Houston Dynamo get shirt sponsor

[RollWolfpack]

Apparently this is what the jersey will look like.

[Camden Crazy]

Good to see another team add a sponsor. The more things MLS does to emulate European leagues, the better. Get rid of the stupid names that are Americanized (Rapids, Galaxy, Earthquakes, Wizards, Crew, Fire, and Revs all need to change to European style names). Get sponsors on all of the uniforms. Build SSS's that look like European stadiums. Switch to a single league table. Combine with the USL-1 and USL-2 to form a relegation system. Get involved in the CONCACAF version of Champion's League (which they might already be doing). Do whatever it takes to be like the Euro leagues is my opinion.

[MJWalker45]

MLS already competes in the CONCACAF Champions League. USL still has aspirations of being the upper tier league in North America so I don't see the two leagues getting together anytime soon. I think San Jose is the only team that has a soccer specific stadium in the works at the moment.

[dumbartonbass]

I am a fan of the whole notion of corporate sponsors on jerseys. However, I do have a gripe about the Amigo Energy logo; I just feel that it's too clunky as compared to other corporate MLS sponsors. I rather like the jersey designs of Toronto FC (BMO), Real Salt Lake (Xango), and Los Angeles (Herbalife). All of them look nice and tidy on the front. The sombrero outline adds too much.

[Sodboy13]

Good to see another team add a sponsor. The more things MLS does to emulate European leagues, the better. Get rid of the stupid names that are Americanized (Rapids, Galaxy, Earthquakes, Wizards, Crew, Fire, and Revs all need to change to European style names). Get sponsors on all of the uniforms. Build SSS's that look like European stadiums. Switch to a single league table. Combine with the USL-1 and USL-2 to form a relegation system. Get involved in the CONCACAF version of Champion's League (which they might already be doing). Do whatever it takes to be like the Euro leagues is my opinion.

"San Jose Earthquakes" has about 25 years of history and devout fan support behind it.

"Chicago Fire" is a brilliant, classic name which has been embraced by fans, and has a top-tier identity.

The others, while definitely products of the mid-'90s, have all established roots with their fandom of more than a decade, which is something few other professional soccer teams in the U.S. can claim.

With all that in front of you, you're gonna tell me FC City Name is still a better option because, gee golly, it sounds like them there high-falootin' Euro leagues? Spare me.

[Camden Crazy]

MLS already competes in the CONCACAF Champions League. USL still has aspirations of being the upper tier league in North America so I don't see the two leagues getting together anytime soon. I think San Jose is the only team that has a soccer specific stadium in the works at the moment.

D.C. United and Real Salt Lake have stadiums in the works, but they're not getting much backing.

"San Jose Earthquakes" has about 25 years of history and devout fan support behind it.

"Chicago Fire" is a brilliant, classic name which has been embraced by fans, and has a top-tier identity.

The others, while definitely products of the mid-'90s, have all established roots with their fandom of more than a decade, which is something few other professional soccer teams in the U.S. can claim.

With all that in front of you, you're gonna tell me FC City Name is still a better option because, gee golly, it sounds like them there high-falootin' Euro leagues? Spare me.

Tradition, brilliance, or not, they're still tacky names for a soccer team. Having Americanized names like that, which separates us from Euro leagues, makes us stick out and look like a complete joke. Who are we to try to do soccer our own way when it's 10 million times more successful over there? We should do everything they do, team names included. Soccer teams weren't meant to have nicknames like that. Stuff like "Hoops" for FC Dallas, "Goats" for Chivas is fine, nearly all English teams do that, but don't use a nickname as part of the official team brand. It's a joke.

[The Nation]

In soccer, for those who don't know, its either a sponsor on the front of the jersey, or nothing i.e. barcelona of old......having the team name on the front is NOT soccer!! very redundant and ugly

[ManCalledAmp]

Soccer teams weren't meant to have nicknames like that. Stuff like "Hoops" for FC Dallas, "Goats" for Chivas is fine, nearly all English teams do that, but don't use a nickname as part of the official team brand. It's a joke.

Just for the sake of argument, I present Bolton Wanderers, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Queen's Park Rangers, and Doncaster Rovers, just to name a few.

Wolves was named thusly for a merger with "The Wanderers," but it is still a nick in/part of the official name.

Ditto QPR, St. Jude's + Christchurch Rangers, but still...____ "Rangers."

However, I find no explanation for Bolton's or Donny's ellongated nomenclature.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, nor am I claiming to be a soccer expert. On the contrary, it may be something so common-knowledge that a Yank like me that prefers American rules football to soccer-football just doesn't know.

