The Patriots "received $700,000 over the course of three years from the state National Guard," but team President Jonathan Kraft yesterday "shed a little light on the issue ... saying it isn’t nearly as sketchy as it has been made out to be," according to Tim Healey of the BOSTON GLOBE. A report by U.S. Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) last week "called out professional sports leagues for so-called 'paid patriotism.'" Kraft: "I understand the public’s ire with it. If I didn’t have knowledge of the back story, I would have the same feelings." Kraft explained that the team has "honored military personnel at games since his family bought the team" in '94. The team also "has a deal with the National Guard for various marketing purposes -- TV and radio, in-stadium signage, etc." Once that relationship was established, the Guard "approached the team with an idea." Kraft: "They said to us, 'Hey, could we start to make that person a Mass. National Guardsman or woman and focus on Massachusetts roots?' We said sure, because we thought it would allow us to get people who really deserved it, who were local. And we didn’t charge any more money for it. We just added it to what we were doing with them." Kraft said that certain traditions "will continue" regardless of the "future advertising relationship" between the Patriots and the Guard. Kraft: "We’ve never charged anybody to sing the national anthem, to be the honored guard, to do anything like that. And never, ever will" (BOSTON GLOBE, 11/9). Cowboys VP/PR & Communications Rich Dalrymple said that no part of yesterday's recognition of more than 70 servicepeople "was tied to any marketing or sponsorship between the team and any branch of the military." The events were "part of the NFL’s monthlong Salute to Service military appreciation program." In Dallas, Eva-Marie Ayala notes some fans were "put off by the news that taxpayers had paid for similar ceremonies and perks for military" (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 11/9).
TRIBUTES OR MARKETING? The NHL Panthers said that any paid patriotism payments taken by the team "took place before" Owner & Chair Vinnie Viola and Vice Chair & Partner Douglas Cifu "purchased the team" in September '13. Panthers COO Matt Caldwell, a West Point graduate who served five years in the Army and is a veteran of the Iraq war, "vehemently denied the new regime’s part in any manner regarding payment to honor United States service members at games." Viola, also a graduate of West Point and a former Army Ranger, "started the initiative, 'Heroes Among Us,' in which the team honors a military hero at every home game." The senators' report said that the Panthers "received $40,000" for tributes to service members. Caldwell said that the team under no condition would "accept payment to honor military members" (South Florida SUN-SENTINEL, 11/7). Hornets officials on Friday said that they were "shocked to see themselves among a list of 50 sports teams" that allegedly received $6.8M from the Department of Defense. In Charlotte, Ordonez & Portillo noted the senators' report states that the Hornets were paid for military tributes including "three 'parachute drops' and an opportunity for an 'on-court ceremony' at a Hornets home game." Hornets Dir of Communications Josh Rosen said that the team "has a long history of recognizing and supporting the military." The team "donates 10,000 personal care kits to military personnel a year and honors veterans at all Saturday games." But he said that the payments raised in the report were "not about tributes but were for actual recruiting events" (CHARLOTTE OBSERVER, 11/7).
ALL POLITICS? In Boston, Ben Volin wrote the senators' report on its surface "paints a highly disappointing picture of the NFL shamelessly doing anything for a buck, of the military wasting its money, and of both sides deceiving the public with supposedly genuine military appreciations." But "dig a little deeper, and the story is more about the senators’ grandstanding." First of all, the senators "used a splashy headline" to report that the military spent $6.8M on marketing contracts with pro sports leagues. The fine print states that the $6.8M accounts for a time period starting in '12, and that overall the Department of Defense spent $10.4M "on marketing and advertising payments with pro sports teams over a four-year period" ('12-15). Various estimates show that military spending in '15 is "expected to be around" $600B. The NFL and other pro sports teams "need to do a better job of separating community relations and advertising campaigns." But "only a fraction" of the $10.4M is "being spent on 'paid patriotism' events." The report is "a bit disingenuous, and the relationship between the military and pro sports teams is not nearly as sinister as the senators make it out to be" (BOSTON GLOBE, 11/8). Also in Boston, Christopher Gasper wrote McCain and Flake "might be doing some political grandstanding and contract cherry-picking, but some of the allegations in the report are just shameful" (BOSTON GLOBE, 11/8).
BLURRED LINES: In Ft. Lauderdale, Dave Hyde wrote the confusing part for fans is it "becomes hard to separate heartfelt acts of appreciation from mercenary acts of marketing." It is "confusing today being a sports fan," as individuals "don't know what's done for the sake of appreciation and what's done in the name of money." Hyde: "Does it matter?" (South Florida SUN-SENTINEL, 11/7). THE OLYMPIAN editorial board writes of paid patriotism, "What’s next? Paying children to salute the flag in school?" The National Guard "relies on volunteers, so recruitment is needed." Still, that "shouldn’t require bribing wealthy sports franchises to act patriotically." If cash is paid, events "should be labeled as advertising" (THE OLYMPIAN, 11/9).
