Jump to content

MLS Kits 2022


VampyrRabbitDesign
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 12/11/2021 at 9:18 AM, DiePerske said:

Hoping the Galaxy goes back to a blue and gold sash, and goes away from the grey like the now old one.

 

Agreed, but I've seen a couple people on Twitter claim that next season's kit "apparently" won't feature a sash (neither said where they had received this information).

 

Also, there was post on the LA Galaxy subreddit about a month ago in which users discussed a private meeting the Galaxy held in Culver City with a select group of invited supporters. At least one fan received a pre-meeting survey about "soccer in the Brentwood area," though multiple attendants said that club representatives pushed back on any talk of relocating out of the South Bay region. The main topic of conversation appears to have been a brand refresh, with a few commenters mentioning the addition of stars above the logo as being one of the big ideas presented by the team. Certainly sounds like the Galaxy's marketing department has realized that it needs to do something to maintain relevancy after the past few years of LAFC being the bright, shiny object in town.

 

Unfortunately, instead of entertaining the obvious solution of moving to a more centrally-located part of Los Angeles, the Galaxy seem to have settled on updating their logo as their response to LAFC's erosion of the Galaxy fanbase and capture of new fans who were indifferent to the Galaxy's (pretty innovative and important) first 22 years of existence. Absent a new stadium in West LA (where there is no space) or L.A. Live in downtown (where AEG could have already built a new Galaxy stadium in the cancelled Farmers Field space if they wanted to), I'm not really sure what the Galaxy could do off the field to keep up with LAFC's successfully-astroturfed, hipstery brand. Maybe move into SoFi Stadium in Inglewood and limit capacity to 35,000? Or, keep the LA name but move to a waterfront stadium in Long Beach? I guess if AEG is committed to staying in Carson then doing more stuff like last season's teal-and-black Community Kit and less stuff like getting rid of the home kit's iconic sash would be a start.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SuperNerdToTheRescue said:

The main topic of conversation appears to have been a brand refresh, with a few commenters mentioning the addition of stars above the logo as being one of the big ideas presented by the team. 

 

Isn't this somewhat decided by the league? Granted it's one gold star for them, but it's almost like double dipping on titles if they need to add their current titles in a new logo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The harsh filtering means I can't tell if this is a real kit or an edited photo, but official communication from the Revolution seems to suggest they're using the roundel/team name logo on their jerseys. And probably recolored on the away. Lame! 

 

nkrywn7ziwpctebvhoxq.jpg 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2021 at 3:03 AM, SuperNerdToTheRescue said:

Also, there was post on the LA Galaxy subreddit about a month ago in which users discussed a private meeting the Galaxy held in Culver City with a select group of invited supporters. At least one fan received a pre-meeting survey about "soccer in the Brentwood area," though multiple attendants said that club representatives pushed back on any talk of relocating out of the South Bay region. The main topic of conversation appears to have been a brand refresh, with a few commenters mentioning the addition of stars above the logo as being one of the big ideas presented by the team. Certainly sounds like the Galaxy's marketing department has realized that it needs to do something to maintain relevancy after the past few years of LAFC being the bright, shiny object in town.

 

Unfortunately, instead of entertaining the obvious solution of moving to a more centrally-located part of Los Angeles, the Galaxy seem to have settled on updating their logo as their response to LAFC's erosion of the Galaxy fanbase and capture of new fans who were indifferent to the Galaxy's (pretty innovative and important) first 22 years of existence. Absent a new stadium in West LA (where there is no space) or L.A. Live in downtown (where AEG could have already built a new Galaxy stadium in the cancelled Farmers Field space if they wanted to), I'm not really sure what the Galaxy could do off the field to keep up with LAFC's successfully-astroturfed, hipstery brand. Maybe move into SoFi Stadium in Inglewood and limit capacity to 35,000? Or, keep the LA name but move to a waterfront stadium in Long Beach? I guess if AEG is committed to staying in Carson then doing more stuff like last season's teal-and-black Community Kit and less stuff like getting rid of the home kit's iconic sash would be a start.


The Galaxy’s main problem is despite being the leagues premier club and its most famous club (especially to the rest of the world), they have failed to capture the city’s most passionate and fervent fans because they have an incredibly boring (and stale) brand/fan base which is coupled with an increasingly outdated stadium and poor stadium experience. 
 

How do they fix that? I do like the suggestions you have, but it seems AEG doesn’t understand that. 
 

If they do insist on staying in Carson (which was and always has been a terrible location for a professional team), that stadium needs upgrading. Badly. It’s not as poor as the Coliseum was, but since that’s being renovated and no longer a tenant of a professional team, their stadium is by far the worst to host a professional team in the entire city. 
 

If someone knew nothing about the history of soccer in LA, nor the teams who play here, based purely on LAFC’s stadium location and the Galaxy’s, you’d assume that LAFC was actually the premier legacy club of the two. 
 