But it's been bugging me how all the Euro teams don't use nicknames in their official names, but some seem to anyway like those above.

However, my assumption is that it's now just another suffix/prefix, like United, City/Town/County, Athletic, Inter[national], etc.

All historical info gleaned meticulously from Wikipedia...so it in no way is gospel. If I'm wrong...please, rip away.

[ManCalledAmp]

Furthermore, I like the Euro movement in MLS, to a point.

FC Dallas was an improvement, as was the Colorado rebrand. The Gals got it half-and-half in LA, but they are learning. RSL looks decent, and New England is perfectly fine (nick is great, and logo is awesome). I won't break down every team, but some are fine, and some just a step or two off. RBNY needs a lot of work...especially those atrocious kits. They look like practice gear fused with billboards, IMO.

In other words, don't erase the solid identities of some of the clubs doing it right just because their names "stand out" as "too American"...(like we don't know where "Galatsaray," "F. Marinos," "JEF United Chiba," or anything with VfL/VfB/Bayern/a bunch of numbers (1. FC Nürnberg?) are from?) I actually think that keeping some American flare is good. That way, as we gain prominence internationally, we don't sound like a team from Anytown, EU.

Okay, to get back on the point I was wanting to make, I like the fact that we're getting jersey sponsors in MLS. However, though I realize these are baby steps, we really need to get better sponsors on these jerseys before it will make much of an impact. I was hoping with Becks that people would be more eager to pour in the money, but I guess the ratings just aren't there yet.

The team in the biggest market in the US...wears the logo of the energy drink that owns the team.

The team with the most watched and wanted man in soccer for whatever reason picked a potentially less-than-reputable herbal supplement provider (with a cannabis-looking logo) over (from what I gather) Citibank, for some reason.

RSL wears the name of some health juice company with a "multilevel marketing structure;" the logo is actually just a plain block all caps wordmark (if you can call it that), and the company has been warned of false or unsubstantiated claims by the FDA.

Chivas sports a Mexican paint company logo. (I guess that one can slip, though Bimbo or Corona would have been higher profile)

TFC has BMO, a major bank and their stadium sponsor on theirs; no problems here, though any proud and well-known Canadian brand would do. (LeBatt Blue, anyone?)

And Dynamo opts for a local energy company. Hmm.

To stem the more elaborate rambles of a marketing nut, the sponsors need more than local appeal (or in RBNY's case, sponsor appeal--why put your logo on a team named after you when you can sell the space for money?). Citi and other banks/lenders/credit card companies, Pepsi/Coke and sub-brands (like Sierra Mist), automakers, and sports's best friend, beer. Once the numbers are there, MLS teams will have less obscure/shady sponsors, and more sponsors like we see in NASCAR.

[JQK]

This whole sponsor thing is one reason soccer will never take off in America.

Americans like their sports on the field clean. They see enough advertising in everyday life, they'd like to keep it off their teams uniforms. It sounds silly, but when ads go on uniforms, people check out...

Unless you're in the south... and then, only on cars is advertising ok. :-P

[KJTALBOT]

This whole sponsor thing is one reason soccer will never take off in America.

Americans like their sports on the field clean. They see enough advertising in everyday life, they'd like to keep it off their teams uniforms. It sounds silly, but when ads go on uniforms, people check out...

Exactly.

[Gothamite]

Soccer teams weren't meant to have nicknames like that. Stuff like "Hoops" for FC Dallas, "Goats" for Chivas is fine, nearly all English teams do that, but don't use a nickname as part of the official team brand. It's a joke.

Just for the sake of argument, I present Bolton Wanderers, Wolverhampton Wanderers, Queen's Park Rangers, and Doncaster Rovers, just to name a few.

Wolves was named thusly for a merger with "The Wanderers," but it is still a nick in/part of the official name.

Ditto QPR, St. Jude's + Christchurch Rangers, but still...____ "Rangers."

"Wanderers" is not the nickname for either Bolton (the Trotters) or Wolverhampton (the Wolves). Similarly, QPR is "the Hoops". "Wanderers" is part of the team name. It just sounds like a nickname to American ears, the way we think "United" is some sort of nickname.

[Gothamite]

Americans like their sports on the field clean. They see enough advertising in everyday life, they'd like to keep it off their teams uniforms. It sounds silly, but when ads go on uniforms, people check out...

Do you have any evidence at all to support this claim?

[Jamikel]

Who are we to try to do soccer our own way when it's 10 million times more successful over there? We should do everything they do, team names included. Soccer teams weren't meant to have nicknames like that.

