USA Soccer - new hoop kits in action

[andrewharrington]

I still have a hard time believing the USSF told a supplier, "Yeah, we want the numbers, but with a blue dot pattern fill instead of solid blue. We think it will be cool." It's especially odd given that other Nike teams (even Brazil, so it seems) have numbers filled with a dot pattern. Nike obviously designs their own numbers, and I'm willing to bet that every national team doesn't order from the same supplier, or that all the international Nike teams randomly decided in the same year to get numbers filled with dot patterns. The fact that the numbers even exist in a form other than solid navy blue makes it at least partly someone else's fault (other than the USSF).

Nike might have put the numbers on there and all but each National Team has to sign off on them still, and if they don't like it they don't have to have it. This is what I hate about people on those boards constantly ripping Nike a new one, because for every idea and concept, for however good or bad it is, each team or client has to sign off on it, so ultimately its their choice, not Nikes. The Swoosh is simply coming up with new ideas and introducing them in their concepts, but they don't say if it goes on the field or not. Thats the teams choice.

Well, yes, obviously the teams order and apply their own numbers, but part of the blame still must go to the designers of the numbers in this case. Why are we designing numbers that don't work on a very common shirt color (white)?

[Digby]

I'm also curious why other Nike teams with dotted numbers and white shirts, like Poland and Portugal (away), didn't have the same visibility problem.

[Iceman87GT]

I still have a hard time believing the USSF told a supplier, "Yeah, we want the numbers, but with a blue dot pattern fill instead of solid blue. We think it will be cool." It's especially odd given that other Nike teams (even Brazil, so it seems) have numbers filled with a dot pattern. Nike obviously designs their own numbers, and I'm willing to bet that every national team doesn't order from the same supplier, or that all the international Nike teams randomly decided in the same year to get numbers filled with dot patterns. The fact that the numbers even exist in a form other than solid navy blue makes it at least partly someone else's fault (other than the USSF).

Nike might have put the numbers on there and all but each National Team has to sign off on them still, and if they don't like it they don't have to have it. This is what I hate about people on those boards constantly ripping Nike a new one, because for every idea and concept, for however good or bad it is, each team or client has to sign off on it, so ultimately its their choice, not Nikes. The Swoosh is simply coming up with new ideas and introducing them in their concepts, but they don't say if it goes on the field or not. Thats the teams choice.

Well, yes, obviously the teams order and apply their own numbers, but part of the blame still must go to the designers of the numbers in this case. Why are we designing numbers that don't work on a very common shirt color (white)?

Put those same exact numbers on a Blue (or any colored shirt) and you have perfectly good numbers. White numbers go on colored backgrounds, Silver numbers should likewise be placed on colored backgrounds, it's not Nike's fault that the USSF elected to put silver numbers on a white shirt. If you place the blame on Nike for designing numbers that don't work on a white shirt then EVERY COMPANY that has ever designed white numbers needs to be blamed.

I'm also curious why other Nike teams with dotted numbers and white shirts, like Poland and Portugal (away), didn't have the same visibility problem.

Simple, they went for colors, the USSF went with Silver, the numbers used against Brazil were the same as those in the pics you posted except Navy instead of green and red. Just look at the pics you posted of the US kits through the years, the 2012 #s are clearly Silver with Navy dots and a Navy Outline, the ones they wore against Brazil switch the Silver and the navy keeping the navy outline. Poland and Portugal are doing the same thing but instead of silver dots they went with white dots.

[gdu]

I still have a hard time believing the USSF told a supplier, "Yeah, we want the numbers, but with a blue dot pattern fill instead of solid blue. We think it will be cool." It's especially odd given that other Nike teams (even Brazil, so it seems) have numbers filled with a dot pattern. Nike obviously designs their own numbers, and I'm willing to bet that every national team doesn't order from the same supplier, or that all the international Nike teams randomly decided in the same year to get numbers filled with dot patterns. The fact that the numbers even exist in a form other than solid navy blue makes it at least partly someone else's fault (other than the USSF).

Nike might have put the numbers on there and all but each National Team has to sign off on them still, and if they don't like it they don't have to have it. This is what I hate about people on those boards constantly ripping Nike a new one, because for every idea and concept, for however good or bad it is, each team or client has to sign off on it, so ultimately its their choice, not Nikes. The Swoosh is simply coming up with new ideas and introducing them in their concepts, but they don't say if it goes on the field or not. Thats the teams choice.

Well, yes, obviously the teams order and apply their own numbers, but part of the blame still must go to the designers of the numbers in this case. Why are we designing numbers that don't work on a very common shirt color (white)?

