Digby

PDX's carpet has been a local meme since before we even called them memes. Kind of ridiculous and painfully Portland, sure. But by the criteria of the City program it is a slam dunk.

Even by the standards of the modern NBA, it was a little weird to have "generic graffiti" wordmark AND "Jean-Michel Basquiat deepfake graffiti" wordmark at the same time.

Well, they can't all live in Framingham.

I'm sorry but the halftone photo of some guys felt silly and un-logo-like even when it was brand new. They were right to get rid of that (and the Copperplate typeface).

I know it's uncouth to think this way in MLS 5.0 but the Brazilian- and Portuguese-American markets remain largely untapped by MLS in the midst of the singular focus on converting Liga MX fans. Put those guys in Newark or Foxboro and we're in business (for the wrong reasons).

Maybe it's a situation like the new Revs logo, where the club will also use the wordmark-free version wherever possible but seems to believe that the wordmarked version is what needs to go on the kits. Though again, I point to Chicago. In this case, losing the words really improves the logo; the proportions go from strange to passable.

Kind of wish the teams that regularly play in outdoor games could just have a regular, designated "heritage" fauxback and wear that a few times. The outdoor game shtick has now been around long enough that it feels like the well is running kind of dry, which is what these Buffalo/Toronto jerseys seem to suggest. I can't imagine what's left for the Bruins to go back to next year.

Also interesting that the old "light/dark" thing seems to have gone out the window. Columbus are back to having a yellow kit and a grey/white kit, no black. The same orange is "dark" for NYCFC but "light" for Cincy.

“Creator kit” that’s just a black and white shirt, give me a break! Orlando looks nice, but I can’t help but wish the gradient was just the whole of the shirt; still would’ve worked well as a clash option, but Orlando just always demand a white base I guess.

IDK, Fanatics is definitely saying silver name/number printing, which leads me to believe that the front sponsor and stripes are more silver as well. Especially contrast with the "Dude Wipes" (lmao) sponsor on the sleeve which looks more decidedly white.

I appreciate the boldness but I don't like the design much. They got beat to the lightning bolt motif by Philly a year ago, and the color scheme by FCC a day ago. MORE arbitrary silver trim on orange, really?

The on-field Cincy kit has blue collar/cuffs, which looks a lot better. Using the flag graphic element is a no-brainer and I'd love to see a white version with the flag stripes actually contrasting someday, too. However, this is the worst authentic vs. replica dichotomy yet...

Interesting that both Cincy and Houston are getting silver accents alongside the orange this year, seemingly out of nowhere. Probably just a coincidence that silver/orange is a common and prominent colorway for Adidas NMDs.

A little surprising that any team is still doing just a plain ol' color swap for their secondary jersey. From those photos I thought it might be a lighter shade of blue as a base, like between royal and navy, but the Fanatics photo seems to suggest it's the usual navy.

That's the most Vermont thing I've ever seen and it rules. The mountain is smiling!

Chicago's got better Revs kits than the Revs do, while their real kits remain stuck in 3-year limbo. We'll go with that.

My 2 thoughts on that are: 1. The Sounders' brand in particular was maybe the most contemporary, design-wise, of its era... the sort of design that will inevitably go out of fashion eventually, worse for them with the bad luck of coming at the tail end of that post-Y2K flashy design era just before the 2010s minimalist modern aesthetic (which might be more time-proof) really set in. 2. They've probably lost a ton of Seattle-sports-merch market share to the Kraken the past couple years.

The shape of the current Sounders crest doesn't really bother me. The spiky blue under-shield is weird, but overall any crest shape that's unusual and modern is welcome in MLS. Especially after the deluge of roundels. But there's room there to evolve and be a little different without ruining that spirit, if they're careful about it.

Honestly kinda forgot about the Dynamo. Like everything about them. I feel like I've seen that one before.

I guess I posted this in the wrong topic sooooo: As a longtime hater of the Sounders brand, that's great news. Please refresh the color scheme and logo to something that doesn't belong in the mid-aughts thread. That "historic brand" comment confuses me a bit though; the Sounders weren't really ever rigid in that beyond having a wordmark with a wave through it in lieu of a proper crest. For most of their original NASL run they were in green and blue but the shades weren't really consistent, so by that standard the MLS era doesn't feel too much different. And then they had eras of going black/white and all-blue too in the A-League times. I'm not really sure what there is to go to, unless they go overtly retro/fauxback the way the other two Cascadia teams generally have. I've always thought of it as the brightest olive green, or the muddiest lime green. Neither of which is a compliment. Sometimes a brighter, more lime or more kelly shade slips through in some of their other media and it instantly looks better. Also, I realize navy is used a lot in MLS, but that would be a much nicer second color to go with a bright green.

nvm!

In the past two weeks the Celtics have beat Miami by 30, Brooklyn by 35, and now Philadelphia by 48 (!!).

Yeah, it's hard to place why it looks better on the Thorns attempt at this motif for me. Maybe it's that the tonal treatment doesn't need to ensure any logo-sized gaps and therefore feels like more natural patterning.

The Galaxy collar graphic looks like a pearl necklace... not great.

I'm not crazy about the size and placement of the roses, I guess, but I don't really know how to do it better.