los Angeles Galaxy is expiring, but what exactly would the club be paying for?
P.S.G. has no doubt about what it expects from the 36-year-old Beckham. It is not just what Beckham can do on the field that attracts the Paris club, among others, but what Brand Beckham can do off it. But for a player as commercially aware as Beckham, there is one factor that could damage the very brand that attracted P.S.G. to his services in the first place.
Beckham has been sponsored by Adidas since 1997; in fact, since leaving Manchester United eight years ago — and with the exception of his call-ups to England's national team — Beckham has not been seen on a soccer field in anything other than Adidas gear. He has a lifetime endorsement contract that will pay him tens of millions of dollars — and most likely make even more for the company. Consequently, whenever Beckham has had to make a decision on where he'll play next, Adidas has been there.
But P.S.G. plays in Nike jerseys. How would Adidas feel about having its flagship star playing in the logo of its biggest rival? Current regulations would force Beckham and Adidas to tolerate the arrangement; UEFA's Kit Regulations state clearly that “a club may advertise for one single sponsor on the shirt of the playing attire.”
The rule was designed to prevent the overcrowding of team jerseys with corporate logos, but couldn't UEFA tailor it to bring soccer more in line with agreements involving athletes and teams in other sports? Should it?
The recent Golf World Cup in China was won by the United States team of Gary Woodland and Matt Kuchar, who both wore a uniform consisting of white trousers, blue shirts and white caps. But a closer look revealed that despite the color-coding, Woodland and Kuchar's individual outfits bore the logos of their personal commercial sponsors and partners. It's a concession that isn't restricted to golf. When Spain faced Argentina in the Davis Cup final, Rafael Nadal and David Ferrer were both decked out in red. But Nadal's shirt had Nike's logo, while Ferrer's had Lotto's.
Why couldn't a similar arrangement work in soccer? Why couldn't Beckham play in P.S.G. colors, but with his own corporate sponsor on his jersey? Image rights are already a growing element of player contracts with Europe's elite clubs; upon joining Real Madrid in 2009, Cristiano Ronaldo first haggled with the club to ensure that at least 50 percent of any revenue generated from his image go to him.
But if endorsement deals continue to grow, some worry that multinational corporations will begin to dictate where players go, acting almost as an agency. The bigger issue is that permitting players to accessorize their jerseys with personal sponsors — a natural progression from the image rights clauses included in some contracts — could be the ultimate victory for player power and commercialism.
Players may be within their rights to ask, what is more important to sponsors: the club, or the individuals that make up the team?
