MLS Kits 2019

[JTernup]

4 hours ago, Duck_Duck said:

Explain?  Because I certainly disagree.

His club is younger than the soup in the back of my pantry... of course nothing is organic or authentic for NYC.

 

Some of our clubs developed supporter culture independently of the league at a time when it wasn't marketable to do so. There is certainly something more authentic about the supporter group I was apart of when I lived in CO painting tiff and creating two poles in the stadium parking lot after a pickup game than some of the team commissioned tifos we have seen in some places. With that said, there is a level of inauthentic support in all American soccer because so much of the culture is borrowed.

 

I won't even address the path that Gothamite tried to take that down because as Duck_Duck mentioned that is outside of the context of how it was being used. 

[BJ Sands]

1 hour ago, Duck_Duck said:

Agreed, that's a great look for Chicago.  I would hope they get the opportunity to mix and match some too.  W/R/W and R/W/R would both work well here too.

Don’t see R/W/R happening. But it’s refreshing how they learned from the mistake of abandoning their visual trademark (the white stripe across the chest) and seem intent instead on owning that look. 

[WarriorFight]

So far, NE and Chicago are the only teams that have formally announced their new kits, right? 

 

It seems thin compared to last year by the end of January. It feels like more times had made official announcements last year.

[Gothamite]

8 hours ago, JTernup said:

His club is younger than the soup in the back of my pantry... of course nothing is organic or authentic for NYC.

 

Thank you.  That’s an excellent example. 

[Gothamite]

5 hours ago, WarriorFight said:

So far, NE and Chicago are the only teams that have formally announced their new kits, right? 

 

It seems thin compared to last year by the end of January. It feels like more times had made official announcements last year.

 

NYCFC unveiled theirs early February last year. 

[BC985]

The Fire’s secondary kit looks great. IMO, the primary would look just as good if the thin outside stripes were removed and the chest stripe was blue with Motorola in white and the logo in red. 

[njdevs7]

10 hours ago, WarriorFight said:

So far, NE and Chicago are the only teams that have formally announced their new kits, right? 

 

It seems thin compared to last year by the end of January. It feels like more times had made official announcements last year.

 

I know last year the Red Bulls did not unveil their red kits until very late. They actually wore their (old) blue kits when they played Olimpia in CCL in late February. 

[ManuelCh]

45 minutes ago, njdevs7 said:

 

I know last year the Red Bulls did not unveil their red kits until very late. They actually wore their (old) blue kits when they played Olimpia in CCL in late February. 

Didn't they release their Kits on January 1st along with the Revs? 

[aawagner011]

4 hours ago, Brandon9485 said:

The Fire’s secondary kit looks great. IMO, the primary would look just as good if the thin outside stripes were removed and the chest stripe was blue with Motorola in white and the logo in red. 

 

That’s not the classic Chicago kit, though. They have almost always worn red kits with a white chest stripe. Ever since their first season in 1998, they’ve worn that design each year aside from two off-brand red kits which spanned 2012-2015. Including this year, they’ll have spent 18 seasons in the traditional red with white stripe and only 4 seasons in other designs. Chicago should probably get more credit for having one of the league’s most firm and consistent identities.

 

https://www.chicago-fire.com/club/history/jerseys

[Section30]

Not sure if this goes here because it isn't technically a kit, but Minnesota United released the logo for their inaugural year at the new Allianz Field via twitter earlier today.

 

 

[WarriorFight]

3 minutes ago, Section30 said:

Not sure if this goes here because it isn't technically a kit, but Minnesota United released the logo for their inaugural year at the new Allianz Field via twitter earlier today.

 

 

 

Cool stuff. Hope they turn some of the stadium hype into actual success on the pitch because their new digs looks classy.

[BC985]

4 hours ago, aawagner011 said:

 

That’s not the classic Chicago kit, though. They have almost always worn red kits with a white chest stripe. Ever since their first season in 1998, they’ve worn that design each year aside from two off-brand red kits which spanned 2012-2015. Including this year, they’ll have spent 18 seasons in the traditional red with white stripe and only 4 seasons in other designs. Chicago should probably get more credit for having one of the league’s most firm and consistent identities.

 

https://www.chicago-fire.com/club/history/jerseys

 

That’s fair. I always seem to dig their white secondary kits, but the white across the red doesn’t do it for me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

I just prefer the Quaker Oats kits more

[hawk36]

20 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

So what precisely is it that you’re no longer allowed to do?  How exactly has the experience been “diluted”?

Great question. Here is what I've experienced...

 

- Public service posters, cards, and announcements asking fans to be welcoming and not offend others, including opposing fans. I'm not about hate but it's fun to "hate" opposing team's fans and feel it's more fun when we can do so without fear of being turned in (as cards instruct fans to do).

- Theme days at matches that have nothing to do with the team or sport itself. Fine if the teams wants to promote X, Y, and Z but don't distract from the actual match. Do it during the week.

- 99% used to stand and cheer for 90 minutes, now it's more like 50/50 and more and more often I'm asked by someone behind me to please sit down so they can see.

- Curtailing or eliminating of chants deemed offensive (could be ECS decision or could be team clamping down on the ECS)

- More of a late arriving crowd that gradually fills in in the first 10 minutes of each half

 

Getting back to the genesis of the discussion though, the Zulily sponsor, my feeling is the team choosing Zulily (money notwithstanding) was a direct result of their desire to be a kinder, gentler organization that doesn't risk offending anyone and attracts more casual fans and less fanatics. Which is odd since the stadium was full when they catered to the fanatics and less full now that they don't.  

