ADVERTISEMENT

Pentagon spends millions paying pro sports teams to honor soldiers at games

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,354
62,361
113
The Pentagon and National Guard paid professional sports teams to publicly honor soldiers at sporting events, according to a Senate oversight report released Wednesday that labeled the practice “inappropriate and frivolous.”

Since the end of 2011, the military has spent $6.8 million on sports marketing contracts, according to the report, released by Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake, both Republicans from Arizona.

“By paying for such heartwarming displays like recognition of wounded warriors, surprise homecomings and on-field enlistment ceremonies, these displays lost their luster,” the report said. It is unclear how much of the money went to paid tributes.

In recent years, on-field flag rollouts and other ceremonies saluting military personnel have become commonplace at National Football League, Major League Baseball, National Basketball Association, National Hockey League and Major League Soccer games around the country. The majority of the contracts analyzed in the report — 72 of 122 — showed that the Department of Defense paid for the tributes that included national anthem performances, ceremonial first pitches, puck drops, color guard presentations and enlistment ceremonies.

Most of the contracts, the investigation found, included VIP suites and game tickets most likely to be given to participating troops or recruiters working at events.

The practices outlined in the report are sometimes called “paid-for patriotism” by critics. They have, the senators said, crossed the line between heartfelt gestures of goodwill and paid advertisements.

“We’re all enthusiastic to receive our men and women who are serving in uniform honored at various sporting events,” McCain said. “We are very grateful for that. Unfortunately, thanks to an in-depth investigation, a lot of that patriotism was paid for.”

More than a third of the contracts highlighted in the report were not included in a list provided by the Pentagon, the senators said. Two-thirds of the contracts found in their own investigation or reported by the Department of Defense, they said, contained some form of “paid patriotism.”

The 150-page report said that the Pentagon has not fully accounted for the “nature and extent” of the practice.

“It’s like pulling teeth,” Flake said of the Pentagon’s cooperation.

In a July letter in response to the investigation, Ben Carson, then acting undersecretary of Defense for personnel and readiness, said a review of all sports marketing and advertising contracts would be conducted by the Pentagon and National Guard.

“The issues raised in your letter are concerning,” Carson wrote to Flake.


The Department of Defense also has defended the practice in the past, arguing that the tributes are a valuable recruitment tool.

In one instance mentioned, the Air Force paid the LA Galaxy to recognize five high-ranking officers during a 2012 game. In another case cited, the National Guard paid the Seattle Seahawks to allow 10 soldiers to reenlist during an on-field ceremony before a 2014 game. The Wisconsin Army National Guard, it said, paid $49,000 to sponsor in part each Sunday performance of “God Bless America” at Milwaukee Brewers games.

Flake said he did not believe team owners and managers were aware of the practices that were ostensibly done in cooperation with their marketing personnel.

In a Nov. 2 letter, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell informed the senators that an audit of all contracts between NFL teams and the military was being conducted to investigate recruitment funds. Any inappropriate payments, he wrote, would be refunded.

“We strongly oppose the use of recruitment funds for anything other than their proper purpose,” Goodell wrote.

This year, the senators led an effort to amend a major defense spending bill to prohibit spending taxpayer dollars on the practice and called on teams to donate profits to armed forces, veterans and their families. The senators said they are hopeful President Obama will sign it.

The money spent on the ceremonies was revealed in a May report by NJ.com, which found that over three years, the Pentagon paid 14 NFL teams for military tributes and other advertising at games, while the National Guard paid 11 teams. The New York Jets, it reported, received nearly $377,000.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...s-teams-military-payments-20151104-story.html
 
Last edited:
I mentioned fighter jet flyovers in the "Traditions that need to die" thread. But I hadn't thought about this.

Would be interesting to see a cost-benefit analysis. Are they getting their money's worth? Does it enhance recruiting efforts enough to justify what is essentially a marketing expense?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I'm fine with the displays and the honoring and the promotion, not with the teams charging for it. They don't need to profit from allowing this.

Okay, take that a step further... should military recruiting commercials get free airtime during sports broadcasts?
 
If this is true, it needs to stop.

I would tend to agree.

I would hope that the pro teams would do it out of respect and patriotism.

On the other hand, perhaps the DoD can demonstrate some real return on investment in terms of recruiting, etc. Something like asking new enlistees how they learned about joining and how much of a factor events like these played in their enlistment.

I generally have no issue with government investing in things that can demonstrate real ROI.
 
The NFL is doing the PR response and apparently donating the monies to charities. Others will follow, I'm sure. I guess I'm in the minority here as I don't have a problem with it.
 
Okay, take that a step further... should military recruiting commercials get free airtime during sports broadcasts?

Sure. Congress gave the public airwaves to the broadcasters for free - If they want to keep them, they need to donate some free airtime back to the people in the public interest.

We should also stop with the promotions at stadiums -- unless they have a public disclaimer that this commercial is brought to you by the U.S. Army. They made it look like it was simply a good deed by the teams, when in fact they were being paid to do it. That's an advertisement, and I should be informed when something is an advertisement -- just like I should know that a story on a website is sponsored content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I have read some sources that the money was paid mostly for recruitment related activities.

Like around here for some reason when you go to fairs you will see a Hummer with a Colt's player and the Colt's logo printed on it along with some stuff about the army.

Based on what I was reading, the use of the logo and images is what was being paid for and not the giant flag ceremonies at the beginning of the game.
 
I also noticed Arizona State's football team all had "Tillman" on their jerseys and a camo trim on their uniforms for the Oregon game last week. I realize that was for Pat Tillman, but, still... more glorification of militarism. I'm hopeful Pat Tillman did more with his life than join the military and get sent to fight and die in Iraq.

Nationalism at sporting events is so banal. If I ever go to games, in person, I never participate in the "take off your hat and put your hand on your heart" ritual. I'm just not fond of paying homage to people killing each other and then calling the result "My Freedom."
 
(Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan.)
 
Okay, take that a step further... should military recruiting commercials get free airtime during sports broadcasts?

That would actually be preferable use of resources. When the military is 'paying' for tributes, and certain members get suite access, etc., we have the reality of 'conflict of interest', where just a handful of individuals obtain 'free' access or preferential treatment.

Allowing the military to run adverts during a specified slot, paid for by the NFL or whatever (or military) means no one gets a free ticket or onfield access.

Eliminate the potential for a conflict of interest by recruiters who can get free suites to big games, and there really shouldn't be an issue w/ the military running marketing campaigns....they are a volunteer force and need to have a way to recruit new members.
 
I also noticed Arizona State's football team all had "Tillman" on their jerseys and a camo trim on their uniforms for the Oregon game last week. I realize that was for Pat Tillman, but, still... more glorification of militarism. I'm hopeful Pat Tillman did more with his life than join the military and get sent to fight and die in Iraq.

Nationalism at sporting events is so banal. If I ever go to games, in person, I never participate in the "take off your hat and put your hand on your heart" ritual. I'm just not fond of paying homage to people killing each other and then calling the result "My Freedom."
Uhhhhh, are you being serious?
 
Didn't have to pay this guy...Love it or Leave it Bitches!

1409349752000-Stanzi-8-29-14.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT