labc93

2018 MLS Kits

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Viper said:

I was at the Loons' kit reveal event (alas, the pics I got aren't as good as what's already been posted). It's a downgrade from last season, but it's not awful by any means. Hell, it was good enough for me to plunk down $120 for one.

 

Note that they only revealed the primary and keeper kits, not the clash kit. Last year's white clashes were nothing special but still a nice and crisp design. I'd be happy if they just kept that. If they try to mimic this new design on a white clash kit I don't see how they could make it work.

Last year’s white kits are sticking around this season. They’ll get a new clash kit in 2019.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Viper said:

I was at the Loons' kit reveal event (alas, the pics I got aren't as good as what's already been posted). It's a downgrade from last season, but it's not awful by any means. Hell, it was good enough for me to plunk down $120 for one.

 

Note that they only revealed the primary and keeper kits, not the clash kit. Last year's white clashes were nothing special but still a nice and crisp design. I'd be happy if they just kept that. If they try to mimic this new design on a white clash kit I don't see how they could make it work.

I think they tend to alternate replacing kits every other year, so I think you guys will be keeping those white secondaries this season unless they decide to change both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, aawagner011 said:

 

Lastly, the wing is not the answer. I'm not a Loons fan or even from Minnesota, but I'm surprised there's so much support for something so bizarre. Supersized wings printed across the chest? What about that sounds like good design?

 

glf8PSn.jpg

 

It was good design because it was actually very subtle black on dark gray. It wasn't gaudy or in your face. Arguments of good/bad design aside, the love of it for us comes from them having worn it their entire pre-MLS existence. For those of us who were season ticket holders during that time, it's how we identify our Loons: with the wing. Add in the light blue numbers and it's a thing of beauty outside under the lights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care for the wing design on the kit because it's directly from the logo.  It'd be nicer is they used a kit design that evoked the wing without being so literal. Even if they did angled stripes or stripes radiating from a central point it'd be a little less literal.  Not exactly like these kits below, but these may help get the idea across.

chivas-.jpgjapan-2014-world-cup-home-kit-1.jpg?w=51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's probably just a bad idea in general to use the wing if you're then going to put a target logo on top of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been wondering if perhaps not using the wing Minnesota has anything to do with LAFC also having a wing element as part of their branding and wanting to have clearly distinct identities. Then again, with all the black/slate and basically white kits this years—other than ATL, Montreal, and to a lesser extent LAG—strong iconic kit identities doesn’t really seem to be a priority for Adidas or really MLS in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Viper said:

Note that they only revealed the primary and keeper kits, not the clash kit. Last year's white clashes were nothing special but still a nice and crisp design. I'd be happy if they just kept that. If they try to mimic this new design on a white clash kit I don't see how they could make it work.

 

They are keeping the white kit from last year.  They needed to make one of their inaugural kits a one-off so they could get on to an every-year rotation for new shirts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, redjives said:

I’ve been wondering if perhaps not using the wing Minnesota has anything to do with LAFC also having a wing element as part of their branding and wanting to have clearly distinct identities.

 

I don't think there's any evidence to believe that.

 

23 minutes ago, redjives said:

Then again, with all the black/slate and basically white kits this years—other than ATL, Montreal, and to a lesser extent LAG—strong iconic kit identities doesn’t really seem to be a priority for Adidas or really MLS in general.

 

Those are all clash kits, which traditionally have been more about chasing trends and selling shirts in "hot" colors than creating iconic kit identities.  That's for home kits, and on the whole I think MLS and Adidas have done a pretty good job with those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redjives said:

I’ve been wondering if perhaps not using the wing Minnesota has anything to do with LAFC also having a wing element as part of their branding and wanting to have clearly distinct identities. Then again, with all the black/slate and basically white kits this years—other than ATL, Montreal, and to a lesser extent LAG—strong iconic kit identities doesn’t really seem to be a priority for Adidas or really MLS in general.

