UnclearInitial

2013-14 Soccer kits

Recommended Posts

The US needs to pick either the hoops or the sash and just stick with it. I'd prefer the hoops but would be fine with the sash. I just want them to have a look that is instantly recognizable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually quite like that Wednesday kit, would be improved with black shorts IMO. The Watford home kit in that template is also really rather good.

In my book, it's not a proper Wendies kit if it doesn't have black shorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull desperately needs a new crest, as that tiger's terrible. But I don't see the point of making the nickname part of the official name.

The tiger we currently use is actually rather old - it was slapped on the shield as a bit of a rush job ten or so years ago as we needed to quickly replace the previous crest for reasons I won't bore you with.

C'mon man, you can't say something like that and not explain!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. And... what is the "proper name" for the club to which you allude?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually quite like that Wednesday kit, would be improved with black shorts IMO. The Watford home kit in that template is also really rather good.

In my book, it's not a proper Wendies kit if it doesn't have black shorts.

They've pretty much swapped between the two for the whole time I've known about them. Most of the time in the 80s they had blue shorts, there best moments in the 90s with Waddle et al I picture in black shorts, and ever since they seem to have swapped and switched, so I don't mind too much in principle, but I think as a design choice that kit would look better with black shorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, steering the subject back onto new kits - and poor, poor Sheffield Wednesday...

37ha.jpg

Bit of a dog's dinner, that.

Oh, it's a wan disco, indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hoops on navy (preferably with hooped socks but I digress) has the potential to become a classic look. Who else in the world (national teams) uses it?

If we go to something like the centennial kit, the England and Germany (among others) comparisons begin.

If we do the white shirt with the red sash, that's kind of already Peru's thing.

A couple of countries (Paraguay comes to mind immediately) do red/white stripes but I honestly can't think of one off the top of my head that does red/white hoops. Plus it just looks good.

I posted a concept a few weeks ago that had thinner stripes, similar to the confeds cup kits...that obviously I liked a lot an would love to be our look for the WC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that the US-look of the last decades is too similar to England. As a child I wondered if the US and England kinda belong to each other.^^

The hoops looked great and very USA. The idea with the sash is also great and would be more classy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull desperately needs a new crest, as that tiger's terrible. But I don't see the point of making the nickname part of the official name.

The tiger we currently use is actually rather old - it was slapped on the shield as a bit of a rush job ten or so years ago as we needed to quickly replace the previous crest for reasons I won't bore you with.

C'mon man, you can't say something like that and not explain!

Heh, alright then.

Basically, we've not had a good history with owners in recent times - they've tended to range from the incompetent to the downright criminal. Back in the late 1990s, the then owners - inbetween not paying players or the taxman - changed our crest from one which included the tiger head used since the late 1970s to a new one which featured at its centre a rather nasty, crudely drawn clip artish tiger which has been described by some as resembling either a goatee wearing owl or a crab with a penis for a nose.

d4wg.jpg

Needless to say, the reaction wasn't positive, even less so when it emerged that the 'designer' who had been paid a hefty sum for

the new crest was actually the son of the club VP. There was further rumour (although never 100% confirmed as far as I'm aware) that as part of the deal the family picked up a royalty for every article sold bearing the crest.

When the owners were finally ousted, the new Tigers supremo set about undoing the damage the previous regime had done. Getting us out of administration was of course the first step, but commissioning a new crest was pretty high up on the list and we soon saw the new - and currently still in use - badge quickly pressed into service.

Exactly. And... what is the "proper name" for the club to which you allude?

The full name of the club is Hull City AFC and as such that's what should be used on the crest, although I'd settle for simply 'Hull City'. Certainly not 'Hull Tigers' or some other silly mish mash of our name and nickname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the kits, and here's Fulham's new away shirt...

1ktj.jpg

Fulham fans will note that the design of the new kit is based on the 2000/01 Away Kit in which the team were promoted to the Premiership after sealing a record 101 points tally. It was one of the best campaigns ever in SW6 as we stormed to the title, having won 11 games straight at the start of the season, so is the perfect design to take us forward into 2013/14.

