Jump to content

2012-13 soccer kits


Saintsfan

Recommended Posts

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

The fact that they're wearing gold the year after winning the UCL is merely a coincidence. If they replaced the gold with white and used the proper crest, it wouldn't look half bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

The fact that they're wearing gold the year after winning the UCL is merely a coincidence. If they replaced the gold with white and used the proper crest, it wouldn't look half bad.

Yeah it's not a champions league celebration, it's more of a champions league coincidence.

With that being said I think they look pretty good although their pl numbers are white no? If so I don't like that aspect.

Get a Dempsey of you're American!!

Eh. If this was released after the Champions League rather than before, none of this would be relevant. Yeah, this would be weird IF they didn't win, but they DID win, and because of that it works, coincidence or not. Hindsight is 20/20. Probably would have been a little weird if the Rams switched to metallic gold after losing the Super Bowl, but (coincidentally) they won the Super Bowl right before the switch, and it suddenly made a lot more sense. The fact that it was more or less a coincidence doesn't take anything away from it, symbolically.

Plus royal blue and gold is one of the most grossly underutilized color combinations in sports.

I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry

[The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

The fact that they're wearing gold the year after winning the UCL is merely a coincidence. If they replaced the gold with white and used the proper crest, it wouldn't look half bad.

Yeah it's not a champions league celebration, it's more of a champions league coincidence.

With that being said I think they look pretty good although their pl numbers are white no? If so I don't like that aspect.

Get a Dempsey of you're American!!

Eh. If this was released after the Champions League rather than before, none of this would be relevant. Yeah, this would be weird IF they didn't win, but they DID win, and because of that it works, coincidence or not. Hindsight is 20/20. Probably would have been a little weird if the Rams switched to metallic gold after losing the Super Bowl, but (coincidentally) they won the Super Bowl right before the switch, and it suddenly made a lot more sense. The fact that it was more or less a coincidence doesn't take anything away from it, symbolically.

Plus royal blue and gold is one of the most grossly underutilized color combinations in sports.

Except for the critical fact that that isn't why they did it or said they did it. They always said it was related to the Olympics (which of course were over before the BPL season even started.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

I find that the more I look a Chelsea's home kit, the more I despise it. The gold is stupid and unnecessary. MASSIVE downgrade from last year's kit, IMO.

How is it unnecessary? Without it it would be a plain blue t-shirt. I don't think it's stupid, either. It's a very fitting celebration of their Champions League title, much like the 'World Champions' jerseys that baseball teams used to wear.

I like it now that they're wearing gold after winning the Champions League (FA Cup, too) but when they came out with this design they were still longshots to win the CL. They were just jumping onto the monochrome crest bandwagon and lucked into making it gold the year they won the CL. And most of the clubs that are going with monochrome crests are doing so on their clash jerseys where their normal crest colors might look out of place on a different color. There wasn't any reason for Chelsea to use a gold crest on their home shirt.

The fact that they're wearing gold the year after winning the UCL is merely a coincidence. If they replaced the gold with white and used the proper crest, it wouldn't look half bad.

Yeah it's not a champions league celebration, it's more of a champions league coincidence.

With that being said I think they look pretty good although their pl numbers are white no? If so I don't like that aspect.

Get a Dempsey of you're American!!

Eh. If this was released after the Champions League rather than before, none of this would be relevant. Yeah, this would be weird IF they didn't win, but they DID win, and because of that it works, coincidence or not. Hindsight is 20/20. Probably would have been a little weird if the Rams switched to metallic gold after losing the Super Bowl, but (coincidentally) they won the Super Bowl right before the switch, and it suddenly made a lot more sense. The fact that it was more or less a coincidence doesn't take anything away from it, symbolically.

Plus royal blue and gold is one of the most grossly underutilized color combinations in sports.

Except for the critical fact that that isn't why they did it or said they did it. They always said it was related to the Olympics (which of course were over before the BPL season even started.)

Well, no one said that they did gold for the Olympics. :P Either way, it looks good, and it makes sense given their successful season. Win-win. There are much bigger uniform battles that need to be fought, no matter what your tastes are.

I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry

[The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually looks better than I'd feared.

394230_10151082649893505_589923300_n.jpg

Wow. That is stunning. What a great jersey.

Mighty Ducks of Anaheim (CHL - 2018 Orr Cup Champions) Chicago Rivermen (UBA/WBL - 2014, 2015, 2017 Intercontinental Cup Champions)

King's Own Hexham FC (BIP - 2022 Saint's Cup Champions) Portland Explorers (EFL - Elite Bowl XIX Champions) Real San Diego (UPL) Red Bull Seattle (ULL - 2018, 2019, 2020 Gait Cup Champions) Vancouver Huskies (CL)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, not sure why every got so worried about it based on the mockups. Halves on a shirt certainly isn't anything new and they picked a pretty good color combo to do it with. I'm really happy with what Under Armour did, at least for the first season.

And Brad Fridel manages to look like he should be the bald villian from some movie in every one of the kit release photos.

Wordmark_zpsaxgeaoqy.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except for the critical fact that that isn't why they did it or said they did it. They always said it was related to the Olympics (which of course were over before the BPL season even started.)

Well, no one said that they did gold for the Olympics. :P Either way, it looks good, and it makes sense given their successful season. Win-win. There are much bigger uniform battles that need to be fought, no matter what your tastes are.

Well they didn't use the word "Olympics", but the adidas press release said gold was to celebrate "the year of sport and celebration in the capital in 2012."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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