Big sponsor or small sponsor? Why smart brands back agencies, not assets

New sponsors often fall into the trap of believing that bigger automatically means better. The instinct is to partner with the most recognisable team or event the budget allows, to buy into scale, prestige, and visibility. But in sponsorship, size does not equal success.

Big-name rights holders deliver reach and enhanced stature, but they rarely produce results without experience, expertise and resources behind them. The truth is that for many brands, chasing the biggest name they can afford can be the quickest way to waste most of their budget; for others, underplaying their hand can be a missed opportunity to drive meaningful growth.

So, should you strive to be the biggest sponsor of a smaller team or a smaller sponsor of a larger team? Both routes can work and both can fail. The real differentiator isn't scale, it's capability.

The case for being a small sponsor of a big team

The appeal of major properties is clear. Partnering with globally recognised teams or events delivers access to vast audiences, media coverage, and the trust that comes from standing alongside other established brands. For newcomers, this can be a shortcut to legitimacy and a powerful way to accelerate awareness in key markets.

However, scale brings sponsorship competition. Secondary sponsors in large portfolios often find themselves fighting for attention. The biggest sponsors dominate the narrative, while smaller partners must carve out their own space and communicate their own message. Without an experienced internal team or strong agency support, even the best logo position can fade into the background.

In other words, if you buy into a major sponsorship without the internal capability to activate it properly, you risk wasting most of the opportunity and the budget.

The case for being a big sponsor of a small team

Smaller partnerships, by contrast, often deliver depth over breadth. Headline sponsors of niche tournaments, emerging leagues or regional teams enjoy access, influence and authenticity. Smaller rights holders are typically more collaborative, flexible and willing to integrate a sponsor's brand into communications, content and community.

For brands with limited marketing resources or sponsorship experience, this can be a more forgiving environment. The rights holder will often help drive activation, share creative ideas and deliver exposure that feels personal and tailored. For many first-time sponsors, that support can be invaluable.

As Darrell Fox, Founder at Synonymous Sport, explains:

“The answer depends on clarity of your objectives. Once you know what success looks like for your business, you can assess whether that’s best delivered through a smaller role with a more established rights holder or by taking a leadership position with a smaller property. We’ve seen fast-emerging brands build trust in key markets by aligning with major rights holders at an entry level to leverage IP, but equally strong results from brands partnering with smaller rights holders at a leading level, where they benefit from a highly engaged and often more tailored audience.”

The answer: Be honest about your capabilities

Ultimately, the decision between going big or small isn't about ambition; it's about realism. Sponsors must make an honest assessment of their own in-house capabilities, experience and know-how.

If you have an experienced marketing team that understands sponsorship strategy, content creation and measurement, then you can extract value even as a small sponsor within a large property. But if that capability doesn't exist, it's wiser to either take a headline role with a smaller rights holder, who will help shoulder much of the activation load, or to find yourself a good agency.

Without the people and processes to plan, produce and sustain activation, it doesn't matter if you're at the front of the grid or the back; you won't be going anywhere fast.