 

Gosh I hope not. That'd be one of the dumbest things ever and yet another time the MLS screwed over Minnesota. Nothing like having both a winged kit and the name United FC first but 2 other franchises that came into existence after the fact were allowed to take them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm bummed because of all the remaining kits they have yet to announce, only LAFC and Orlando have somehow not leaked yet. Like not even a peak from the twitter account, and it's starting to make me worry that whatever it is LA is hesitant to put out before the last possible minute. Which does not bode well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WarriorFight said:

I'm bummed because of all the remaining kits they have yet to announce, only LAFC and Orlando have somehow not leaked yet. Like not even a peak from the twitter account, and it's starting to make me worry that whatever it is LA is hesitant to put out before the last possible minute. Which does not bode well.

 

I dunno, NYCFC did a damn good job at keeping theirs under wraps.  The only leak was from one retailer that put the stock out too quickly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't really notice that touch of red on the DC United's henley.  Really like it.

 

DV8KrlZVwAEOeDm.jpg

 

Between that touch of red and the tonal Adidas stripes, I really like the new shirt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gothamite said:

 

I dunno, NYCFC did a damn good job at keeping theirs under wraps.  The only leak was from one retailer that put the stock out too quickly.

 

 

true, but they had been teasing theirs for weeks with their social media accounts. I understand it not leaking, sure clubs try to play it safe and I understand because if a bad picture gets out and it doesn't do it justice you're already walking into people with negative views of it. 

 

What worries me is that they have not referenced it at all, nothing, no teases. It makes me think less that they're trying to keep it under wraps for the sake of surprise but instead because it is so underwhelming. No offense to MNU, but going more teamware than ATL did. Which would be upsetting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WarriorFight said:

true, but they had been teasing theirs for weeks with their social media accounts. I understand it not leaking, sure clubs try to play it safe and I understand because if a bad picture gets out and it doesn't do it justice you're already walking into people with negative views of it. 

 

What worries me is that they have not referenced it at all, nothing, no teases. It makes me think less that they're trying to keep it under wraps for the sake of surprise but instead because it is so underwhelming. No offense to MNU, but going more teamware than ATL did. Which would be upsetting.

 

I think you're reading way too much into that.  But we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gothamite said:

 

I think you're reading way too much into that.  But we'll see.

fair enough. We shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

 

Gosh I hope not. That'd be one of the dumbest things ever and yet another time the MLS screwed over Minnesota. Nothing like having both a winged kit and the name United FC first but 2 other franchises that came into existence after the fact were allowed to take them.

 

I’m an Atlanta fan and I certainly agreed with most folks at the launch that United was a pretty bland name. Let’s not pretend like it’s some awesome and prestigious name exclusive to Minnesota. Atlanta was announced as an MLS club (April 2014) a year before Minnesota (March 2015, and Minnesota had only started using United since 2013). This was a race to claim Generic FC.

 

Now that it’s been a few years, I kinda get what they were trying to do with Atlanta. It is very much a transient city with people from all over the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aawagner011 said:

 

I’m an Atlanta fan and I certainly agreed with most folks at the launch that United was a pretty bland name. Let’s not pretend like it’s some awesome and prestigious name exclusive to Minnesota. Atlanta was announced as an MLS club (April 2014) a year before Minnesota (March 2015, and Minnesota had only started using United since 2013). This was a race to claim Generic FC.

 

Now that it’s been a few years, I kinda get what they were trying to do with Atlanta. It is very much a transient city with people from all over the world.

 

Never said it was awesome or prestigious or exclusive. But MLS had a very good idea that both Atlanta and Minnesota were coming to the league. And in terms of the MLS, they already had a United team in DC. It seemed like an odd choice from the beginning to then allow 2 new United FC teams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

Never said it was awesome or prestigious or exclusive. But MLS had a very good idea that both Atlanta and Minnesota were coming to the league. And in terms of the MLS, they already had a United team in DC. It seemed like an odd choice from the beginning to then allow 2 new United FC teams. 

 

And they did.  Not really seeing the problem there.

 

In other news, I'm kind of digging this kit.  Especially with orange shoes.

 

DV4C2sxVoAA1XLW.jpg:large

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WarriorFight said:

I'm bummed because of all the remaining kits they have yet to announce, only LAFC and Orlando have somehow not leaked yet. Like not even a peak from the twitter account, and it's starting to make me worry that whatever it is LA is hesitant to put out before the last possible minute. Which does not bode well.

I as well have been surprised at the lack of information from Orlando. They're probably just going to get another recycled-national-team-pattern white jersey, but, y'know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now