I haven't decided yet. i know that in the days of TiVo that advertisers need to work harder, but this borders on ridiculous. About a week ago I was driving to Southern California for Christmas and was listening to the Sunday Night Football game on ESPN Radio (I assume). The first score of that game was when the Redskins tackled a Vikings RB in the end zone for a safety. The announcers then busted out with something like "And with this safety, OnStar reminds you that the safety of your automobile and family are very important. Subscribe to OnStar to ensure their safety." They then went to an OnStar commercial.
Okay, the fact that will help me decide whether this is brilliant or moronic is the cost. I mean, safeties happen, oh I'd say, maybe ten times a year. Total. And I'm not 100% familiar with the radio contracts of the NFL, but I'm pretty sure that the only ones that are carried on a nationwide network are the primetime games. I think the typical Sunday morning/afternoon games are just carried by local stations that contract with only the local team. If that is the case, the number of safeties on nationally broadcast games is maybe two.
So, seriously, who ever thought "Hey, let's sponsor the safety!" I mean, I'm sure it's not going to cost that much since they probably only have to pay a set amount when the safety actually occurs. However, I'm sure that they had to pay some sort of base fee, however minimal, to ensure that they then could pay the sponsorship fee when the safety actually occurs. I can't imagine that ESPN Radio would sell that sponsorship without at least some assurance that they will get some money and, honestly, you can't assume at the beginning of the season that a safety will occur in a primetime game.
So I'm still unsure if this is brilliant or horrible. Maybe a bit of both.