MLS Kits 2019

[upperV03]

^Yeah, here’s the official reveal:

 

This could’ve been pretty nice had they really emphasized the pattern and made the collar and cuffs blue with black piping. As it is, though, it’s very underwhelming. They’re capable of so much more.

[PaleVermilion81]

Welp, at least I get to save money on a Loons jersey this year. Hopefully 2020 we'll get a better home kit.

[seasaltvanilla]

Totally boring is an upgrade over ugly, I guess.

[Digby]

3 hours ago, WarriorFight said:

 

It was 100% a thing before then. DC United? Timbers rose secondaries? 

 

All of Vancouver's home kits have been more or less solid white.

 

So I reject the idea that it is wholly *new*, first off. I'd also argue that black is a major color aspect in both MTL's and ATL's identities.

 

Secondly, there is only so much color variety you can have in a league, especially one as large as MLS is now. People act as though it's an MLS problem, that it is indicative of a lack of creative vision on their part and the part of Adidas, but ALL leagues have arguably a similar problem, if you can even call it that. For example, Serie A: Sassuolo is Black-and-Green, Inter is Black-and-Blue, as is Atalanta, Milan is Black-and-Red, and both Juventus AND Udinese are black-and-white stripes, but I don't hear anyone giving any of them trouble over it. 

 

It's just because most people can agree that black paired with complimentary collars almost always looks tight.

 

I'm not talking about the likes of DCU, at all. That's the sort of identity that's been around for years and it's fine.

 

I'm talking about teams like Atlanta, Montreal and San Jose reduce color in favor of predominantly black primary kits in recent years. Or Vancouver and Sporting KC getting rid of team-color secondaries in favor of super dark gray ones. All decisions that are maybe defensible individually, but in aggregate, it makes for a feeling that the league is leaning too hard into black versus white.

[upperV03]

Here’s a shot of the full MNUFC secondary:

[UnclearInitial]

On 2/10/2019 at 12:15 AM, WarriorFight said:

 

See I completely disagree. Vast majority of the world's football clubs are some variation of FC, United, etc. I personally like it because I'm coming to MLS having been an English football fan for far longer. I think it's clean and respectable, and I doubt that, for example, ATL would be able to get any of the caliber of players they have if they had some (imo) dumb name attached. Atlanta United is clean, and some claim boring but then all of football in the world must be boring. I reject that idea.

 

Your specific example, personally, I really dislike. Austin FC is clean sounding, where Austin City Kickers makes me think of minor league baseball type name.

 

But this has been the constant debate over club names in the US. Personally I like the balance between the two, especially if the Americanized names have something cool behind them. I like Austin FC way better than anything else they likely would've come up with.

 

On 2/10/2019 at 12:15 AM, WarriorFight said:

 

See I completely disagree. Vast majority of the world's football clubs are some variation of FC, United, etc. I personally like it because I'm coming to MLS having been an English football fan for far longer. I think it's clean and respectable, and I doubt that, for example, ATL would be able to get any of the caliber of players they have if they had some (imo) dumb name attached. Atlanta United is clean, and some claim boring but then all of football in the world must be boring. I reject that idea.

 

Your specific example, personally, I really dislike. Austin FC is clean sounding, where Austin City Kickers makes me think of minor league baseball type name.

 

But this has been the constant debate over club names in the US. Personally I like the balance between the two, especially if the Americanized names have something cool behind them. I like Austin FC way better than anything else they likely would've come up with.

 

City Name FC or United is definitely common throughout the world, but it’s not the only naming convention that exists in soccer. German teams often their region (Bayern, Borussia), or have the founding year incorporated. Italian clubs often use a demonym instead of the city name outright. South American teams have dozens of different styles. And that’s not even to mention the teams named after mythical beings, the ones named after people, the factory teams. Obviously MLS tried to incorporate some of those non-British naming conventions in Inter Miami, Real Salt Lake and Sporting Kansas City, to mixed success. But every country has developed its own convention. I get it,  dumbing every team down to 2 styles is the safe option. But there is no need to be shackled by those 2. Inter Miami is derivative but it worked. FC Angeleno would have worked just as well as LAFC, Nashvillian FC or Motor City 22 aren’t Wiz level cheesy but at least it’s something different 

 

6 hours ago, WarriorFight said:

 

It was 100% a thing before then. DC United? Timbers rose secondaries? 

 

All of Vancouver's home kits have been more or less solid white.

 

So I reject the idea that it is wholly *new*, first off. I'd also argue that black is a major color aspect in both MTL's and ATL's identities.

 

Secondly, there is only so much color variety you can have in a league, especially one as large as MLS is now. People act as though it's an MLS problem, that it is indicative of a lack of creative vision on their part and the part of Adidas, but ALL leagues have arguably a similar problem, if you can even call it that. For example, Serie A: Sassuolo is Black-and-Green, Inter is Black-and-Blue, as is Atalanta, Milan is Black-and-Red, and both Juventus AND Udinese are black-and-white stripes, but I don't hear anyone giving any of them trouble over it. 

 

It's just because most people can agree that black paired with complimentary collars almost always looks tight.

