Jump to content

MLS Kits 2021


kylonian

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

Well, he's also making grand pronouncements about the world's traditions that aren't standing up to scrutiny.


Do tell me how I’m wrong. Some names aren’t good enough to justify keeping them around, Impact being one of them. 
 

Some NASL names were worth keeping (Cascadia), some initial MLS (the league that wasn’t a failure) names are worth keeping - provided they are good names, and maybe a few pre-MLS names are worth keeping. Impact wasn’t one of them.

 

Also, I have to agree with IceCap here. The legacy of soccer in North America is largely one of failure. Things started to get better once the league started emulating the rest of the world. Correlation isn’t exactly causation, but I don’t think it should be ignored. Following international examples and trying to downplay North Americanisms like naming conventions and the MLS 1.0 rules is a good thing for the sport.

 

It’s not like I’m asking for hooliganism or the stupidity of promotion-relegation. That should never be a part of North American association football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IceCap said:

Did it though?

 

Yes, I'd say that it did. Hell, you could boil down the North American Soccer League's impact (no pun intended) on Major League Soccer to the Alan I. Rothenberg connection alone and you'd have a compelling argument for just how influential the older league was in laying the foundation for the current circuit.

If Rothenberg isn't introduced to the sport of soccer through his work as an attorney for Los Angeles Wolves owner Jack Kent Cooke, the seed isn't planted that later convinces him to purchase the Los Angeles Aztecs a decade later. Without the experience of owning said team, Rothenberg likely isn't as amenable to accepting Peter Uerberroth's subsequent invitation to oversee the soccer competition at the 1984 Olympic Games. In which case, Rothenberg doesn't do a yeoman's job producing said tournament, the event doesn't unexpectedly resonate with the American public to the extent that it did, which means that its success doesn't catch the eye of FIFA officials and they don't begin to seriously consider awarding the 1994 FIFA World Cup to the United States and asking Rothenberg to serve as the chairman of the organizing committee for global soccer's signature event. Which means that Rothenberg probably doesn't seek - and win - the presidency of the United States Soccer Federation in 1990, which puts him in the perfect position to not only oversee the most profitable World Cup tournament in history, but also plot the structure and launch of Major League Soccer, the domestic league which will crown its 25th champion in nine days.

        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:


Do tell me how I’m wrong. Some names aren’t good enough to justify keeping them around, Impact being one of them. 
 

Some NASL names were worth keeping (Cascadia), some initial MLS (the league that wasn’t a failure) names are worth keeping - provided they are good names, and maybe a few pre-MLS names are worth keeping. Impact wasn’t one of them.

 

Again with the arbitrary value judgements. There is nothing that makes "Sounders" or "Miami Heat" inherently worth keeping and "Impact" not worth it. What the hell is a Sounder anyway? Or a Timber?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

Things started to get better once the league started emulating the rest of the world.


As I've stated elsewhere, I'd argue that Major League Soccer's fortunes began to improve once the league committed to securing right-sized, soccer-specific stadia for its member-clubs. Doing so helped to build match day atmosphere, delivered the message that teams were committed to their markets and weren't just a means to fill dates in the facilities of other sports teams, and - as a result - generated supporter enthusiasm and engagement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

Again with the arbitrary value judgements. There is nothing that makes "Sounders" or "Miami Heat" inherently worth keeping and "Impact" not worth it. What the hell is a Sounder anyway? Or a Timber?


Sounders is a reference to the Puget Sound around Seattle, Timbers refers to the old logging industry in Portland, and Miami Heat arguably references the wet heat of South Florida (and is also associated with three NBA titles).


Impact has none of these qualities. It references nothing, sounds terrible, and has little-to-no significant success in MLS. It just lasted for 27 seasons despite being terrible. I get that it had to be “English and French-friendly,” but there are more locally-significant names to chose from. There are also French names.

 

Impact sucks and getting rid of it was long overdue. That’s purely a personal opinion. Acting like this is a “gutless” move or is “breaking the tradition of North American association football” is asinine to me. If the fans don’t like it, fine. Their preferences should be considered. But as an outsider, the name was Wild-level trash.

