Arsenal lost the UEFA Champions League final to Paris Saint-Germain in May, but its shirt sponsor, Emirates, received far more television exposure. A June 2026 analysis by YouGov recorded two hours and 52 minutes of cumulative exposure for Arsenal’s shirt branding, compared with one hour and 54 minutes for PSG’s. These figures add together the branding’s appearances during the broadcast.
A sponsor can have its logo exactly where the contract says it should be, yet barely feature in television coverage. Much depends on what the cameras capture during the match, which is why reviewing the actual footage is so important.
In South Africa, the sums involved are substantial. SA Rugby reported that its sponsorship revenue rose by 51% to R739 million in 2025, exceeding broadcast revenue for the first time. That figure reflects what SA Rugby earned from sponsorships, not the exposure individual brands received.
Look more closely at the footage
YouGov also found that Emirates branding on Arsenal shirts was more prominent than Qatar Airways branding on PSG’s. The size and positioning of the logos played a role, as did how much other branding was visible around them.
During play, a shirt logo might be clear in a close-up and almost impossible to make out when the camera pulls back. Advertising boards show similar differences depending on where they sit relative to the action. These details help when reviewing how specific branding positions perform over a season.
One well-covered match can distort the picture of a season-long sponsorship. A sponsor might appear repeatedly in post-match interviews after a big win but receive little attention during the next fixture. Looking across several games gives marketing teams a better sense of which branding positions are consistently visible and which depend heavily on how the coverage unfolds.
Follow the post-match coverage
After a match, sponsor logos behind a player during an interview may be much easier to see than those on the pitch. Broadcasters and sports websites can reuse that footage the following day, giving the sponsor further exposure. Social media clips also need to be checked, particularly when the footage has been cropped and some of the branding is no longer visible. A sponsor may also be mentioned in an online report without its logo appearing in the accompanying photograph, giving the brand another form of exposure to record.
Digital activity is increasingly part of sponsorship agreements themselves. SponsorUnited’s 2026 research found that 68.3% of the 1,509 agreements it tracked across the US women’s basketball and football leagues in 2025 included a digital or social media component. Although the research covers two US leagues, it shows why sponsors should also examine the exposure they receive through digital channels.
Sponsors should also separate the coverage promised in their agreements from the exposure they receive independently. If a team has agreed to feature a sponsor on its social media accounts, those appearances can be checked against the contract. Photographs published by news outlets or clips shared by supporters provide additional exposure. Recording these separately shows what was delivered under the agreement and what the sponsor gained through wider media coverage.
Coverage of a controversy involving the team can also put a sponsor’s branding alongside headlines the company would rather avoid.
Use the findings before signing again
The most useful review compares the branding opportunities in the contract with the exposure received over the season. Poor visibility from a particular camera angle might influence the next discussion about pitch-side placement. Strong coverage around player interviews might justify giving that part of the arrangement more attention.
At Novus Group, we see value in examining where sponsors feature in media coverage and how clearly their branding is shown. Audience estimates help put that into context, although they cannot establish whether viewers noticed a logo or whether those viewers were the customers the sponsor hoped to reach.
Monitoring cannot, by itself, prove that sponsorship increased sales or changed public opinion. That requires additional evidence. It can, however, give marketing teams a much stronger basis for renewing an agreement, renegotiating placements, or deciding the money would work harder elsewhere.
