2015-16 Soccer Kits and News

[GMS1122]

Liverpool's Home Kits were officially unveiled today...it in fact is a faux-collar.

http://www.thisisanfield.com/2015/04/photo-gallery-liverpool-fcs-new-201516-home-kit-revealed-close-up/

[patsox]

Liverpool's Home Kits were officially unveiled today...it in fact is a faux-collar.

http://www.thisisanfield.com/2015/04/liverpool-fc-home-kit-201516-revealed-at-anfield/

Yepp. Weird random pattern on the jersey that shifts from plaid to stripes too. Which from what I can gather has no meaning at all except new Balance being new Balance. Case in point look at the shoes I'm wearing (fresh foam 980 look it up). More random patterns mixed together all over the place (I bought them for function as opposed to fashion and because I have a 40 percent discount from a relative who's an employee).

[BKarchitect]

LFC = Terrible. At least under the "Warrior" emblem, the home shirts were usually at least ok.

The adidas Juve shirt looks wretched also...all the different stripes. What a mess. Puma's Arsenal shirts for next year look terrible. United's shirts aren't offensive except for the Chevy logo but still are pretty mediocre. Lots of poorly executed work coming out for next season. City's home shirt and Chelsea's shirts look pretty top notch though.

[gdu]

Both kits still had red and blue on them, even if only on the crest and accents.

A shameful performance by Nike in a World Cup year. Fortunately the USMNT will only wear these two horrible kits during a meaningless gold cup.

Are we sure the men will be wearing it? Awful, if so.

[pepis21]

Gdu, that are the Woman kits from WC 2011.

Brooklyn Nets will have sleeves again...

About Liverpool, I'm a United fan, but their new GK shirt is absolutely amazing and I love it.

[Billy B]

Liverpool looks pretty nice. I like the collar design there.

The new US shirts are terrible though. There's absolutely no reason to be wearing white and black with no red or blue at all.

[TimEOBrien]

wait a second, they aren't USM&WNT kits, they're Stankonia Kits:

And in that case, they look great.

[The Nation]

Juventus home:

At the first glance I liked it, but then I realized what a mess this is.

OMG....what a step back....the ugliest Nike Juventus kits (I'm talking about the one with the fuzzy stripes) still beats this :censored: job comfortably. Adidas really needs to check their ego at the door and quit forcing their 3 stripes onto jerseys. If Nike can have just 1 logo on their kits, then Adidas can too.

[IanC]

OMG....what a step back....the ugliest Nike Juventus kits (I'm talking about the one with the fuzzy stripes) still beats this job comfortably. Adidas really needs to check their ego at the door and quit forcing their 3 stripes onto jerseys. If Nike can have just 1 logo on their kits, then Adidas can too.

Why should Adidas change something which has become their recognised brand since the 70's onwards. Should hummel take off their chevrons from sleeves as that is also their brand or do you belive that is an ego trip for them also? No. So what if Nike only use a swoosh. Why should all the other manufacturers follow a minimalist route just because Nike do?

[Avenger]

Any chance that US home is trimmed with navy and the photo is just over-exposed? Let me cling to that idea, please.

[Gothamite]

OMG....what a step back....the ugliest Nike Juventus kits (I'm talking about the one with the fuzzy stripes) still beats this job comfortably. Adidas really needs to check their ego at the door and quit forcing their 3 stripes onto jerseys. If Nike can have just 1 logo on their kits, then Adidas can too.

Why should Adidas change something which has become their recognised brand since the 70's onwards. Should hummel take off their chevrons from sleeves as that is also their brand or do you belive that is an ego trip for them also? No. So what if Nike only use a swoosh. Why should all the other manufacturers follow a minimalist route just because Nike do?

Yes. Can't happen too soon.

[IanC]

OMG....what a step back....the ugliest Nike Juventus kits (I'm talking about the one with the fuzzy stripes) still beats this job comfortably. Adidas really needs to check their ego at the door and quit forcing their 3 stripes onto jerseys. If Nike can have just 1 logo on their kits, then Adidas can too.

Why should Adidas change something which has become their recognised brand since the 70's onwards. Should hummel take off their chevrons from sleeves as that is also their brand or do you belive that is an ego trip for them also? No. So what if Nike only use a swoosh. Why should all the other manufacturers follow a minimalist route just because Nike do?

Yes. Can't happen too soon.