 

As for Brian’s point, the shift to international names had begun in the SSS period. Correlation isn’t causation, but I think the link is too important to ignore. Maybe leaning on non-North American traditions isn’t the answer, but the legacy of mostly failure that is pre-MLS 2.0 North American soccer isn’t - viable option either.

 

Edited by SFGiants58
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

As for Brian’s point, the shift to international names had begun in the SSS period.

 

Fort Lauderdale's Lockhart Stadium was renovated to serve as the soccer-specific stadium for the expansion Miami Fusion in 1998. A year later, the Columbus Crew took to the pitch in their namesake soccer-specific facility (now MAPFRE Stadium). The Los Angeles Galaxy moved into the Home Depot Center (now Dignity Health Sports Park) in 2003. None of those names strikes me as being particularly of the "international" variety, though your mileage may vary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

I'd say it's expedient, but not good because it's boring compared to the previous name. I also wonder if this is an attempt to ward off CPL competition in the area and they decided that switching to a more commonly used name for a soccer team was needed to do that. Montreal Olympique or Olympic Montreal would sound better, but unless they were playing in Olympic Stadium full time I wouldn't use it. 

 

My understanding is that they can't use it under any circumstances - the International Olympic Committee has a trademark on the word in a sporting context, with exceptions for the few grandfathered exceptions scattered across the world.  No new team could adopt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gothamite said:

 

My understanding is that they can't use it under any circumstances - the International Olympic Committee has a trademark on the word in a sporting context, with exceptions for the few grandfathered exceptions scattered across the world.  No new team could adopt it.

I believe that was the reason for St. Louis going with their newly chosen name when entering the league. Personally, I'd say Olympians are not just athletes that competed at the Olympics nor the word Olympic belongs solely to the IOC. I think it's BS, and if it were challenged in a US court it wouldn't stand. It's the same thing as O'Neill's being able to use three stripes on hurling jerseys in Ireland. But there's no team that wants to deal with the amount of money involved just over a name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

48 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

As for Brian’s point, the shift to international names had begun in the SSS period. 

 

19 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

Fort Lauderdale's Lockhart Stadium was renovated to serve as the soccer-specific stadium for the expansion Miami Fusion in 1998. A year later, the Columbus Crew took to the pitch in their namesake soccer-specific facility (now MAPFRE Stadium). The Los Angeles Galaxy moved into the Home Depot Center (now Dignity Health Sports Park) in 2003. None of those names strikes me as being particularly of the "international" variety, though your mileage may vary.  

 

I think @SFGiants58's point was that new teams had started to adopt international conventions at that point, and some older clubs had as well.  The shift had begun, not necessarily that all teams were changing over.

 

We can also debate when exactly "the SSS period" started.  I would personally put it in the mid-2000s, when they became the standard and not the exception.  Real Salt Lake in 2004 was the last club admitted to MLS without a stadium deal in place, and most of those stadiums by necessity were SSS.  And by that point, the international model of team name was well and truly in vogue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Personally, I'd say Olympians are not just athletes that competed at the Olympics nor the word Olympic belongs solely to the IOC. I think it's BS, and if it were challenged in a US court it wouldn't stand.

 

Admittedly IANAL, but I don't think you can reasonably make the argument that the average person hears "Olympics" or "Olympic athlete" and thinks of anything but the Games. 

 

I don't like that they have a trademark, but that doesn't mean the trademark itself isn't totally legitimate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Admittedly IANAL, but I don't think you can reasonably make the argument that the average person hears "Olympics" or "Olympic athlete" and thinks of anything but the Games. 

But when I hear Olympians, am I referencing Olympic athletes or the Olympian gods? Then again, that team's logo would aldo have to omit the Olympic rings and probably any type of torch. Like so:

Olympiacos F.C. - Wikipedia

I wonder if teams would also consider starting to use something like San Antonians or or Arizonans as a team name instead of simply using the city name and another word attached to it. Or even the city's best known nickname. Montreal has a few nickname that would be great for soccer:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Montreal

 

I really like Saint City, Festival City or La Metropole. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SFGiants58 said:

Impact... references nothing, sounds terrible, and has little-to-no significant success in MLS. It just lasted for 27 seasons despite being terrible. I get that it had to be “English and French-friendly,” but there are more locally-significant names to chose from. There are also French names.


