MLS kits 2023

[Digby]

4 hours ago, aawagner011 said:

Their season opener was equally horrible. I tuned into the highlights and could barely tell them apart.

yikes. I had not seen that. In my head I’d imagine pink would be tonally more different, I guess, even if still not ideal? Surely they could just get some black teamwear shirts printed up in a hurry?

[kylonian]

2 hours ago, Digby said:

yikes. I had not seen that. In my head I’d imagine pink would be tonally more different, I guess, even if still not ideal? Surely they could just get some black teamwear shirts printed up in a hurry?

 

Or else simply use their primaries from last year with their new logo? Unsure on the regulations surrounding this by MLS.

[WBeltz]

Montreals kit issue is I think a valid point for a 3rd jersey. Even if it means you’re carrying over last years home/away kit and labeling it as an alt like several clubs used to do. It would then allow Montreal to wear their black kit with the new logo and dub it as a 3rd. Even if it means you only wear it “x” times a year.

 

also what happened to the rumored 3rds we were getting for Seattle, Austin, LAFC and others? Or did that get dropped?

[upperV03]

Montreal did use their old kits with the new logo in preseason:

You would think they could use them in a match if needed. At the very least they could use the black shorts and/or socks, or even the shorts and socks from their unreleased primary kit to provide some contrast below the waist. That would’ve made a substantial difference last week against Miami.

 

Speaking of old kits/kit elements, Minnesota should’ve worn the light blue shorts and socks from their 2021/22 secondaries last week against Dallas. Portland wore old white socks on a couple of occasions the last two seasons and DC wore 2020/21 red shorts a couple of times last season, so there is recent precedent for that sort of thing. 

[Digby]

7 hours ago, kylonian said:

 

Or else simply use their primaries from last year with their new logo? Unsure on the regulations surrounding this by MLS.

If there’s precedent for this in modern MLS, it’s this same team — I recall them being on a three-year kit change cycle toward the end of their days before the rebrand away from “Impact”. Not sure we ever heard an explanation but I’ve always suspected that team to be such a shoestring operation that I wouldn’t be surprised if someone dropped the ball back then too.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

St Louis looks awesome.

 

"St Louis City" is so :censored:ing stupid though. What a dumbass name.

[MJWalker45]

Glad to see Columbus in all yellow instead of the black kit. Does DC still have red shorts? I think they'd look better than all black.

[tigers]

43 minutes ago, DG_ThenNowForever said:

St Louis looks awesome.

 

"St Louis City" is so :censored:ing stupid though. What a dumbass name.

 

It's even worse when the put City in all capitals.

[Digby]

17 minutes ago, tigers said:

 

It's even worse when the put City in all capitals.

Well, that’s what makes them special and totally not derivative and 10 years late, see. 
 

[tigers]

15 minutes ago, Digby said:

Well, that’s what makes them special and totally not derivative and 10 years late, see. 
 

 

I was expecting a Fleur de Lis Foot reply

[upperV03]

Check out the tights that John McCarthy was wearing yesterday:

 

Seems like Adidas have added the three stripes to them this year since more and more MLS keepers have worn tights instead of/in addition to socks in recent years. I noticed Steve Clark had the same thing yesterday, with red stripes on yellow tights to match the yellow keeper kit colorway (Clark does have the socks on too, they’re just down by his ankles):

[upperV03]

RSL is, to my knowledge, the only club that faithfully posts the kit assignment graphic on their website each week. Here’s the graphic for their home opener on Saturday against Austin:

Two things:

 

1) They are really pushing the new gold kits, having already (needlessly) worn them in their first two road matches and now for the home opener.

 

2) That ref kit has to be a mistake, no way the refs could wear fluorescent yellow with RSL in their gold kits. Gotta think the refs will be in either blue or pink instead. While it’s not ideal having the refs match one of the team’s keeper kits, it happens semi-regularly in MLS.

[TacoCat83]

On 3/4/2023 at 6:42 AM, WBeltz said:

 

 

also what happened to the rumored 3rds we were getting for Seattle, Austin, LAFC and others? Or did that get dropped?

Rumors up here was all that really was. Especially based off how short lived, the Atlanta one was. There has been absolutely no chatter on a Seattle 3rd for years.

[MJWalker45]

20 hours ago, upperV03 said:

2) That ref kit has to be a mistake, no way the refs could wear fluorescent yellow with RSL in their gold kits. Gotta think the refs will be in either blue or pink instead. While it’s not ideal having the refs match one of the team’s keeper kits, it happens semi-regularly in MLS.

Why not have the refs wear blue and make the RSL keeper wear green or black? 

[officeglenn]

16 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

Why not have the refs wear blue and make the RSL keeper wear green or black? 

 

Or just have the ref wear black. It's still in the ref's rotation, and wouldn't clash as badly with Austin as the other options.

[upperV03]

1 hour ago, MJWalker45 said:

Why not have the refs wear blue and make the RSL keeper wear green or black? 

 

The league probably wouldn’t allow the green or black keeper kits to be used against Austin’s primary kits.

 

52 minutes ago, officeglenn said:

 

Or just have the ref wear black. It's still in the ref's rotation, and wouldn't clash as badly with Austin as the other options.

Ehh, Austin’s kit is still pretty black-heavy even with the green shirt back. Not just the shorts and socks, but from the front the shirt still has too much black for a black ref or keeper kit to be worn in the same match.

[upperV03]

Here’s my prediction of this weekend’s kit matchups. Once again, * = confirmed kit choice.

 

*Charlotte (blue/white/blue) vs. Atlanta (stripes/black/red)

 

Vancouver (all-white) vs. Dallas (red/blue/blue)

 

Cincinnati (royal/navy/navy) vs. Seattle (all-green or g/b/g)

 

DC (all-black) vs. Orlando (all-white or w/p/w)

 

NYCFC (all-city blue) vs. Miami (all-black)

 

Philadelphia (all-navy) vs. Chicago (white/light blue/white)

 

Toronto (gray/red/gray) vs. Columbus (all-yellow or y/b/y)

SKC (all-light blue) vs. *LAG (all-teal)

 

Minnesota (all-white) vs. *NYRB (all-red)
 

*Nashville (all-black) vs. *Montreal (all-gray)

 

*RSL (gold/navy/gold) vs. *Austin (stripes/black/black)

 

Portland (all-green) vs. St. Louis (all-pink/red)

*San Jose (all-black) vs. *Colorado (all-light blue)

 

*LAFC (all-black) vs. *New England (white/red/red)

 

[spartacat_12]

Refreshing to see an athlete express some rational criticism about their team's uniform rather than just towing the company line. Still crazy that a team who calls themselves the "Reds" thought wearing charcoal at home & grey/white on the road was a good idea.

[upperV03]

Looks like the league and Apple (sort of, not really) learned their lesson after Week 1’s light pink vs. gray Miami/Montreal matchup:

Ironically I really don’t think there would’ve been an issue with Nashville’s bright yellow, or at least certainly not as much of an issue as Miami’s light pink vs. Montreal’s gray. In any case, this is pretty dumb when Montréal literally wore their old primaries with the new badge in preseason. The home team should not have to accommodate the road team in a case like this. Montreal should have to wear their old kit or go buy some cheap teamwear before making the home team change (although I doubt Nashville minds showcasing their new kit @ home again).

[WBeltz]

The thing that kinda grinds me gears with the new kits is that teams will play in them so frequently you forget that it should be the alternate kit but instead plays out as the new home in some cases