Put those same exact numbers on a Blue (or any colored shirt) and you have perfectly good numbers. White numbers go on colored backgrounds, Silver numbers should likewise be placed on colored backgrounds, it's not Nike's fault that the USSF elected to put silver numbers on a white shirt. If you place the blame on Nike for designing numbers that don't work on a white shirt then EVERY COMPANY that has ever designed white numbers needs to be blamed.

I'm also curious why other Nike teams with dotted numbers and white shirts, like Poland and Portugal (away), didn't have the same visibility problem.

Simple, they went for colors, the USSF went with Silver, the numbers used against Brazil were the same as those in the pics you posted except Navy instead of green and red. Just look at the pics you posted of the US kits through the years, the 2012 #s are clearly Silver with Navy dots and a Navy Outline, the ones they wore against Brazil switch the Silver and the navy keeping the navy outline. Poland and Portugal are doing the same thing but instead of silver dots they went with white dots.

Not sure how many times it can be said: the numbers were navy dots. They just appeared silver because there were too few of them.

[BroadSt_Bully]

Design a new badge and it's practically perfect.

[andrewharrington]

I still have a hard time believing the USSF told a supplier, "Yeah, we want the numbers, but with a blue dot pattern fill instead of solid blue. We think it will be cool." It's especially odd given that other Nike teams (even Brazil, so it seems) have numbers filled with a dot pattern. Nike obviously designs their own numbers, and I'm willing to bet that every national team doesn't order from the same supplier, or that all the international Nike teams randomly decided in the same year to get numbers filled with dot patterns. The fact that the numbers even exist in a form other than solid navy blue makes it at least partly someone else's fault (other than the USSF).

Nike might have put the numbers on there and all but each National Team has to sign off on them still, and if they don't like it they don't have to have it. This is what I hate about people on those boards constantly ripping Nike a new one, because for every idea and concept, for however good or bad it is, each team or client has to sign off on it, so ultimately its their choice, not Nikes. The Swoosh is simply coming up with new ideas and introducing them in their concepts, but they don't say if it goes on the field or not. Thats the teams choice.

Well, yes, obviously the teams order and apply their own numbers, but part of the blame still must go to the designers of the numbers in this case. Why are we designing numbers that don't work on a very common shirt color (white)?

Put those same exact numbers on a Blue (or any colored shirt) and you have perfectly good numbers. White numbers go on colored backgrounds, Silver numbers should likewise be placed on colored backgrounds, it's not Nike's fault that the USSF elected to put silver numbers on a white shirt. If you place the blame on Nike for designing numbers that don't work on a white shirt then EVERY COMPANY that has ever designed white numbers needs to be blamed.

I'm also curious why other Nike teams with dotted numbers and white shirts, like Poland and Portugal (away), didn't have the same visibility problem.

Simple, they went for colors, the USSF went with Silver, the numbers used against Brazil were the same as those in the pics you posted except Navy instead of green and red. Just look at the pics you posted of the US kits through the years, the 2012 #s are clearly Silver with Navy dots and a Navy Outline, the ones they wore against Brazil switch the Silver and the navy keeping the navy outline. Poland and Portugal are doing the same thing but instead of silver dots they went with white dots.

Not sure how many times it can be said: the numbers were navy dots. They just appeared silver because there were too few of them.

This is the hangup for me. Are these numbers with dots punched out of them to save weight and make them more breathable? Or are these solid numbers that are printed with colored dots on top of them? If the dots are just printed for decoration, then I'm afraid the whole system is flawed because it makes all the numbers less readable, no matter what color they are. I saw some of the jerseys in the crowd and it looked like the numbers were solid white or silver with a blue outline and blue dots printed on top. If there is a legitimate performance benefit for the pattern in the numbers, then fine, but if they're just printed to look neat, it's not working as well as it could.

[tBBP]

^ That right there is my whole point of contention...is there really any certifiable functional value to the dot-matrix i.e. hole-punched like AH mentioned, or is it a pattern just to look "kewl"? Are they really lighter? And even if so, exactly what performance advantage is gained?

I mean...how how they measure this, anyway? Do they take a normal solid number and a dot-matrix one, soak them in water, then set them on a baker's scale to weigh out the difference to see if the one is really 3.56 oz lighter than the other one? Then take them and slap them on two similar shirts and tell an athlete to go run a 40-yard dash to see if, while wearing the dot-matrix, he can run it .356 seconds faster? Will he be able to kick the ball .356% harder, or further? Will it drop his internal body temp by. 356°? And who do they have cooking up all these weird numbers, anyway?do they employ a mad scientist whose sole job it is to measure this stuff?