As a noun, Impact is a word that can mean, amongst other things, "a collision", "a force", "forceful contact"... like the impact of a foot striking a soccer ball. Or, a head striking a soccer ball. Hell, even a goalkeeper's fist punching a soccer ball would be creating an impact.

Another definition of impact - when utilized as a noun - is "the impression or effect of one thing on another". It could be said that the competitive fortunes of a professional sports franchise - perhaps a soccer club - have an impact on the emotions of said team's supporters. There's also the impact that the arrival of such a franchise in a particular area can have on the local economy.

As a verb, impact can mean "to hit with force", "to bring about a result", or "to bring about a result on another". A soccer club's victory in a match could negatively impact an opponent's ability to make the playoffs. 

As for on-the-field success, they did eliminate Pachuca in the Quarterfinals and Alajualense in the Semis of the 2015 CONCACAF Champions League, before Club América bested them 5-3 on aggregate in the Finals. That MLS season saw the Impact finish 3rd out of 10 teams in the Eastern Conference and 7th out of 20 teams overall. They then bounced arch rivals Toronto FC out of the Knockout Round 3-0, before succumbing 3-4 to eventual MLS Cup runners-up Columbus Crew in the Eastern Conference Semis.         

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

But when I hear Olympians, am I referencing Olympic athletes or the Olympian gods?

 

Trademarks are based in context.  Companies register the various uses of their names.  Apple could use their name for computers and software, the Beatles had a problem with them entering the music industry.

 

In a sporting context, nobody is thinking of the Olympian gods.

 

Quote

I wonder if teams would also consider starting to use something like San Antonians or or Arizonans as a team name instead of simply using the city name and another word attached to it. Or even the city's best known nickname. Montreal has a few nickname that would be great for soccer:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_of_Montreal

 

I really like Saint City, Festival City or La Metropole. 

 

This is an interesting idea.   We just saw this in the NWSL:

 

NWSL-Angel-City.jpeg?itok=-vVBUQW7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Digby said:

 

Again with the arbitrary value judgements. There is nothing that makes "Sounders" or "Miami Heat" inherently worth keeping and "Impact" not worth it. What the hell is a Sounder anyway? Or a Timber?

How about this? 

"I like the name Sounders but dislike the name Impact." 

 

That's all you need to justify an opinion like this. 

 

2 hours ago, Digby said:

 

I think the vaunted Real Soccer Fan is smarter than flocking to the nearest club just because they put "FC" in the name. To me there is a stronger value proposition in embracing the history of soccer on this continent, and that doesn't just mean the shootout clock era. I don't think franchising every market with a Your Town FC, modernist trendy font on a black roundel, is the fill-in-the-blank, is the way forward no matter how amenable to Real Soccer Fans it is. If we have 24/7 access to all the world's best soccer even from continents away, what is the value proposition of MLS, beyond simply existing and being recognizably soccer?

You're arguing against strawmen.

 

2 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

 

Yes, I'd say that it did...

That's a lot of effort to connect a lot of dots, and I remain unconvinced. Sorry. MLS from 2005-onward owes little to the MLS that existed up to that point. Much less the NASL. 

 

And it is, to be frank, getting tiring. Tiring that every time we get a new team- be it in MLS or the USL- you have people with NASL nostalgia who won't pipe down about the new name that was chosen being "an insult to the proud soccer tradition of the city" or whatever. The NASL's cultural impact was minimal. Cascadia is the exception that proves the rule because not even the Cosmos were sees as so invaluable that MLS HAD to have them. 

 

It's all getting a bit tiring, and a bit tedious. MLS is making its own mark and seems far more sustainable than any league that came before it- even the early MLS. 

Every year the people who keep holding onto the flame of the NASL get older and greyer. And the NASL gets slightly less relevant to younger MLS fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Trademarks are based in context.  Companies register the various uses of their names.  Apple could use their name for computers and software, the Beatles had a problem with them entering the music industry.

 

In a sporting context, nobody is thinking of the Olympian gods.

