claret and blue is an improvement over black and blue. plus, it has a denver sports tie in with the avalanch/mammoth (also kroenke teams). i was hoping for green, but honestly... this is nice. and that logo is so much better than either of the old rapids logos.
I suppose a new logo was necessary after their former bland and uninteresting one. However, is it really a good idea to have yet another red uniformed team in MLS? (You can call it "maroon" all you like, but as far as I'm concerned that's just a fancy word for "red" in this case.)
To my eye it looked like 96 but i can see where it COULD be SC. Were i willing to bet money i'd say it says 96.
My first impressions: 1. Yay, another team with red in their logo. 2. I would have rather seen them go towards green. 3. I like that it is a shield/badge.
I pretty much agree with all three of your points. Rapids fans have to be pissed that it's time to buy yet another jersey.
Hmmm, off-red, grey...where have I seen that before? Oh yes, earlier this year: Every time I see a new logo, I can't help but think of how badly MLS and the uniform providers botched things in 1996.
I agree, replace the red with the green, and it would look better (or at least more distinct.) To recap the rebranding in MLS, by location... San Jose - Clash to Earthquakes to Hiatus Dallas - Burn to FC Dallas New York - NY/NJ MetroStars to just MetroStars to Red Bulls Colorado - Green/White to Blue/Black to Avalanche on grass Kansas City - Wiz to Wizards Am I missing anything?
In the name of all of us who watch games with a team in red v. a team in all white and need 5 minutes to determine which team is which, our opinion matters
That's what the sponsors are for, silly. This will be EPL'tastic baby. All we need to do is rebrand the league "Crazy Horse II Major League Soccer" and we too can start losing our teeth. Sachin
For those who are curious, the less-than-enthusiatic Colorado fan reaction is here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375422&page=20 (Yes, page 20)