A branding/crest update (they shouldn’t change their name at all) isn’t a terrible idea, but that feels like the equivalent of putting a bandaid over a single hole in a sinking ship. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rockstar Matt said:

If someone knew nothing about the history of soccer in LA, nor the teams who play here, based purely on LAFC’s stadium location and the Galaxy’s, you’d assume that LAFC was actually the premier legacy club of the two. 

 

Which is why so many newcomer know-nothings root for LAFC! 😉 Kidding aside, I think this is the first time I've ever (mostly) agreed with an LAFC fan. AEG choosing to further entrench the Galaxy in Carson will look terrible in 20 years when the Galaxy are the '80s Rams to LAFC's '80s Raiders, with LAFC being the trendy team that plays in an accessible location while the Galaxy are the uncool others who might as well be Long Beach or Orange County's team. 

 

I understand that the Sports Arena site LAFC managed to snag wasn't available to AEG when it was looking for places to build the Galaxy a soccer-specific stadium in the early '00s, and that downtown arenas weren't yet all the rage in MLS back then, but it's a different era now. On the other hand, AEG likes having its teams in AEG-owned locations and the taxpayers of LA will (correctly) never pay for a new stadium again, so the Galaxy are probably stuck in the South Bay. Even if AEG tried to annex the Farmers Field site into L.A. Live by moving the Galaxy there, I could see the city council saying "Sorry, but we already have a new soccer stadium near downtown. Why don't you guys move in with LAFC instead?" (I'm being told that wouldn't be ironic because LAFC and Chivas USA are completely different things?) 

 

3 hours ago, Rockstar Matt said:

their stadium is by far the worst to host a professional team in the entire city.

 

Aha! You're an LAFC fan but you just admitted that Carson is in LA! I have you now!

 

3 hours ago, Rockstar Matt said:

A branding/crest update (they shouldn’t change their name at all) isn’t a terrible idea, but that feels like the equivalent of putting a bandaid over a single hole in a sinking ship. 

 

You snobs already took FC so we'd only be able to be LA United anyways 😝. To your point about the name, my head canon has always been that Nike named LA's team the Galaxy because the league wanted to have a premier, star-studded team in a city that made so many contributions to the aerospace industry. I know Nike just wanted to emphasize how there's a "galaxy" of celebrities in LA, but I'd much rather see the stars play soccer (the sport 🇬🇧 Los Angeles Football Club 🇬🇧 plays) for the Galaxy with the branding reflecting a space theme. Emphasize the unique shape of the quasar! Sneak five stars into an updated crest by making them space stars instead of championship stars! The potential bandaid solutions are endless!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean a pretty significant issue is that, since Arena left, the Galaxy are in their most sustained run of relatively bad finishes in their existence, no? Despite the Zlatan, Chicharito, etc. signings and everything. And bad timing for that to happen while LAFC showed up with a "cool" brand, better stadium and mostly-excellent results. I don't really have a sense of what the core LA Galaxy fan is now, and yeah, they've probably lost the downtown creative $4500/month-for-a-studio-loft crowd, which is too bad, but I got the sense their attendances had stayed pretty high for MLS even after LAFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SuperNerdToTheRescue said:

 

Which is why so many newcomer know-nothings root for LAFC! 😉 Kidding aside, I think this is the first time I've ever (mostly) agreed with an LAFC fan. AEG choosing to further entrench the Galaxy in Carson will look terrible in 20 years when the Galaxy are the '80s Rams to LAFC's '80s Raiders, with LAFC being the trendy team that plays in an accessible location while the Galaxy are the uncool others who might as well be Long Beach or Orange County's team. 

 

 

It's very well on its way to becoming that. Even to this day, I'd argue the Raiders are about as popular in LA as the Rams if not more so. It's kind of wild that the Galaxy were among the first clubs in the country to truly get people to care about domestic soccer, especially in LA when they built their soccer-specific stadium which really helped them gain some legitimacy in the city (along with signing Beckham), but that decision in the long run will be their limiting factor in growing their fanbase. The fact that LAFC was able to come in and gain supporters in numbers that nearly rival the Galaxy's in just a few years should never have happened.   

 

Quote

I understand that the Sports Arena site LAFC managed to snag wasn't available to AEG when it was looking for places to build the Galaxy a soccer-specific stadium in the early '00s, and that downtown arenas weren't yet all the rage in MLS back then, but it's a different era now. On the other hand, AEG likes having its teams in AEG-owned locations and the taxpayers of LA will (correctly) never pay for a new stadium again, so the Galaxy are probably stuck in the South Bay. Even if AEG tried to annex the Farmers Field site into L.A. Live by moving the Galaxy there, I could see the city council saying "Sorry, but we already have a new soccer stadium near downtown. Why don't you guys move in with LAFC instead?" (I'm being told that wouldn't be ironic because LAFC and Chivas USA are completely different things?) 

