No More Dome Dogs ??!!??

Continuing my writings on the PR of the Minnesota Twins as they move closer towards baseball at Target Field (it won't be long now), here's an interesting one I heard today, Hormel won't be the hot dog supplier at Target Field.

According to an article in today's StarTribune (http://www.startribune.com/local/85210112.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUr) Hormel is ending a corporate sponsorship with the Twins that has existed since 2001.

Personally, I had thought that Hormel might get the naming rights for the Twins' new ballpark. Hormel Field does have a nice ring to it. And, it is a local company.

If you've been to a Twins game, you see every once in a while promotional items from Hormel, stadium signage, and lest we forget the infamous "Hormel Row of Fame" in-stadium promotion where every fan in one lucky row, in a section picked at random wins a "Hormel hot dog treat," as the song goes.

With Hormel's departure, the Dome Dog will also depart from concession stands at the Dome. I have mixed feelings about that. First, the Dome Dog isn't one of those pre-cooked hot dogs that are placed in tin wrap and stuck in a warmer for three hours, making the bun soggy and the hot dog mediocre. Dome Dogs are placed on a fresh sesame seed bun (I believe the Our Family brand). Not only that, you also get a bag of chips.

While Hormel may not be the greatest hot dog on the market, I will miss the Dome Dog. Ever since its inception a few years ago, Dome Dogs are my meal of choice at the Dome, regardless of the event.

Apparently, according to the article, the parting was an "amicable" one. But, we are now left to wonder who will supply our hot dogs at the open-air Target Field in just a few short weeks. I have also read that the new concessionaire for Target Field, Delaware North SportService, specializes in hot dogs in the stadiums and arenas they service; so, maybe they'll come up with something better than the Dome Dog.

Maybe a hot dog and, cheese curds?

A 3rd jersey for the Minnesota Wild?

A ha, finally. an issue I love to write about: sports and corporate branding.

It has been announced that the Minnesota Wild (NHL) will unveil a "third" jersey to be worn this season. The unveiling will happen next Sunday at the Minnesota State Fair. There are speculations about what the jersey might look like. One can be found here: http://media.photobucket.com/image/Wild%20green%20jersey/puckdrawn/Concepts/MinnesottaWildConcept.png, and another can be found here: http://www.wildpuckbanter.com/2009/08/new-wild-jersey.html.

This is an interesting concept to me, sports teams have been using "alternate" jerseys for many years now. Some have been successful, and others have been total flops. However, the Wild had an alternate jersey a few years ago. The jersey seen here: http://www.icejerseys.com/item_details.php?id=5354.

What happened was, the NHL had switched jersey manufacturers. The league contracted with Reebok and their new Edge line of jerseys. The "Rbk Edge" was a custom-fit jersey, which was supposed to supply better comfort for players. And, the NHL made a rule that teams had to scrap whatever third jerseys they had, and couldn't unveil a new one for two years.

The Wild kept their white jersey, and opted to keep the red "alternate" jersey http://www.icejerseys.com/item_details.php?id=5354 and got rid of the original green sweater.

Here's what bothers me about the red sweater they kept. The logo on the front. In my estimation, a good and respectable corporate brand, should not have to tell you what it is. You will notice that the words "Minnesota Wild" surround it. Earlier in the franchise's history, the words "NHL Hockey" even appeared on a secondary logo the team was going to use.

If you see the logo for GM, you know that it's for General Motors. They make cars. The company does not need to put "auto manufacturer" on the logo. If you see an oblong "G" surrounded by a green and gold oval, you know that logo is for the Green Bay Packers. They don't need to put "We play football in Green Bay" on the logo. Let's not forget the Golden Arches. These are respectable, reputable, trustworthy corporations, that do not need to label what they are, or what they do, to get the point across.

I feel the Minnesota Wild made a mistake when choosing what sweater to keep. The Minnesota Wild have some of the best merchandise sales, if not the best merchandise sales in the National Hockey League. The only problem, most people can't figure out what animal the head belongs to, that you see on the front of the jersey. Is it a bobcat, cougar, a panther? No one knows. But, they DO know that logo.

On the other hand, looking at some of the concept drawings people have conjured up in their minds (the ones with a script font "Minnesota"), many sports teams in all professional leagues are putting the city or state of origin on their road jerseys.

Personally, I think the Wild should ditch the red jersey with the circle "Minnesota Wild" surrounding the cougar head (I'll call it a cougar). The Wild have made a name for themselves in the National Hockey League, in their ten years of existence - on the basis of their enormous fan base, merchandise sales and team ownership.

I feel that it is in the best interest, not just of the Wild, not just of sports teams, but of all corporations, to do their very best to cultivate a corporate brand, a corporate logo that is immediately recognizable - without being told what it represents.