No they should not if it's their brand. Same for Macron and having their logo on the shoulders. The original point was said it was about ego and Adidas should check it at the door. So that means every other manufacturer should follow Nike then and become bland and boring. Adidas are iconic with their three stripes. Everyone instantly recognises a Hummel kit because of the chevrons. Everyone recognises a Nike kit for being just bland. They can't even design a decent USMNT kit that stands out.

[pcgd]

I'm not going to argue the merits of 3 stripes and chevrons or back to back silhouettes, but the arguement that adidas (or any brand for that matter) has more ego than Nike is laughable at best.

[JTernup]

No, the problem is that Adidas, Macron and Hummel among others are placing their brand so prominently on a teams jersey which dilutes that teams brand. As a manufacturer your goal first and foremost should be to brand the team you are supplying, not yourself. These brands on soccer kits are among the worst in the world for branding for yourself. It's very similar to nikes toilet seat football collars, it is completely self serving and takes away from individual team identity when so many teams have manufacturer branding taking over.

Plus pcgd I think it's a fair argument that Nike soccer is less egotistical than other soccer brands, now football and other sports, no way but Nike soccer is pretty payed back.

[Gothamite]

I'm not surprised that manufacturers try to elevate their brand over that of the team. I'm surprised the teams let them.

I think there should be rules that manufacturers get one self-promotional opportunity. If shoulder stripes are your thing, then no logos on the front. The NFL holds their suppliers to it, so can every other league.

[mbannon92]

As a manufacturer your goal first and foremost should be to brand the team you are supplying, not yourself.

Nope, completely wrong. As a business, the manufacturer's number one priority is to promote its own brand and make money—Nike and Adidas aren't not-for-profits. So it's going to push the envelope as far as it can when it comes to promoting it's own brand, whether it be through three stripes or ugly, template-emphasizing designs. And the more the manufacturer is allowed to do this, the more it'll pay the team for the opportunity to do so. So the teams are benefiting as well—Man U is getting £75m a year from Adidas. And the teams' brands don't seem to be hurting, especially in the Premier League. Die hard fans buy new shirts every year, no matter how small the changes.

So until the teams decide that the purity of their uniforms is more important than millions of dollars, this trend is going to continue and probably get worse.

[MJWalker45]

I disagree with your point that the kit suppliers aren't in the business of putting the client's brand first. However, I fully agree that the team has the final say on what they wear. Most teams know that the 3 stripes are going to be pushed by adidas, Macron will put their logo over the entire sleeve and Kappa/Hummel will try to put multiple mudflaps/chevrons down the sleeves and shorts. So at the end of the day it's not adidas' fault the kits look the way they do. However, I would hope the team has as big an ego as their suppliers to say how the kits should look.

[mbannon92]

I disagree with your point that the kit suppliers aren't in the business of putting the client's brand first.

Then how do you explain the Buccaneers and Jaguars? The toilet seat collars? The Arkansas Tusks/Husky Stadium Jaws? Adidas' tire tread jerseys and templated, three-striped NBA warm ups? (Note that I'm thinking more about US leagues, as I don't closely follow European soccer.)

These don't necessarily harm the teams' brands in most cases, but they do put the manufacturer's brand over style and uniqueness.

Take Arsenal's kits for a Premier League example. Are they the traditional red with white sleeves? Yes. Do they look good? No. Do you know they're made by Puma with a quick glance? Sure do. But they still sell, so there's no motivation on either side to change.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I'm not surprised that manufacturers try to elevate their brand over that of the team. I'm surprised the teams let them.

I think there should be rules that manufacturers get one self-promotional opportunity. If shoulder stripes are your thing, then no logos on the front. The NFL holds their suppliers to it, so can every other league.

The Adidas flower is iconic enough of its own, just like the Under Armor, Nike, New Balance and every other sports manufacturer logo.

Where Adidas goes sideways is when they fundamentally alter the look of the teams they represent by putting the three stripes on the shoulders and arms; it becomes a design element of the uniform itself that needs to be worked around. The leaked Juventus jersey is probably the perfect example of how it can go wrong -- different stripes in different widths going in different directions.

Teams like Man U should have more respect for their brand. They don't look like a top-flight soccer club. They look like one of a million other soccer teams at any level, except with a gross Chevy logo on the front.

There's a whole lot of ugly in soccer wear going around and, like much of college football, it's all disposable.

[Teal]

I really like that Adidas Juve kit. Very nice.