MLS Kits 2021

[gosioux76]

54 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

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.

 

I get what you're saying when it comes to staying power of city-based brands. That makes a lot of sense.  But I wouldn't necessarily associate the eschewing of a city name as an indicator they're ashamed of the city. Anyway, Sacramento was probably a bad example. Frankly, Sacramento Republic FC would be among the more unique brands as it is. I was just suggesting that Republic FC would also sound appealing. 

[AnPheitseog]

4 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

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. 

Just for fun trivia on the O'Neills

 

They are able to use it on the island of Ireland for any sport whatsoever be the GAA games(football, hurling, camoegie) or even soccer(Bohs use them in League of Ireland).

 

Problem is, they can only sell(as you said) the three stripes inside of the island of Ireland. Outside of Ireland, they sell two stripes versions.

[Digby]

4 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I get what you're saying when it comes to staying power of city-based brands. That makes a lot of sense.  But I wouldn't necessarily associate the eschewing of a city name as an indicator they're ashamed of the city. Anyway, Sacramento was probably a bad example. Frankly, Sacramento Republic FC would be among the more unique brands as it is. I was just suggesting that Republic FC would also sound appealing. 

 

I've thought about this too, why we don't have an Arsenal or Rangers-style team -- but I do think that dropping American-style nicknames are one thing but the need to market oneself can't lose the location identifier. Probably doubly so now in the age of every little local reference being a necessary building point for identities and marketing campaigns. I've thought "Revolution" is the one that might work in that context, but eh, don't really see a strong need to, either.

[MJWalker45]

18 minutes ago, Digby said:

 

I've thought about this too, why we don't have an Arsenal or Rangers-style team -- but I do think that dropping American-style nicknames are one thing but the need to market oneself can't lose the location identifier. Probably doubly so now in the age of every little local reference being a necessary building point for identities and marketing campaigns. I've thought "Revolution" is the one that might work in that context, but eh, don't really see a strong need to, either.

We do. They just happen to be called Red Bull now. PSV Eindhoven is actually named after Phillips, who used to own the team. You still see it in Asia.

[aawagner011]

I think the problem going against singular word names or names that don’t reference the city is that there are so many other prominent North American sports. In Europe, it's football at the top, and then several tiers below are other sports teams. To call yourself Arsenal or Liverpool is a bit different than Los Angeles. Ok, Los Angeles what? There’s probably 10+ teams in LA. Just a little different.

[schlim]

City nicknames should be reserved for every unique local brewery that exists in every American city that brews 'worldwide tastes' with 'locally sourced ingredients' that serves 'the tastes of the community' and 'carries on the proud tradition of American brewing'.

On second thought, they would actually be a perfect fit for MLS.
 

[IceCap]

22 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

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.      

I'm going to be as honest as I can be. 

You think any fan of the Los Angeles Galaxy or LAFC gives one iota of a care in the world about the Los Angeles Wolves? You think either the New York Red Bulls or NYCFC owe anything to the Cosmos? No. Hell, MLS could have had the Cosmos. They chose not to have the Cosmos. 

 

So you can draw these lines any which way you want- it doesn't change the fact that MLS today doesn't owe anything to the NASL. The NASL utterly imploded and cratered top flight soccer in north America for years. MLS fumbled out of the gate- and only started getting its act together in the mid 2000s when they stopped trying to "Americanize" the sport. 

 

So no, it's not all "just a coincidence" but a few key people here and there does not create this grand legacy you so desperately want to exist. Everything in North American soccer prior to MLS' rebirth as a league that respected the game's global traditions has been tinged by failure. 

 

And all of this is academic anyway. Why are we having this argument? You're mad that someone who isn't from Montreal likes the name "Montreal FC" over "Montreal Impact"? Really? 

You're free to disagree with him on that but come on man. There was no need to use that disagreement as a jumping off point of multiple walls of text dedicated to why the deep legacy of North American soccer is worth defending. 

 

All the guy said was that he didn't like a singular 90s style name. That's all. It's hardly a revolutionary- or even unpopular- opinion around here. 

[Brian in Boston]

5 hours ago, IceCap said:

I'm going to be as honest as I can be. 

You think any fan of the Los Angeles Galaxy or LAFC gives one iota of a care in the world about the Los Angeles Wolves? You think either the New York Red Bulls or NYCFC owe anything to the Cosmos? No. Hell, MLS could have had the Cosmos. They chose not to have the Cosmos. 

 

So you can draw these lines any which way you want- it doesn't change the fact that MLS today doesn't owe anything to the NASL. The NASL utterly imploded and cratered top flight soccer in north America for years. MLS fumbled out of the gate- and only started getting its act together in the mid 2000s when they stopped trying to "Americanize" the sport. 

 

So no, it's not all "just a coincidence" but a few key people here and there does not create this grand legacy you so desperately want to exist. Everything in North American soccer prior to MLS' rebirth as a league that respected the game's global traditions has been tinged by failure. 