European leagues didn’t have the benefit of establishing a teams brand in the modern ‘branding matters’ era, more often than not teams just chose the colors that were available. And they don’t get to choose the brands of teams that play in the league due to pro/rel. This is an area where being recently founded and centrally organized can help MLS to establish distinct brands for every team and they’d be stupid to waste it

[PrimalCookie]

I know it's just another plain white kit, but I really like this one from Minnesota. The light blue accents perfectly go with the white/black main kit, and I think the inspiration is really good (and, for once, actually fits). It just seems to fit a team from Minnesota, if that makes any sense. My only wish is that they made the pattern a bit more noticeable. 

[UnclearInitial]

On 2/8/2019 at 10:41 PM, upperV03 said:

Here’s the first shot I’ve seen of the full RSL secondary:

Unpopular opinion: I don’t hate this. The pattern may be standard adidas but it kind of reminds me of canyon rock sediment which is very fitting for Utah. The thing I dislike the most is the monochrome crest which is hardly ever the right choice

[Section30]

I will say I'm underwhelmed with the Loons new kit. I think it has potential and is an upgrade, but overall it just looks solid white. If they made the texture more noticeable I might like it more, but it just looks boring IMO. I'm still hoping they bring back light blue as the primary color for the second kit with the wings on the home kit.

[Digby]

1 hour ago, anythinglogos said:

Unpopular opinion: I don’t hate this. The pattern may be standard adidas but it kind of reminds me of canyon rock sediment which is very fitting for Utah. The thing I dislike the most is the monochrome crest which is hardly ever the right choice

 

I would mind the monochrome crest less if it was navy, I think; the color balance feels off among the trim colors, with too much red and not enough navy.

[upperV03]

Latest teaser for Dallas’ new secondary:

And a brief explanation from the linked article:

”As we get closer to the reveal, we get our first glimpse at the front of the kit. First, a new material for the FC Dallas badge showcases more detailed and textured elements within the logo not seen in embroidered logos of the past. Also, around the logo a faint hint of design begins to take shape. An alternating diagonal striping ascends at a 45-degree angle across the chest of the jersey. It's inspiration comes from a highly-visible Dallas landmark.”

[upperV03]

LAFC wore the socks from their new, yet to be unveiled secondary kits in their preseason match against Atlanta:

[WBeltz]

13 hours ago, anythinglogos said:

Unpopular opinion: I don’t hate this. The pattern may be standard adidas but it kind of reminds me of canyon rock sediment which is very fitting for Utah. The thing I dislike the most is the monochrome crest which is hardly ever the right choice

I thought the same thing! I was thinking adidas/RSL was going to go that route with the explanation of the kit. I think pairing it with red shorts would look much better as well, or breaking the look with red socks.

[PaleVermilion81]

8 hours ago, upperV03 said:

LAFC wore the socks from their new, yet to be unveiled secondary kits in their preseason match against Atlanta:

 

Are Vela's socks on the wrong way? Aren't the wings supposed to be on the outside?

[upperV03]

1 minute ago, PaleVermilion81 said:

 

Are Vela's socks on the wrong way? Aren't the wings supposed to be on the outside?

There are wings on both sides of the sides actually. You can kind of see it here on the socks for the home kit:

 

[agentrygraphics]

14 hours ago, anythinglogos said:

Unpopular opinion: I don’t hate this. The pattern may be standard adidas but it kind of reminds me of canyon rock sediment which is very fitting for Utah. The thing I dislike the most is the monochrome crest which is hardly ever the right choice

I wouldn't mind this if they opted for claret shorts rather than white. With all the claret pattern amassing more towards the bottom hem, it just seems like a natural progression into a colored short.

[agentrygraphics]

Not sure if it was officially posted...but here's the NYRBs' 2019 primary

 

Wholeheartedly disagree with the move away from white jerseys. When you're already criticized for being "energy drink FC"...perhaps coloring your jersey silver/gray like your drink can isn't the best approach.

 

The "glitch" patterned words are an interesting touch. I don't love nor hate them...

[agentrygraphics]

On 2/8/2019 at 9:38 PM, upperV03 said:

The Impact just revealed their new primary:

 

 

"Lift & shift" of AC Milan's jersey or not...those are beautiful. I love them.

[njdevs7]

Weird that the Red Bulls kits from media day had the script on the back in White but the mock ups have the script in Red. Guess we will have to see. Also, I don't know why it's listed as the "Primary" because their Red kit is really the new primary. 

 

I like Montreal's kits but I would have liked to see the colors reversed. Mainly Blue with black stripes.

[PaleVermilion81]

5 minutes ago, njdevs7 said:

Weird that the Red Bulls kits from media day had the script on the back in White but the mock ups have the script in Red. Guess we will have to see. Also, I don't know why it's listed as the "Primary" because their Red kit is really the new primary. 

 

I like Montreal's kits but I would have liked to see the colors reversed. Mainly Blue with black stripes.

 

My assumption is that it is just a poor photoshop for sale vendor websites. Also, it could be that the replica jerseys have it in red, while the authentic are white. The only jerseys I've seen for sale are the replicas. No authentics of the new kit are available for sale on fanatics or the MLS store.