 

 

This is an interesting idea.   We just saw this in the NWSL:

 

NWSL-Angel-City.jpeg?itok=-vVBUQW7

 

I agree 100% and wish more teams would go this route. But in MLS in particular, there seems to be a great reluctance to foregoing the city's name in core brands. 

 

Either Cincinnati or Charlotte had the opportunity to own Queen City FC. St. Louis could've done something with Gateway City but opted not to. (While many think St. Louis could've adopted Olympique, using a French name for a city whose soccer heritage is largely derived from Italian immigrants didn't make a lot of sense.) Sacramento could simplify its name to Republic FC. All of these would've added some variety to the MLS branding mix, and I'm sure some of these may have been considered. But it's as if they're worried people will forget the team represents an actual city if the city's name isn't part of the actual brand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I agree 100% and wish more teams would go this route. But in MLS in particular, there seems to be a great reluctance to foregoing the city's name in core brands. 

 

Either Cincinnati or Charlotte had the opportunity to own Queen City FC. St. Louis could've done something with Gateway City but opted not to. (While many think St. Louis could've adopted Olympique, using a French name for a city whose soccer heritage is largely derived from Italian immigrants didn't make a lot of sense.) Sacramento could simplify its name to Republic FC. All of these would've added some variety to the MLS branding mix, and I'm sure some of these may have been considered. But it's as if they're worried people will forget the team represents an actual city if the city's name isn't part of the actual brand. 

These are the people that yell at the Jets and Giants for calling themselves New York. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gosioux76 said:

Either Cincinnati or Charlotte had the opportunity to own Queen City FC. St. Louis could've done something with Gateway City but opted not to. (While many think St. Louis could've adopted Olympique, using a French name for a city whose soccer heritage is largely derived from Italian immigrants didn't make a lot of sense.) Sacramento could simplify its name to Republic FC. All of these would've added some variety to the MLS branding mix, and I'm sure some of these may have been considered. But it's as if they're worried people will forget the team represents an actual city if the city's name isn't part of the actual brand. 

 

From my outsider's perspective, I think they look at nicknamey-names as being a little gimmicky.  And given its past, gimmicky is the last adjective they want to be associated with.  Adopting city/state names create a strong connection, won't become tiresome in a few years, and offer maximum possibility for fans to generate their own names.

 

I don't want Sacramento to drop "Sacramento" from their name.  That's their hometown, they shouldn't be ashamed of it.

 

I see something of a mirror with the NBA, which is really going all out on leveraging local iconography.  For those not familiar, they have a whole series of rotating one-year uniforms (called the "City Edition") that trade in a hyper-local connection, sometimes to the exclusion of anything the outside world would recognize or care about (I mean, how many people outside Brooklyn would think a Basquiat-inspired uniform represents them).  MLS is also working to develop that kind of community spirit, those deep local connections, and city names are a big part of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IceCap said:

That's a lot of effort to connect a lot of dots, and I remain unconvinced.


Little effort at all. In fact, it's simply a matter of referencing notes I took while covering an appearance by Rothenberg at a lecture series here in Los Angeles, as well as reviewing the transcript of an interview I conducted with him when I was working as a radio broadcaster about 18 years ago.

Further, the so-called "dots" connecting the soccer-related stages of Rothenberg's career are more like flashing neon arrows. One doesn't have to strain oneself in order to make the connections. If you can't see that a logical line exists between Rothenberg's introduction to professional soccer as General Counsel and General Manager of Jack Kent Cooke's Los Angeles Wolves in 1968, his subsequent purchase and operation of the North American Soccer League's Los Angeles Aztecs from 1977 through 1980, his decision to accept Peter Ueberroth's invitation to serve as commissioner of what turned out to be a highly successful soccer tournament at the 1984 Olympic Games, his being approached by impressed FIFA executives in the wake of said tourney with an offer to take on the chairmanship of the organizing committee for the 1994 FIFA World Cup that the international soccer organization wished to award to the U.S, his successful campaign to be elected President of the United States Soccer Federation, his leadership of the most profitable World Cup competition in history, and his successfully navigating Major League Soccer from initial concept to launch... well, I don't know what to tell you. It's virtually a CV of soccer stewardship that begins with the NASL and culminates in MLS... but it's apparently all just a coincidence.               

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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