It may look similar, but it's a hell of a stretch to say that it's based on that old kit - it's a modified version of a template worn by a number of teams last season, the Autheno 12. Cheeky Adidas, cheeky Fulham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new Bayer Leverkusen third is white-green with yellow pinstripes.

2gserup.jpg

That's a good look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull desperately needs a new crest, as that tiger's terrible. But I don't see the point of making the nickname part of the official name.

The tiger we currently use is actually rather old - it was slapped on the shield as a bit of a rush job ten or so years ago as we needed to quickly replace the previous crest for reasons I won't bore you with.

C'mon man, you can't say something like that and not explain!

Heh, alright then.

Basically, we've not had a good history with owners in recent times - they've tended to range from the incompetent to the downright criminal. Back in the late 1990s, the then owners - inbetween not paying players or the taxman - changed our crest from one which included the tiger head used since the late 1970s to a new one which featured at its centre a rather nasty, crudely drawn clip artish tiger which has been described by some as resembling either a goatee wearing owl or a crab with a penis for a nose.

d4wg.jpg

Needless to say, the reaction wasn't positive, even less so when it emerged that the 'designer' who had been paid a hefty sum for

the new crest was actually the son of the club VP. There was further rumour (although never 100% confirmed as far as I'm aware) that as part of the deal the family picked up a royalty for every article sold bearing the crest.

When the owners were finally ousted, the new Tigers supremo set about undoing the damage the previous regime had done. Getting us out of administration was of course the first step, but commissioning a new crest was pretty high up on the list and we soon saw the new - and currently still in use - badge quickly pressed into service.

Exactly. And... what is the "proper name" for the club to which you allude?

The full name of the club is Hull City AFC and as such that's what should be used on the crest, although I'd settle for simply 'Hull City'. Certainly not 'Hull Tigers' or some other silly mish mash of our name and nickname.

From the point of view of Hull, I'd have thought as a marketing manoeuvre, Hull Tigers would rock the brand being confused with the city's rugby teams, or at least as another rugby team from the city? It's a bad idea as Hull City sounds like a football team, Hull Tigers sounds like they should be playing at Craven Park or the old Boulevard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new Bayer Leverkusen third is white-green with yellow pinstripes.

2gserup.jpg

That's a good look.

meh. It's safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was attempting too. Just adding my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With No Gold Elsewhere On Leverkusen, I'd Prefer Green Pinstripes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Agreed, I bet you can't even see the gold pinstripes from a distance, making the jersey a quite bit boring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the shirts, I just realized that the ones the Cosmos wore in their charity match aren't the same as unveiled.

Cosmos-v-Newtown-Pride-535x390.jpg170885571_AT_9756_93FB6E906DB4DE0142EFA0

White collars?

1022446-16509511-640-360.jpg

Just in case anybody remembered the mystery, or cared, it was cleared up at the inaugural match on Saturday.

The white shirts with white collars, worn at the Newtown benefit, are practice wear. They have standard numbers in navy blue. This is what they were wearing in the kickaround as we filed into the stadium.

175317108_MS_3481_AA307242E2DED22F7C8A6D

When the players came out for the start of the match, they were wearing the shirts with green collars.

175317108_MS_3518_61CD02E154BED790838FC9

Those shirts have light green names and numbers on the back, the numbers marked with Cosmos logos.

Fort+Lauderdale+Strikers+v+New+York+Cosm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the point of view of Hull, I'd have thought as a marketing manoeuvre, Hull Tigers would rock the brand being confused with the city's rugby teams, or at least as another rugby team from the city? It's a bad idea as Hull City sounds like a football team, Hull Tigers sounds like they should be playing at Craven Park or the old Boulevard.

Yep, it does sound like a second division rugby league team or something. With local sporting politics, sounding more rugby isn't desirable in the slightest - even ignoring the total silliness of the alternative names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.