​When Kansas City Current forward Michelle Cooper scored her first of two goals against Denver Summit FC last Friday, she didn’t point to the badge on her jersey. Instead, the 23-year-old bent down and gestured toward her bright New Balance Furon Elite V9 cleats, debuting a new colorway in front of the crowd at Dick’s Sporting Goods Park and on NWSL+. The moment carried a $500 fine for Cooper, though the gesture itself seemed small in isolation.
Although inconsequential on its own, the celebration occurred a week after the league introduced an updated footwear exposure policy that restricts which brands can be displayed during matches. Cooper denied that her gesture was a message about the policy. She said she was simply celebrating her cleats. “I just think my cleats allow me to do what I do and score goals,” Cooper said after the game. “To be able to put that (goal) away, and we debuted a new colorway, it is super awesome. So I just wanted to show that off a little bit. I love my cleats.”
The league fined Cooper for not concealing the branding because her sponsor, New Balance, is not one of the two brands that have secured a league deal in addition to Nike, according to an NWSL Players Association spokesperson. The NWSL had previously issued Cooper a warning during the Challenge Cup for displaying the New Balance logo. The league declined to comment on whether fines have begun to be issued regularly under the new framework.
As part of the footwear framework introduced ahead of the Challenge Cup on June 26, the NWSL requires boot manufacturers to pay for the right to display their logos during matches. The NWSLPA has been in discussions with the league about grandfathering in existing endorsement agreements, including Cooper’s NIL deal with New Balance, which she signed while playing at Duke University.
“The league has decided to move forward with implementing this program over the union’s objection, and specifically, our objection to forcing players like Michelle Cooper and others to breach their own individual endorsement agreements,” Meghann Burke, the executive director of NWSLPA, told The Athletic. “Because these players had no notice of (the league’s new framework) at the time they entered into their endorsement field.” The union contends that the program violates players’ rights under the collective bargaining agreement as well as the standard play agreement.
“We’ve really tried to work with the league to support its commercial objectives. We understand this is a revenue-generating initiative, and that’s ultimately a positive for everyone,” Burke said. “What’s frustrating is that they’re taking money out of players’ pockets by refusing to adopt the same grandfathering language that exists in other professional leagues. If they’re going to adopt an industry-standard model, they can’t pick and choose which parts they like.”
The NWSLPA says it will appeal for better SEO and to address the broader implications of the policy. The situation highlights ongoing tensions between the league’s pursuit of new revenue streams and players’ existing sponsorship commitments, as well as the potential for further disputes over branding and endorsements as the league continues to expand its marketing strategies.