DrJack

I think the latest are the best. The big team name across the front is the way to go. It'll look great in the arena. I wish they'd throw players' jersey numbers on them somewhere though. Maybe the sleeve?

Cool idea, Nike... https://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/118494-fresh-nba-concepts-utah-jazz-1030/#comment-2951736

I'd argue the Mavs logo and colors have not withstood the test of time. They look dated today. But regardless, they're not a franchise that has had many changes in their history (once every 20 years or so), but I think their due for the next one. I'm not suggesting the Hornets will do a major "rebrand", but I could definitely see them overhaul their look again. I consider this a major overhaul: And I could definitely imagine another one of the same level (same colors, same name, new look) happening in the next 10 years. I feel the same way about the Grizzlies and the Pelicans. Both franchises have a good thing going, but that's usually not enough to keep middling franchises from trying to fix what isn't necessarily broke. They'll do "something big" someday, their identity isn't "done". I'm less certain about the Warriors, but something about their current branding doesn't feel like it's going to age well. They've already updated the fonts.

I'd put the Mavs in the "likely to change again" category. Their look is solidly stuck in the 00's... and will probably get another overhaul (as it should). The Bulls so badly need a new logo. I know it's iconic (thanks, MJ), but it's one of the worst primary logos in all of sports, imo. I can't imagine a world in which the Spurs go off an do something crazy. They're going to be black and silver with a Spur logo forever, imo. And a splash of fiesta colors here and there. I also imagine we'll get rebrand of the Warriors, Grizzlies, Pelicans, and Hornets before toooo long. Nothing they have is so iconic it can't be changed... and in the NBA that usually means it will.

White/Dark/White vs. Dark/White/Dark is a big pet peeve of mine. I dislike it in American football too. If one team is wearing white tops and socks, I don't want the other team in white shorts. I find it hard to track the players when they're close together. But I agree that those are both good looks individually for those teams.

The treatment of the Thorns logo on the white jerseys reminds me a lot of the USWNT's "4 stars only" logo and campaign... team name is barely legible, the red pops highlight just the championships and the Thorns. There's at least an odd parallel between the symbolism of the 4 Stars Only campaign and the ongoing issues in the Thorns/Timbers front office (protecting abusers and predators). Obviously the club wouldn't do this on purpose, but it is curious to me at least.

That Timbers / Austin matchup was beautiful on tv, just my 2 cents.

I don't actually have any real issue with the whites, especially if they pair them with red shorts. Or white shorts/red socks... And I do like the design of the black jersey, but I agree with you that the team needs to be primarily in red. It's a shame not to have a primarily red kit for the fourth(?) year in a row. I'd love to see it reversed, with black thorns across a red base.

And it's owned by a renowned soccer brand designer. Let the man play a little, he's earned it.

That is nice. Great work, super clean, modern aesthetic... but also timeless.

I hate to be critical, but what about this is "light years ahead" of anything? It's fine, it's clean, but it's just a fairly generic uniform design. Traditional block letters, traditional stripes, striped socks. This is safe as hell. It's a recolored Cowboys uniform. What about this is innovative at all? And again, it looks good. Not offense to Moseph, nice work. But jeez, this is a like if a big yawn was a football uniform. You must not know too many designers...

It can be part of the official logo and not have to be on the jersey. Juventus is a pretty clean example - and it feels like that's the "look" the Crew were going for in their redesigned crest anyway. There's a time and a place to write out the team name in tiny letters above the crest... and the jersey just ain't it. It's different if the words are worked into the logo as part of the design, ala Arsenal. Quite different if you have a designed crest that works perfectly well as a standalone element and you still insist on wrapping it with tacked on text because, God forbid, someone somewhere sees a fan wearing a jersey on the street and says "what team is that?" Also, sorry, but that 96 badge sucks. What they have now actually works well, imo, they just need to utilize it properly.

Black, yellow, and white... If I were going to rename my team the Utah Hornets, those are probably the colors I'd choose. Long live the Beehive State!

Agreed... but I think it's actually dark navy, at lest according to this color picker.

I'm back once again... trying to get teams to stop doing stupid things with their crests. You designed a badge, use it. Imagine if the Packers wrote "Green Bay Packers" around that G logo on their helmet. This is the soccer equivalent and it's terrible.

Apparently neither does #5.

My 2018 salt expired a while ago. Replaced it all with 2021 salt now. Some teams make multiple appearances in the MLS Cup.

There isn't some special Atlanta United Bespoke Design Task Force at Adidas Headquarters. You're a black and red team with vertical stripes that plays in an NFL stadium... let's not complain about using recycled colors and designs. This is a good looking kit. Congrats.

Yeah, I get it. It just sucks. Men at least have the option of buying an authentic... A friend at Adidas (not in the soccer department) actually explained it to me that when they decide to create levels in the product line (like replica/authentic) they need to save some things out for the authentic to entice folks to pay more for it. The patterned collar is not any more expensive or complicated to make. It could easily be included on a replica kit, without impacting Adidas' bottom line. But if they did that, they'd be giving customers less of a reason to buy the more expensive authentic version. People don't pay extra for things they can't see (like fabric cut or collar slogans or jock tags or whatever). So I get why replicas look the way they do. But knowing that, makes it all the more ridiculous that they choose not to include the correct collar and basic design elements on women's and kids' kits. Don't make the pattern on the collar a focal point of the design if you're going to not include it in the retail versions of your product.

Pretty lame that the women's and kid's versions of these new kits don't have the collar detailing, especially considering the collar detailing IS the design for many of them.

Quick edit for the Revs.... they designed a great crest, no need to ruin it with that white roundel.

Austin should go with minty green shorts and minty green socks. This shade kinda looks like it glows in the dark,.. which reminds me of those seizure-inducing green lights that the stadium uses when they score a goal. Mostly black for one kit, and crazy lite-brite green for the other kit. That's clashy enough, imo. And as a Timbers fan... I'm pretty meh on these new rose kits, although they're getting a great response among fans I know. I love the colors, I just have an aversion to a repetitive all-over graphic as a design. It looks like wall paper.

Ditto. It is really bad and has been for a couple weeks now. I submitted another bad ad report. But I’m not sure that it’s doing anything. Site was unusable yesterday. All day. At at least I got through this post today

I'm hoping for Milk Men just for the special uniforms.