I mean...at some point, if they're gonna keep ballyhooing these various facts and figures, they might also look at certifiably quantifying the percentage gains in performance...otherwise it's all just a bunch of hogwash to me. (And somehow, I don't think I'm the only one.)

[andrewharrington]

^ That right there is my whole point of contention...is there really any certifiable functional value to the dot-matrix i.e. hole-punched like AH mentioned, or is it a pattern just to look "kewl"? Are they really lighter? And even if so, exactly what performance advantage is gained?

I mean...how how they measure this, anyway? Do they take a normal solid number and a dot-matrix one, soak them in water, then set them on a baker's scale to weigh out the difference to see if the one is really 3.56 oz lighter than the other one? Then take them and slap them on two similar shirts and tell an athlete to go run a 40-yard dash to see if, while wearing the dot-matrix, he can run it .356 seconds faster? Will he be able to kick the ball .356% harder, or further? Will it drop his internal body temp by. 356°? And who do they have cooking up all these weird numbers, anyway?do they employ a mad scientist whose sole job it is to measure this stuff?

I mean...at some point, if they're gonna keep ballyhooing these various facts and figures, they might also look at certifiably quantifying the percentage gains in performance...otherwise it's all just a bunch of hogwash to me. (And somehow, I don't think I'm the only one.)

Putting any kind of holes in a vinyl number can only help. As a wearer of jerseys with vinyl or printed numbers on the back for a number of years, I will say that you can feel the sweat build up underneath them. Punching holes out of them is a nice solution to make it more breathable and keep it dry under there.

[Gothamite]

That makes sense - when I played soccer as a kid, we always liked getting the hand-me-down jerseys with screenprint numbers faded so the mesh holes shone through. They were less stiff and more comfortable.

[tBBP]

I guess I'm just not one to buy into all that marketing speak?but them again, the last thing I'm worried or even thinking about in the heat of competition is a sweaty number stuck to my back.

But again, that's just me.

[Kg54mvp]

They look nice. I'm going to be missing the 10/11 away alternates though, I loved those. I hope the kits for the world cup have the hoops one for the home and for the away a jersey similar to the 2010 one

[SG30]

From my personal experience I don't notice screen printed numbers while actually in the heat of competition, but whenever there's a second to breathe I get annoyed. The sweat builds up under the number and I have found it really itchy and annoying. I agree with andrewharrington that printing as dots is actually a good idea in my book, once the visibility issue is fixed. I mean, if there's a way to make damn gross sweaty pro athlete's back happy, no matter what marketing jargon they label it with, might as well try it.

[Digby]

I've always thought that the vinyl numbers on the back of soccer jerseys are way too heavy and non-absorbant. Surely screenprinting a light layer of ink would be a better idea?

[illini1]

I'm also curious why other Nike teams with dotted numbers and white shirts, like Poland and Portugal (away), didn't have the same visibility problem.

This supports that the USSF was responsible for the numbers. They didn't make the dots on the original numbers as big as the other countries, which cause the visibility issues.

[Sodboy13]

So, at this point, if the weight and texture of the screenprinted numbers is an issue, why aren't the names and numbers just dye-sublimated onto the jerseys, like the hoops and assorted other designs are?

Numbers have been dye-sublimated directly onto on-field jerseys in the AFL for a few years now.

[illini1]

So, at this point, if the weight and texture of the screenprinted numbers is an issue, why aren't the names and numbers just dye-sublimated onto the jerseys, like the hoops and assorted other designs are?

Numbers have been dye-sublimated directly onto on-field jerseys in the AFL for a few years now.

I'm guessing because it wouldn't give teams flexibility to change rosters. If they add someone to the roster or someone changes a number, they wouldn't be able to make the changes in house. They would have to make a whole new jersey.

[MJWalker45]

Uniform numbers are locked in at the start of the season for most soccer leagues. AFL has no names on the jersey so changing numbers doesn't affect them as much. Granted, the thinner the shirt the easier it is to feel the numbers on the back. Which is why I wear an undershirt most of the time I play.

[aawagner011]

Uniform numbers are locked in at the start of the season for most soccer leagues. AFL has no names on the jersey so changing numbers doesn't affect them as much. Granted, the thinner the shirt the easier it is to feel the numbers on the back. Which is why I wear an undershirt most of the time I play.

The problem here is that the Yanks aren't always in season and field slightly different squads for most of their matches. That's why numbers change sometimes from game to game and why the USSF self-applies the numbers and names. A good explanation of how this can be even more applicable is when Klinsmann made the numbers 1-11 reserved for starters for the first 9 months or so of his tenure. Numbers were changing pretty regularly.