 

And all of this is academic anyway. Why are we having this argument? You're mad that someone who isn't from Montreal likes the name "Montreal FC" over "Montreal Impact"? Really? 

You're free to disagree with him on that but come on man. There was no need to use that disagreement as a jumping off point of multiple walls of text dedicated to why the deep legacy of North American soccer is worth defending. 

 

All the guy said was that he didn't like a singular 90s style name. That's all. It's hardly a revolutionary- or even unpopular- opinion around here. 

Who is having an argument over anything? Who is mad? Certainly not me. What is there to feel anger over? A sports franchise changing its branding? That's ridiculous. 

I simply opined that I feel abandoning a unique brand that the club in question has sported across a range of competitions for 27 seasons seems to fly in the face of those people who would argue that soccer in the U.S. and Canada lacks tradition. As I've said on this board many times prior to the exchange in this thread - indeed, countless times throughout my life while discussing other matters entirely - it's tremendously difficult to build and maintain tradition if one is too amenable to abandoning the history they've already established.

We're told that soccer is the world's game. That it's an international phenomena. That cultures from around the globe have contributed to the sport's development, traditions and history. That's all true. As is the fact that the United States of America and Canada - their players, their coaches, their leagues, and their teams - have contributed and continue to contribute to soccer's rich tapestry.

I never made the claim that Los Angeles Galaxy or LAFC supporters care about the Los Angeles Wolves. I never hazarded a guess as to whether the New York Red Bulls or NYCFC feel they owe anything to the original NASL's New York Cosmos.

I simply pointed out that Alan Rothenberg - the Wolves' former general counsel and general manager, the former owner of the NASL's Los Angeles Aztecs, the commissioner of soccer competition at the Games of the XXIII Olympiad, the CEO of World Cup USA '94, and the two-term president of the United States Soccer Federation - was responsible for spearheading the conceptualization and launch of Major League Soccer. He was the league's founder. There's no disputing that. Rothenberg took a lifetime of experience - most definitely including the lessons he'd learned firsthand during his tenure as an executive and owner in the original North American Soccer League - and built a first division soccer league that, despite the struggles it has faced along the way, survives to this day. 

The Los Angeles Galaxy, LAFC, New York Red Bulls, and NYCFC? They don't exist today without Alan Rothenberg. Major League Soccer doesn't exist without him. Might there be another first division soccer league, comprised of other soccer teams, operating in the United States and Canada at this point? There certainly might. Would another first division league have operated more successfully, less successfully, about the same? We'll never know. Why? Because, Rothenberg succeeded in launching MLS and - despite the NASL's "utter implosion" and the "crater[ing ]of top flight soccer in north America" - the league will stage its 25th championship final in eight days.   

As for such opinions as "MLS today doesn't owe anything to the NASL" and "[e]verything in North American soccer prior to MLS' rebirth as a league that respected the game's global traditions has been tinged by failure"... they bear an absolutism that's hardly conducive to a nuanced discussion of any topic, let alone North American soccer history.          

  



            

[Gothamite]

23 hours ago, Brian in Boston said:

As for such opinions as "MLS today doesn't owe anything to the NASL" and "[e]verything in North American soccer prior to MLS' rebirth as a league that respected the game's global traditions has been tinged by failure"... they bear an absolutism that's hardly conducive to a nuanced discussion of any topic, let alone North American soccer history.

 

More absolutist than this?

 

On 12/3/2020 at 6:07 AM, Brian in Boston said:

All of that said, there is no questioning the fact that the North American Soccer League laid the foundation for the success that Major League Soccer now enjoys. 

...

Bottom line? The NASL's 17 years of operation laid the foundation that MLS was built upon... and provided MLS with a blueprint of what not to do in some cases. Without the original North American Soccer League having existed, there is no way that Major League Soccer is operating at the level it is today. None.

 

 

 

[upperV03]

Another small little hint by Merritt Paulson on the Timbers’ new primaries for next season:

Based on everything he’s said, I’m guessing the new kit will be an updated version of the 2014/15 retro thirds, which are the best (IMO) and easily most popular kits they’ve had:

By updated I mean that the new kit will almost surely have the standard dark green color rather than the darker pine green that those third kits had, the modern Alaska Airlines logo, and probably the primary crest with a white axe rather than gold. I could also see the new kit having a polo collar, but I think it’s more likely that there would just be a solid gold v-neck collar and gold cuffs.

[Brian in Boston]

3 hours ago, Gothamite said:

More absolutist than this?

 

 

Remind me... who was responsible for leading the efforts behind the conceptualization and launch of Major League Soccer? Why was the gentleman in question chosen to undertake said task?

 

Less "absolutist" than a simple statement of fact.

 

[VancouverFan69]

On 12/2/2020 at 3:38 PM, Brian in Boston said:

 

Just out of curiosity, who are you to decide that the Montréal Impact identity "was mierda" that "sucked for about 30 years" to the point that "it's good" that said brand is "finally gone"? Are you a supporter of the club? Do you attend its matches on a regular basis? Do you live and die with the team? If not, shouldn't it be left to the actual supporters of the club to determine whether or not the identity that's graced the team for 27 seasons across a variety of competitions is worthy of being preserved? 

