2019 MLS Jersey Thread

The green keeper kit that Frei wore last night is arguably better than your guys’ current home kit. The brighter shade of green is definitely better IMO.

 

It really is a great shade of green. Frei specifically asked for that one this year since he never really gets a chance to wear our normal green. Id expect it to get used a bunch this year.

 

What DC could have had if they went with adidas proposals

On @TheAthleticSCCR, I've got an eye-opening look @ a handful of kit concepts #DCU batted around before settling on their new, all-white kits. They include a "cat in the hat" homage, a "monument" look & this lovely cherry blossom number. Subscribe & read: https://t.co/D3gW0ulqjf pic.twitter.com/rD7J88unEP

— Pablo Iglesias Maurer (@MLSist) February 26, 2019

 

^Those actually weren’t Adidas proposals, they were created internally by DCU themselves and eventually nixed by the club higher-ups.

 

The Cherry Blossom kit would've been pretty sweet and probably would've sold well. It's a shame the FO didn't have more courage.

 

DC wear black, and white. And should always.

 

DC United aka the Black and Red.

 

It's almost like the joke with the players was designed to make everyone thankful they actually went with a shitty white kit...

Not going to lie, those shirts look nice. Grey work with RBNY for some reason. The cans maybe?

39thirty is flex/stretch fit. Looks like a fitted cap, but still fits when you need a haircut or have sinus pressure. Best of both worlds.

 

Monotone League Soccer.

Reminds me of our "away" jerseys in my soccer league back in the 80s. We had stellar maroon and gold jerseys league wide (colors for the part of DM I grew up in), but our "alternates" came six in a pack and were made by Fruit of the Loom or Hanes.

 

Every set of highlights I see I find myself thinking, "Is this Vancouver?". Alas, no, they're the one team that really high a homerun with the white this season, in my opinion.

 

Caps or Galaxy at first glance everywhere indeed

Unfortunately even the kinda nice Caps design suffers because of the mostly unreadable red numbers and the red on blue nonsense on the back.

 

Yeah, I understand that, and can't quite workout why it doesn't bother me much.

 

So, Opening Weekend we had all 24 teams in action. The jersey run-down went like this:

Home team first.

Philadelphia - White (secondary, light)
Toronto - Red (primary, dark)

Orlando - Purple (primary, dark)
NY City - Light Blue (primary, light)

Columbus - Yellow (primary, light)
NY Red Bulls - Red (secondary, dark)

Dallas - Red (primary, dark)
New England - White (secondary, light)

Colorado - Red (primary, dark)
Portland - White (secondary, light)

Houston - Black (secondary, dark)
Salt Lake - White (secondary, light)

Vancouver - White (primary, light)
Minnesota - Dark Gray (primary, dark)

LA Galaxy - White (primary, light)
Chicago - Red (primary, dark)

San Jose - Black (primary, dark)
Montreal - White (secondary, light)

Seattle - Green (primary, light)
Cincinnati - White (secondary, light)

DC United - Black (primary, dark)
Atlanta - White (secondary, light)

Los Angeles - Black (primary, dark)
Kansas City - Light Blue (primary, light)

I think all those designations are correct. Overall, 10 of the 12 games had a team wearing white. And 10 of 12 home teams wore their primary shirt.

The two games that really jump out at me are Houston-RSL and Seattle-Cincinnati.

It sure looks to me like Houston was forced into wearing the secondary Black at home on a day where they put the new primary Orange shirt on sale for the first time. If the Dynamo had worn Orange which is apparently our "light" shirt then what would RSL have worn? White which is also their "light" or their "dark" Red which is close to the same color as Orange? So Houston wore Black.

Houston and RSL have seldom worn Orange v. Red with one team usually wearing White against the other's primary. The last few years Houston has worn Black away at Salt Lake's Red. It will be interesting to see if that continues or if it will be Houston in Black but RSL in White at home.

On the other hand, both teams wore "light" shirts in the Seattle-Cincy game. I guess Cincinnati's Blue was too close to Seattle Green.

 

After promoting the new kit availability on opening night the Houston Dynamo had few authoentics to sell. They ran out quickly.

How widespread is this? Can you get your new shirt for your club or is it unavailable?

 

Worth noting that only one of the games featured both teams in non-monochrome kits, Colorado vs. Portland:

And what a great looking game it was, in large part because of the snow, but also because of the really nice color clash and balance between two simple, yet still really solid kits.

 

Good thing the Timbers wore green shorts, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to see the players.

 

I like your use of "clash." The Brits seem to use "clash" to mean that the uniforms were too similar. Which makes no sense to me.

 

New England's secondary is actually a very light blue, but it looks white.

 

Yep, in the past Houston has worn Orange against other team's White. But they did not on Saturday. And RSL didn't wear Red against Houston Black. That's why I think "light" versus "dark" has taken over. The old rules about the specific colors being different enough are gone. Light versus dark is the primary consideration. .

 

Yes. The league has changed it to Light kits vs. Dark kits for the games. The Home team has first choice as to what to wear for each game then the Away team.

So if a team wants to wear their Away kit at home then they propose that and if the Away team is ok with wearing whatever goes against that then it goes to competition to approve for the game.

 

By mid second-half I couldn't see the Portland players on the other side of the field anyway. Even the shorts weren't enough with the amount of snow coming down.

 

So what do you think about my theory on Houston wearing Black on Saturday? What would RSL have worn if Houston chose to wear Orange? Would that have been possible?