 

 

 

 

 

[Jer15]

9 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

Great question. Here is what I've experienced...

 

- Public service posters, cards, and announcements asking fans to be welcoming and not offend others, including opposing fans. I'm not about hate but it's fun to "hate" opposing team's fans and feel it's more fun when we can do so without fear of being turned in (as cards instruct fans to do).

- Theme days at matches that have nothing to do with the team or sport itself. Fine if the teams wants to promote X, Y, and Z but don't distract from the actual match. Do it during the week.

- 99% used to stand and cheer for 90 minutes, now it's more like 50/50 and more and more often I'm asked by someone behind me to please sit down so they can see.

- Curtailing or eliminating of chants deemed offensive (could be ECS decision or could be team clamping down on the ECS)

- More of a late arriving crowd that gradually fills in in the first 10 minutes of each half

 

Getting back to the genesis of the discussion though, the Zulily sponsor, my feeling is the team choosing Zulily (money notwithstanding) was a direct result of their desire to be a kinder, gentler organization that doesn't risk offending anyone and attracts more casual fans and less fanatics. Which is odd since the stadium was full when they catered to the fanatics and less full now that they don't.  

 

 

In fairness, offense chants should be cut out. There's no room for that :censored:. 

[hawk36]

Just now, mr.negative15 said:

 

In fairness, offense chants should be cut out. There's no room for that :censored:. 

I'd disagree. I think we lost a sense of humor in our world and it would be a better place if we could laugh at and with each other a bit more. And I'm not talking outright racial or offensive, but more the clever jabs. I mean "2 r's, 4 e's, 1 f in referee" is brilliant in my book. 

[Jer15]

2 minutes ago, hawk36 said:

I'd disagree. I think we lost a sense of humor in our world and it would be a better place if we could laugh at and with each other a bit more. And I'm not talking outright racial or offensive, but more the clever jabs. I mean "2 r's, 4 e's, 1 f in referee" is brilliant in my book. 

That's fair. 

 

I thought you meant all together. racist stuff, homophobic stuff....that needs to get out. 

A fun jab is more than ok. 

[Digby]

Okay, chanting and singing is fun for the atmosphere or whatever, but the whole ultras thing can take a breather. 

 

MLS is ultimately entertainment for the affluent by the ultra-affluent. This is not a Fugazi show.

[JTernup]

On January 23, 2019 at 6:15 AM, Gothamite said:

 

Thank you.  That’s an excellent example. 

Surely you can see why a supporter of an original member of MLS would feel that their club had a more organic start as it relates to US soccer and supporter culture than a lot of these recent upstart clubs. I consider Seattle and Portland to be much closer to our group than what has happened with NYC, LAFC, ATL, and Inter Miami.

 

Honestly, a lot of it is also being bitter... I'm a Colorado Rapids fan and I truly believe my club would have been better off if it were founded 20 years later. MLS kind of poisoned the well in a lot of the early cities they are part of (Denver, Columbus, Dallas, SJ, Tampa, Miami, even LA with Chivas and Galaxy, and NY with the NJ Red Bulls/Metro Stars issues). Once you have 20 years of perceived minor league status, soccer mom culture, incompetence, playing in front of 8K in an NFL stadium, suburban stadiums, apathetic ownership, penalty shootouts, shot clocks, branding disasters (TB Mutiny, KC WIZ, Dallas Burn), etc. baked into franchises it is hard to ever change public perception. Now we have all of these clubs coming in and succeeding off of the bat, running their organizations the right way, and getting huge fan support. 

 

Why wouldn't someone like me who has supported an inept club through thick and thin, a club who will likely never become MLS elite, and had a 20 year head start that actually put us behind be frustrated by that. All we have is our struggle, our authentic and organic supporter culture, and a love for our club that frankly an ATL fan can't develop in two years. 

 

So, if you don't like those phrases or want to dismiss them and this post as meaningless, that is your prerogative, but I think it is shortsighted to do so.

[WSU151]

19 minutes ago, JTernup said:

Honestly, a lot of it is also being bitter... I'm a Colorado Rapids fan and I truly believe my club would have been better off if it were founded 20 years later. MLS kind of poisoned the well in a lot of the early cities they are part of (Denver, Columbus, Dallas, SJ, Tampa, Miami, even LA with Chivas and Galaxy, and NY with the NJ Red Bulls/Metro Stars issues). Once you have 20 years of perceived minor league status, soccer mom culture, incompetence, playing in front of 8K in an NFL stadium, suburban stadiums, apathetic ownership, penalty shootouts, shot clocks, branding disasters (TB Mutiny, KC WIZ, Dallas Burn), etc. baked into franchises it is hard to ever change public perception. Now we have all of these clubs coming in and succeeding off of the bat, running their organizations the right way, and getting huge fan support. 

 

None of the four other major leagues started off as huge successes. I get your point...but there's a lot of hindsight/shoulda/woulda/coulda in the above.  The new teams are successful now because of the original teams, new technology, plus changing demographics in sports viewership. 

[JTernup]

1 minute ago, WSU151 said:

 

None of the four other major leagues started off as huge successes. I get your point...but there's a lot of hindsight/shoulda/woulda/coulda in the above. The new teams are successful now because of the original teams, plus changing demographics in sports viewership. 

Yeah, I'm not blaming anyone in particular. I just think original clubs and their fans are justified in feeling that they are more authentic and organic than newer clubs. That was the comment that this entire post was based on.