In the rest of the world, football is ten million times more successful than soccer is in the United States because they represent two different things, which is why I like to call them by different names. Football is a sport of the people, something kids play in the street for fun. Soccer, on the other hand, is seen by the greater public as a sport of suburban yuppies that kids only play after being shuttled to a park in their families' minivans. Until that changes, no amount of nomenclature in the world is going to make a difference.

Edit: But despite its popular image, soccer fans in the US are quite a mishmash of different social groups, and it only seems fitting that our major soccer league reflects that in the names of its teams.

[Mingjai]

This whole sponsor thing is one reason soccer will never take off in America.

Americans like their sports on the field clean. They see enough advertising in everyday life, they'd like to keep it off their teams uniforms. It sounds silly, but when ads go on uniforms, people check out...

Unless you're in the south... and then, only on cars is advertising ok. :-P

You really think that someone open-minded enough to give soccer a chance will all of the sudden change the channel when he sees sponsors' logos on jerseys? Anyone lists sponsors' logos as a reason for not watching soccer was never going to watch it in the first place.

I'm of the already-stated view that sponsors' logos are necessary to make up for the loss of revenue from in-game television ads. It would be nice to see the MLS get some higher-profile jersey sponsors. It would also interesting to have corporations based in the teams' regions as the sponsors because both the team and the sponsor represent the region. These two propositions aren't mutually exclusive.

[gosioux76]

This whole sponsor thing is one reason soccer will never take off in America.

Americans like their sports on the field clean. They see enough advertising in everyday life, they'd like to keep it off their teams uniforms. It sounds silly, but when ads go on uniforms, people check out...

Unless you're in the south... and then, only on cars is advertising ok. :-P

I think you're assuming a lot here. For starters, I'm of the belief that MLS has shifted its focus away from trying to convert American sports fans -- which is useless (just listen to Jim Rome's radio show) -- and are instead trying to lure true soccer fans living in America who would rather spend their time watching the Mexican, South American or European leagues.

That's why we're seeing the Europeanizing of franchise names and the inclusion of sponsor logos on the jerseys. It's part of the world football culture, to which fans of more popular leagues have become accustomed.

And honestly, do you really think the average fan of, say, the Pittsburgh Steelers would really "check out" if they happened to put a Heinz ad on a jersey? That's ridiculous.

[Titanole]

This whole sponsor thing is one reason soccer will never take off in America.

Americans like their sports on the field clean. They see enough advertising in everyday life, they'd like to keep it off their teams uniforms. It sounds silly, but when ads go on uniforms, people check out...

Umm yeah, you got one thing right. It sounds silly. It's the sponsor on the shirt that is the one reason? So I guess MLS has taken off already since for ten years there were no shirt sponsors? And I would question what "taking off" is anyway. If MLS averaged between 15-20K attendance, I'd say they have become established. The sports universe in this country is crowded enough. If soccer can fall in next behind the big three, that would be about as good as it can get.

And I assume you mean "clean" in terms of uniforms. American sports are far from clean. (Barry Bonds, NBA ref scandal, etc.) Besides, uniforms aren't all that clean. They aren't corporate sponsors, but a big ol' Nike swoosh, Adidas logo or whatever other manufacturer's mark is prominently displayed on every uniform.

Some of you need to get over it. The NFL, MLB and NBA do not need the extra injection of income. MLS does. I wouldn't be surprised if the NHL started featuring uniform sponsors pretty soon given their financial situation.

[-Helix-]

Anyone who complains about sponsor logos on soccer uniforms is obviously not a soccer fan.

Sponsors have been part of soccer for a long long time....this is NOTHING new.

Doesn't mean it looks good.

I'm a soccer fan, but I hate the fact that my favorite team's kit has a giant ad plastered on the front of it. Thus why I have not and probably will never buy one of their uniforms.

If only FC Barca was my favorite team...

[Gothamite]

Um, Barca has a giant ad plastered on the front of their shirt as well....

[totc]

Anyone who complains about sponsor logos on soccer uniforms is obviously not a soccer fan.

Sponsors have been part of soccer for a long long time....this is NOTHING new.

It's nothing new, and it still sucks.

And no - I couldn't give a crap about football/soccer, and this is one of the reasons why.

So there.

... actually wouldn't it be "could give a crap" because it implies you're dumping on something?

But, the sponsor on shirts does help make up a bit for the fact that there are no substantial commercial breaks in soccer like football, basketball, baseball and hockey.

At least we haven't gone like Mexico has -- sleeve sponsor, short sponsor, sock sponsor, buttock sponsor, under-the-number sponsor, over-the-number sponsor. Hell, the Jaguares team will sell you a pair of their team socks with the OXXO logo on them! Yeesh!