MLS Kits 2021

[Ashes of Astroworld 352]

Yeah it wasn't a good name but it was a unique name with history that got the chance to be promoted.

 

*Still groaning in Houston that we're an FC now.*

[Digby 6,098]

Legitimately think it would be a years-long scandal on the level of the Revs' crayon flag in the soccer design peanut gallery if "Miami Heat" or "Orlando Magic" were soccer teams.

[Gothamite 23,650]

Yep.  Those are terrible names too. 

 

Soccer clubs don't have a monopoly on bad names, but fortunately we have one less now.

[DG_ThenNowForever 15,234]

17 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.

 

Fine. Then "Red Sox" or "White Sox" or "Athletics." There are countless examples of less-than team names in the Big Four that wouldn't make it today but we wouldn't dream of not having them.

 

And also, I don't think you can "whatabout" sports logo and branding critique.

[Jer15 1,012]

I mean, yeah, the name was never good but with almost 30 linear years of being a pioneer in Canadian soccer (I know, that history doesn't run deep yet) the history is there with that name.

That's why I think this idea is stupid. 

[insert name 4,981]

Bleh. How can you make your own history by deleting your own and copying someone else’s trend? Who are we appeasing with FC? We don’t even call it football here but that’s a whole other can of worms. 

[_DietDrPepper_ 4,166]

20 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

 

Fine. Then "Red Sox" or "White Sox" or "Athletics." There are countless examples of less-than team names in the Big Four that wouldn't make it today but we wouldn't dream of not having them.

 

And also, I don't think you can "whatabout" sports logo and branding critique.

There's a difference between the 120-100 year old Sox and A's, which are less a result of the era that they were founded and more a simplification of a longer name that they originally had, and the late 80s/90s esc garbage that is Impact Montreal. The red Sox were called that because the original team had Red Stockings, and they were called the red stockings to represent that. It's been simplified over time to the Sox. Impact was chosen arbitrarily to fit in with the times. 

 

Not to mention the Impact are barely 30 years old at most and the MLB teams are over 100.

[DG_ThenNowForever 15,234]

Just now, insert name said:

Bleh. How can you make your own history by deleting your own and copying someone else’s trend? Who are we appeasing with FC? We don’t even call it football here but that’s a whole other can of worms. 

 

Depends on what you mean by "here." In French-speaking Canada, they absolutely do call it "football."

[shaydre1019 1,062]

3 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

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. 

 

 

I can give or take "impact" as an outsider it's a very meh name, but their logo is definitely in need of an upgrade so it's a net positive for me. 

[Gothamite 23,650]

1 hour ago, Digby said:

Legitimately think it would be a years-long scandal on the level of the Revs' crayon flag in the soccer design peanut gallery if "Miami Heat" or "Orlando Magic" were soccer teams.

 

Yep.  Those are terrible names too. 

 

Soccer clubs don't have a monopoly on bad names, but fortunately we have one less now.

[Digby 6,098]

33 minutes ago, _DietDrPepper_ said:

There's a difference between the 120-100 year old Sox and A's, which are less a result of the era that they were founded and more a simplification of a longer name that they originally had, and the late 80s/90s esc garbage that is Impact Montreal. The red Sox were called that because the original team had Red Stockings, and they were called the red stockings to represent that. It's been simplified over time to the Sox. Impact was chosen arbitrarily to fit in with the times. 

 

Not to mention the Impact are barely 30 years old at most and the MLB teams are over 100.

 

I mean it's a bit of a vicious circle isn't it? If you keep discarding your legacy because it's not old enough... you're not really any closer to having a legacy. If you keep digging up a sapling in your backyard because it hasn't taken root to your liking, you're not getting any closer to your neighbor's old growth tree.

[Gothamite 23,650]

48 minutes ago, Digby said:

I mean it's a bit of a vicious circle isn't it? If you keep discarding your legacy because it's not old enough... you're not really any closer to having a legacy. If you keep digging up a sapling in your backyard because it hasn't taken root to your liking, you're not getting any closer to your neighbor's old growth tree.

 

A diseased tree should be dug up.  And a bad identity shouldn't be kept around just in the hope it gets better with age.

[SFGiants58 13,587]

12 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

A diseased tree should be dug up.  And a bad identity shouldn't be kept around just in the hope it gets better with age.

We let San José and Dallas dig up their diseased trees, why don’t we let Montréal do the same? I get that there’s a lot more history with Impact than with Clash (who adopted an NASL name) or Burn, but it’s still on that level of awful.

[QCS 2,326]

I guess I don't mind them changing the name, I'm moreso disappointed they didn't change it to something unique. A fan-created nickname is great and all but I'd like to see something more than "[city name] FC".

Edited December 2, 2020 by QCS
forgot a word

[spartacat_12 1,209]

1 hour ago, gosioux76 said:

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. But 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.

 

I understand the appeal of a nickname being generated organically by the fans, but that really only works if the team was never given an official nickname in the first place. Even then, with a modern sports business landscape you end up with "unofficial" nicknames that the team is clearly pushing on the fanbase. When Toronto FC joined MLS I remember that immediately the nickname Reds was being pushed by the media, which was obviously because of influences from the organization. To this day I never hear anyone calling them the Reds, with TFC being the common name used by fans.

 

Montreal already had a nickname, so if they're gonna go by Montreal FC people will just keep calling them the Impact.

[Digby 6,098]

7 minutes ago, spartacat_12 said:

 

I understand the appeal of a nickname being generated organically by the fans, but that really only works if the team was never given an official nickname in the first place. Even then, with a modern sports business landscape you end up with "unofficial" nicknames that the team is clearly pushing on the fanbase. When Toronto FC joined MLS I remember that immediately the nickname Reds was being pushed by the media, which was obviously because of influences from the organization. To this day I never hear anyone calling them the Reds, with TFC being the common name used by fans.

 

This! The "organic nickname" argument drives me crazy. If anything the TFC/Reds might have been the closest we have to something organic. The Lions and Loons were quite clearly seeded by the team logos, and as far as I'm aware Nashville/Miami/LAFC don't really have equivalents. Point being that dreams of MLS having its own "Gunners" haven't panned out and I don't really see the benefit of trying desperately to make it happen.

 

Especially when, you know, you've had a perfectly good name in use for 30 years.

[Digby 6,098]

32 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

A diseased tree should be dug up.  And a bad identity shouldn't be kept around just in the hope it gets better with age.

 

I don't see what evidence there is that the IMFC identity is such a problem that it requires a change of this magnitude, beyond the arbitrary aesthetic complaints of some design nerds.

[SFGiants58 13,587]

Just now, Digby said:

Especially when, you know, you've had a perfectly good name in use for 30 years.

Except the name was mierda. It sucked for about 30 years and it’s good it’s finally gone. The same applies to the Minnesota Wild and a few of the singular names of the NBA. Heck, Impact might be worse than Wild!

 

2 minutes ago, Digby said:

If anything the TFC/Reds might have been the closest we have to something organic. The Lions and Loons were quite clearly seeded by the team logos, and as far as I'm aware Nashville/Miami/LAFC don't really have equivalents.

Give it time and you’ll get it.

[Gothamite 23,650]

19 minutes ago, Digby said:

I don't see what evidence there is that the IMFC identity is such a problem that it requires a change of this magnitude, beyond the arbitrary aesthetic complaints of some design nerds.

 

Le sigh.

[BryanSmalls 101]

That’s disappointing about the name change. Is Montreal replacing "Impact" with "FC" in their logo or creating a new logo?