 

The Galaxy are definitely stuck in the South Bay for the time being, which is why I think a stadium renovation is needed. Modernize it, update it to the current standards. Bring the stands closer to the pitch. Give your supporters a standing section. Just got to get rid of that late 90's/early 2000's AYSO feel the stadium currently has. LAFC's stadium experience is still the best in the city (although I bet SoFi is really nice too. Haven't been to a game there yet) and encapsulates what many of us desperately wanted for a soccer club in the US. 

 

Quote

Aha! You're an LAFC fan but you just admitted that Carson is in LA! I have you now!

 

We all know LA is just a conglomerate of small cities that we really just treat as neighborhoods. It's just fun to tease y'all.

 

Quote

You snobs already took FC so we'd only be able to be LA United anyways 😝. To your point about the name, my head canon has always been that Nike named LA's team the Galaxy because the league wanted to have a premier, star-studded team in a city that made so many contributions to the aerospace industry. I know Nike just wanted to emphasize how there's a "galaxy" of celebrities in LA, but I'd much rather see the stars play soccer (the sport 🇬🇧 Los Angeles Football Club 🇬🇧 plays) for the Galaxy with the branding reflecting a space theme. Emphasize the unique shape of the quasar! Sneak five stars into an updated crest by making them space stars instead of championship stars! The potential bandaid solutions are endless!

 

But would those updates help gain new supporters? Or would they simply just be popular with the fans you already have.

 

For me, what I'd do in I was in charge of the Galaxy, to maintain relevance and significance as LAFC continues to get more and more popular would be to build a new outstanding stadium in a better location (or renovate your current one), slightly update the crest (but  keep the name; that brand is still very strong around the world), start signing the Beckhams of the world again (the Galaxy would still be a massive draw if they were still winning with stars) and compete for titles again.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Rockstar Matt said:

Give your supporters a standing section.

 

I literally just stood in the standing section at that stadium for the USMNT game six hours ago.  I'm not a Galaxy fan (MNUFC here), but I had to roll my eyes at the incredibly biased description you gave of the stadium in Carson.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, -kj said:

 

I literally just stood in the standing section at that stadium for the USMNT game six hours ago.  I'm not a Galaxy fan (MNUFC here), but I had to roll my eyes at the incredibly biased description you gave of the stadium in Carson.


If they now have a standing section, that’s a recent addition clearly in response to standing sections being created around the league. 
 

But as a born and raised Angelino, go watch a game in any other stadium in LA (hell even in Anaheim too) then compare it to the Dignity Health Sports Park experience. Is it the worst place to see a game? Absolutely not. However after going to games in every other stadium in LA (SoFi withstanding) and especially the Banc, the Carson stadium is clearly on a tier below the rest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Rockstar Matt said:


If they now have a standing section, that’s a recent addition clearly in response to standing sections being created around the league. 
 

But as a born and raised Angelino, go watch a game in any other stadium in LA (hell even in Anaheim too) then compare it to the Dignity Health Sports Park experience. Is it the worst place to see a game? Absolutely not. However after going to games in every other stadium in LA (SoFi withstanding) and especially the Banc, the Carson stadium is clearly on a tier below the rest. 

Seems like the Chargers and the NFL (as they would have had to approve it) were alright with it as a temporary stadium. They could have gone with the Rose Bowl or Colesium but they didn't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2021 at 7:10 PM, Digby said:

The harsh filtering means I can't tell if this is a real kit or an edited photo, but official communication from the Revolution seems to suggest they're using the roundel/team name logo on their jerseys. And probably recolored on the away. Lame! 

 

nkrywn7ziwpctebvhoxq.jpg 

This is such a disappointment if true. The slash R and the bunting would make the perfect stand along kit crest. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Galaxy are currently in a rough patch compared to their past successes. They need to fix the on-field product before anything else should happen.

A brand refresh will be tough for the Galaxy to ditch their Nike-created name and Beckham era crest since there is much history behind it. Also, they missed an opportunity to claim LA City or Angel City as their new name as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed that returning to consistent contending squads should be priorities 1-3 for Galaxy. But beyond that, I think refresh (and not rebrand or overhaul) is the right way to go ... Keep the name and colors, just make the logo more modern and serious, and ideally incorporate the five stars. Something a la Brazil's federation logo seems right for the moodboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BryanSmalls said:

A brand refresh will be tough for the Galaxy to ditch their Nike-created name and Beckham era crest since there is much history behind it. Also, they missed an opportunity to claim LA City or Angel City as their new name as well. 

Both of those names would have been considered massive downgrades from Galaxy, which is one of the best names of any of the OG MLS teams. I know that the team now play on the opposite side of LA to Hollywood and the Griffith Observatory, but getting rid of that name would be a huge mistake.

It shouldn't be that difficult for a brand refresh. Keep the name, just bring the logo up to date.

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.