Favre hot on Manning's heels

August 27, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Believe it or not, there are a few people who actually don't know anything about Peyton Manning. They wouldn't know him if they saw him drinking Gatorade, and they wouldn't know him with or without a fake mustache. They wouldn't even know him if they saw him cheering on their local butcher.

According to Los Angeles-based Davie-Brown Entertainment, which measures such things, fewer than 15 percent of U.S. consumers have never heard of the Indianapolis Colts star quarterback. Still, a recognition rating of better than 85 puts Manning in the top spot among National Football League quarterbacks in the Davie-Brown Index.

But there's an up-and-comer. Well, it might be a stretch to call Brett Favre an up-and-comer. But Favre has seen his DBI recognition rating soar 10 points since he came out of retirement, left the Green Bay Packers and joined the New York Jets. He flew right past the New England Patriot's Tom Brady into second place and is on the heels of Manning in the recognition ratings. Manning, Favre and Brady are the only three quarterbacks with DBI ratings better than 80.

But there's some bad news for the former cheese-head. Favre's consumer appeal has dropped 9 points since his rubarb with the Packers, according to the DBI, and his trust factor has declined 8 points.

In those two categories, Manning is still No. 1 among NFL quarterbacks. But if Favre makes good in the Big Apple, sports marketers think Manning will have company at the top.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I always giggle when I read comments from people complaining that a market is "too saturated" with one thing or another. What does that even mean? If someone is able to open and sustain a new business, whether you think there is room enough for them or not, more power to them. Personally, I love visiting as many of the new local breweries as possible. You do realize that most of these establishments include a dining component and therefore are pretty similar to restaurants, right? When was the last time I heard someone say "You know, I think we have too many locally owned restaurants"? Um, never...

  2. It's good to hear that the festival is continuing to move forward beyond some of the narrow views that seemed to characterize the festival and that I and others had to deal with during our time there.

  3. Corner Bakery announced in March that it had signed agreements to open its first restaurants in Indianapolis by the end of the year. I have not heard anything since but will do some checking.

  4. "The project still is awaiting approval of a waiver filed with the Federal Aviation Administration that would authorize the use of the land for revenue-producing and non-aeronautical purposes." I wonder if the airport will still try to keep from paying taxes on these land tracts, even though they are designated as "non aeronatical?"

  5. How is this frivolous? All they are asking for is medical screenings to test the effects of their exposure. Sounds like the most reasonable lawsuit I've read about in a while. "may not have commited it" which is probably why they're suing to find out the truth. Otherwise they could just ask Walmart, were you negligent? No? OK, thanks for being honest.

ADVERTISEMENT