Bogotá, Colombia – In a recent Dimayor initiative aimed at promoting peace in Colombian football, one player stood out—not for embracing the campaign, but for subtly sidestepping it. Dorlan Pabón, a veteran of Atlético Nacional and a symbol for their fan base, found a clever way to avoid donning the jersey of Millonarios, Nacional’s long-time rival, during a symbolic gesture to encourage unity. But was this a smart PR move, or a missed opportunity for greater solidarity?
This unexpected decision has sparked a lot of conversation online, especially among Millonarios fans who were eager to see Pabón, a known rival, sporting their iconic blue jersey. Let’s break down what happened, why it matters, and what we can learn from this incident about brand identity, sports rivalry, and public gestures.
Why Dorlan Pabón’s Decision Matters for Football Rivalries
If you follow Colombian football, you’re no stranger to the fierce rivalry between Atlético Nacional and Millonarios. This rivalry runs deep, spanning decades of heated matches and passionate fan bases. So, when Dimayor launched a campaign that called for the captains of opposing teams to wear each other’s jerseys as a gesture of peace, the optics were striking—especially for fans who understand the emotional stakes.
Dorlan Pabón, captain of Envigado Fútbol Club, was poised to participate in this show of unity. However, instead of stepping out in Millonarios’ blue, he passed the captain’s armband to Felipe Jaramillo, who had previously played for Millonarios. While Pabón’s decision may seem minor, it sent a clear message: some rivalries run too deep for symbolic gestures to override.
What does this tell us about sports loyalty?
For Pabón, his legacy with Atlético Nacional—where he won two league titles and a Copa Colombia—has deep ties to his personal brand. Fans see him not just as a player but as a symbol of their club’s history and success. Wearing the jersey of a rival, especially one as significant as Millonarios, could have felt like a betrayal of that identity, even if it was just for a short pre-match ceremony.
The Power of Public Gestures: Missed Opportunity or Tactical Decision?
From an outsider’s perspective, Pabón’s decision could be viewed as a missed opportunity to demonstrate sportsmanship and promote peace. Dimayor’s campaign was a direct response to a violent incident at the Atanasio Girardot stadium just days earlier, where tensions between fans of Atlético Nacional and Junior escalated into chaos. The initiative was meant to remind everyone that football is about more than competition—it’s about unity, respect, and community.
By refusing to wear the Millonarios jersey, Pabón may have kept his personal and fan loyalty intact, but did he forfeit a moment to stand for something bigger? This scenario offers an interesting case study in how public figures, especially athletes, balance their personal brand with larger societal movements.
Is this something we can relate to outside of sports?
Absolutely. Think of the times when public figures or brands face a choice between standing by their identity versus participating in broader initiatives that might conflict with that image. From a branding perspective, it’s a fine line to walk. Aligning yourself with a cause can boost public perception, but it can also alienate core supporters if the gesture seems out of character or forced. Pabón’s choice is a reminder that authenticity is critical in any public-facing role, whether you’re an athlete, a business leader, or a brand manager.
What Does This Mean for Dimayor’s Campaign?
From a campaign effectiveness standpoint, Dimayor’s jersey-swap initiative was a bold move. The idea was clear: get captains to publicly support peace by temporarily setting aside rivalries. But the reaction to Pabón’s choice highlights a crucial element in any PR or peace-building campaign: the power of symbolism can only go so far if the emotional and historical stakes are too high.
Pabón’s subtle evasion wasn’t lost on fans or the media. For Millonarios supporters, it was an almost comical confirmation that the rivalry lives on, despite attempts to soften it. And for Dimayor, it raises questions about how future campaigns might need to evolve to account for these deeply ingrained tensions.
What’s the bigger takeaway for campaigns like this?
In any campaign—whether it’s promoting peace in football or launching a new product—the key is understanding the audience’s emotional attachment to the message. For Dimayor, the initiative was well-intentioned, but perhaps overly optimistic. Rivalries like Nacional vs. Millonarios aren’t just about football; they’re about history, identity, and pride. Trying to paper over those elements with a one-off gesture might not resonate the way they’d hoped.
Future campaigns might benefit from a more nuanced approach, one that acknowledges the complexity of these rivalries rather than attempting to neutralize them. In the end, true unity might come not from asking players to wear rival jerseys, but from creating initiatives that allow for reconciliation without forcing symbolic actions that feel hollow.
The Bottom Line: Authenticity Over Symbolism?
In the world of football, much like in business or personal branding, authenticity trumps hollow gestures every time. Dorlan Pabón’s decision not to wear Millonarios’ jersey was, on the surface, a simple captaincy swap. But it spoke volumes about how players—like brands—navigate public expectations while staying true to their core identity.
For marketers, PR professionals, and leaders, this incident is a reminder that while grand symbolic gestures can be powerful, they only work when they align with the deeper values of the people involved. If they don’t, the message can fall flat, or worse, backfire.
As we look ahead to future campaigns—whether in sports, business, or social causes—the key will always be finding that balance between public perception and personal integrity.