Your "get with the rest of the world's traditions" and "not using the North American naming conventions" comments earlier in this thread seem to bespeak an attitude that you're of the mind that much of the history of the sport of soccer in the United States and Canada is disposable. That it can't possibly measure up to the traditions and conventions of the sport elsewhere around the globe. Therefore, many aspects of U.S. and Canadian soccer culture - certainly its branding - should be jettisoned in favor of simply aping the more "authentic" traditions of European or South American soccer culture. After a certain point, it all seems to come off as... pandering. It's as though we're so desperate to be accepted as part of "The Beautiful Game" clique, we should be willing to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater and fashion our top domestic league into a carbon copy - right down to the branding aesthetics - of the various European club competitions. 

So, in the case of dumping the Impact brand, what should it be? Obviously, a Ligue 1 club should be copied, oui? Mais lequel? Montréal Saint-Laurent? MOSC (Montréal Olympique Sporting Club)? Olympique de Montréal? Olympique Montréalais? Stade Montréal?



Look, soccer is an international phenomena... "the world's game"... global in scope. Guess what? The United States and Canada exist on the globe in question. Therefore, the history of the sport in said countries - up to and including team branding - is part and parcel of the Beautiful Game's authentic traditions and conventions.

Don't get me wrong. You're certainly welcome to your personal opinions, including your thoughts regarding the Montreal Impact club's brand. Opinions are the lifeblood of a community such as this one. That said, there are folks in this community who seem to be of the mind that the only way for professional soccer in the United States and Canada to establish its bona fides on the global stage is to mimic foreign domestic competitions right down to the club names and badges... even when it means casting aside identities that have existed for decades.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you can't build authentic soccer tradition in the U.S. and Canada by abandoning the history that's already been established.

 

Very, very well said. Initially, I wasn't big on the Impact name. I actually preferred the old NASL Montreal name, the Montreal Manic. The Manic are named after a river in the Province of Quebec. However, through time and the beautiful French blue and black verticals, the Impact name grew on me. No different than Manchester United. The Impact with its colour scheme, crest and USL championship success started to become their own entity. I absolutely hate the dismissal of the great things of the NASL and North American soccer by today's North American soccer fans due to their strong bias towards the English Premiership and other European leagues. No official team names is not a soccer/European football thing. It's a European sports thing. Not that it's wrong. It's a European sports tradition. However, we have our sports traditions here in North America, no matter what the sport. Our traditions need to be respected too.

 

If it weren't for the NASL and its legacy, MLS would not exist today. 

[BC985]

Watching Columbus in black and New England in white is making me irrationally angry.

[Digby]

Columbus fans never shut up about their banana kit and throw a fit if anyone else dares to wear yellow, yet they needlessly wear black at home half the time anyway.

[BC985]

22 minutes ago, Digby said:

Columbus fans never shut up about their banana kit and throw a fit if anyone else dares to wear yellow, yet they needlessly wear black at home half the time anyway.

I don’t know what the issue is, but this is where MLS should step in and tell the clubs to wear their primary kits if only to promote their clubs’ brand.

[njdevs7]

This Crew vs Revs game should be yellow vs navy/red. Instead it is black v white lol

[MJWalker45]

3 hours ago, BC985 said:

I don’t know what the issue is, but this is where MLS should step in and tell the clubs to wear their primary kits if only to promote their clubs’ brand.

Is it Columbus though or does MLS  actually control how many times each kit is worn? I also think the league needs to have 3rd kits if they feel there are too many issues with kit clashing. Uniform sales shouldn't be used as the reason they don't happen. 

[PaleVermilion81]

10 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Is it Columbus though or does MLS  actually control how many times each kit is worn? I also think the league needs to have 3rd kits if they feel there are too many issues with kit clashing. Uniform sales shouldn't be used as the reason they don't happen. 

 

Pretty sure the no 3rd kit thing is the call by Adidas, not MLS.

[MJWalker45]

37 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Is it Columbus though or does MLS  actually control how many times each kit is worn? I also think the league needs to have 3rd kits if they feel there are too many issues with kit clashing. Uniform sales shouldn't be used as the reason they don't happen. 

Yup. It's Adidas's justification for not providing them.

[Digby]

46 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Is it Columbus though or does MLS  actually control how many times each kit is worn? I also think the league needs to have 3rd kits if they feel there are too many issues with kit clashing. Uniform sales shouldn't be used as the reason they don't happen. 

 

believe what I've read is that it's up to teams and they're meant to get a waiver for wearing away kits at home. Certainly has felt to me like some teams go away-at-home pretty often (Columbus and SKC come to mind) and others rarely or never do (Galaxy?). Watching the Revs more closely, seems they've done it once or twice in recent years in seasons where the away kit is the new one, but not when the home kit is the new one.