Jump to content

MLS Kits 2021


kylonian
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think that the MLS is best suited to using a hybrid of traditional names alongside Americanized-names. The Whitecaps, Sounders, Timbers, and Fire are awesome. I'm also fine with teams being named "CITY NAME FC/SC", but when everybody starts doing it, it obviously sucks. It's one thing for expansion teams to not get that, but for an already established brand to abandon their identity for it? Just plain stupid, no excuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:


Finally. That garbage name is gone! It’s a shame they’ll be another FC, but anything to get rid of that awful name.

 

If it’s not NASL or 1996 MLS (even then, the jury’s out), get with the rest of the world’s traditions. 
 

I mean the name is even older than MLS so I'd say it's pretty traditional for North American Soccer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

If it’s not NASL or 1996 MLS (even then, the jury’s out), get with the rest of the world’s traditions.

 

What do you mean by rest of the world's tradition?

 

17 hours ago, Digby said:

Well, here's some news. A gutless and terrible call.

 

Well this news is bad, they should stay with Impact instead of being another boring "City name FC" team (even in Europe teams got names).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, dannykraft said:

I mean the name is even older than MLS so I'd say it's pretty traditional for North American Soccer


...and said name sucks. I’m glad it’s gone. I’d prefer something else to another FC, but an FC name is better than a lame nickname.

 

1 minute ago, pepis21 said:

What do you mean by rest of the world's tradition?


Simply not using the North American naming convention. If there’s a nickname to be had, let it originate with fan groups/fans rather than the team itself. Granted, it’s not universal outside of North America, but it’s common.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a terrible move. Yes, Impact sounded kind of minor league, but that’s part of what makes them one of the more unique clubs in MLS, the only team without NASL roots that played in the minor leagues and wasn’t started with the direct purpose of making the jump to MLS. They’re a relic of a specific period of North American soccer that doesn’t deserve to all be thrown in the trash just because it was a struggle, those 30 years of history is North American football heritage. A big problem with MLS is the perceived lack of history so why are you throwing it all out? The Sox names in MLB or the Packers also probably sounded stupid by the time teams weren’t being named for hosiery or meat packing firms but they stuck by it and they are the most historical, old timey  names in the league

 

 

 It doesn’t hurt that Impact works in both French and English, and that the IMFC initials are fairly recognizable. City Name FC is so bland, and it’s made worse by their biggest rivals being the first to bring that naming style over to North America. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

...and said name sucks. I’m glad it’s gone. I’d prefer something else to another FC, but an FC name is better than a lame nickname.

Montreal Impact sounds way better than Montreal FC, Montreal City or Montreal United. They should have kept it and maybe gone back to something resembling their older logos. 

Montreal Impact Logo History | The most famous brands and company logos in  the world

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Simply not using the North American naming convention. If there’s a nickname to be had, let it originate with fan groups/fans rather than the team itself. Granted, it’s not universal outside of North America, but it’s common.

 

I don't know too many teams which names was originated by fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, pepis21 said:

 

I don't know too many teams which names was originated by fans.

At least not any that weren't part of a name the team contest. And do we really want modern fans nicknames for some of these teams? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

At least not any that weren't part of a name the team contest. And do we really want modern fans nicknames for some of these teams? 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when this idea of fan-generated names is brought in the soccer context, it usually means unofficial nicknames. Like how Liverpool is referred to as the Reds or Arsenal is called the Gunners. 

 

There's a distinction to be made between nicknames, which Reds and Gunners are, and brands. 

 

In this MLS discussion, we're talking about brands. I presume the preference of @SFGiants58 is to forego a crummy Americanized brand in favor of something more generic in the hope that some sort of organic nickname emerges naturally in some ensuing years.

 

It's a bit of a long game rooted in some solid logic. It's hard to reconcile right now because all we have to go on is Montreal FC or FC Cincinnati or Charlotte FC -- names that are as bland as it gets. But over time, if Charlotte fans begin to refer to the team as the Crowns or Cincinnati calls their team the Lions, you may care less about the root branding.

 

Nobody complains that Liverpool F.C. is too generic. They're just Liverpool or, more casually, the Reds. But they've had the benefit of a century of history to build that sort of reputation. 

 

All that said, I still think defaulting to CITY FC is pretty weak, whether it be an established club like Montreal or an expansion franchise. Impact wasn't a great name, but it had history. (I preferred the French application, Impact de Montreal, and think they should have just used it that way all the time) And absent a true replacement, I'd bet fans will continue to refer to the club as Impact anyway.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Yes, but it was our terrible name. You'd never name a team "Yankees" in 2020, but isn't it a net positive they've kept it for so long?

 

Actually, not even so sure that name wouldn't be chosen today.  But whataboutism can't hide that "Impact" is just not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

Yes, but it was our terrible name. You'd never name a team "Yankees" in 2020, but isn't it a net positive they've kept it for so long?

 

Actually, not even so sure that name wouldn't be chosen today.  But whataboutism can't hide that "Impact" is just not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Actually, not even so sure that name wouldn't be chosen today.  But whataboutism can't hide that "Impact" is just not good.

 

Indeed! Even in the context of the time, compare "Impact" to "Revolution," "Wizards," "Rapids," "MetroStars," and "Mutiny." It really doesn't hold up. It's "Clash" and "Burn"-tier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.