No, I don't get the Texas joke; but FYI - the Colorado Buffaloes are back and gold- not black and yellow. But kudos for a great idea. Somebody's alternate uniform should be stout themed. Brown (almost black) colored socks and shorts, with tan shirts.
Texas is burnt orange, better known as brown, while Texas A&M is maroon, aka dark brown. I'm with you on Gold v. Yellow. I went to Purdue which is Black and Old Gold, not that nasty yellow worn by schools like Iowa. Hmmm. My color wheel seems to be expanding. But, no, the Rapids and RSL are still both Red.
Has anyone noticed some variability in sizing in the jerseys lately? Traditionally I fit into a M in replica and L in authentic, but I went into the adidas store downtown to try on the 2018 Fire jerseys, and the authentic L just seemed a lot larger than previous years, the M still kinda tight on my lack of six pack gut as usual. I'd really like to get an authentic since they're discounted right now, but no point shelling out that much $ for something that doesn't fit right. On a positive note, the Fire display at the flagship adidas store was a lot more prominent than their other soccer stuff.
Week 2 jerseys: Home team first. Chicago - Red (primary, dark) Orlando - Purple (primary, dark) New England - Blue (primary, dark) Columbus - Yellow (primary, light) Dallas - Red (primary, dark) LA Galaxy - White (primary, light) Houston - Orange (primary, light) Montreal - White (secondary, light) Salt Lake - White (secondary, light) Vancouver - Dark Gray (secondary, dark) San Jose - Black (primary, dark) Minnesota - White (secondary, light) Seattle - Green (primary, light) Colorado - Red (primary, dark) NY City - Light Blue (primary, light) DC United - Black (primary, dark) Kansas City - Light Blue (primary, light) Philadelphia - Dark Blue (primary, dark) Atlanta - Red/Black (primary, dark) Cincinnati - White (secondary, light) LAFC - Black (primary, dark) Portland - White (secondary, light) Corrections appreciated. Only 6 white shirts this week. 10 of 11 home teams wore their primary shirt. I don't know what to think about dark/light. It is apparently not a hard and fast rule. We started off the week with two teams wearing dark shirts in the Chicago/Orlando game. And then Houston wore their light shirt Orange against Montreal in their light shirt White. I'm really confused as to why Houston wore Black in Week 1. The rest were all dark v. light but most were pretty predictable pairings.
Week 3 jerseys: Home team first. Chicago - Red (primary, dark) Seattle - Black (secondary, dark) Columbus - Black (secondary, dark) Dallas - White (secondary, light) Houston - Orange (primary, light) Vancouver - White (primary, light) NY Red Bulls - White (primary, light) San Jose - Black (primary, dark) Orlando - Purple (primary, dark) Montreal - White (secondary, light) DC United - Black (primary, dark) Salt Lake - White (secondary, light) LA Galaxy - White (primary, light) Minnesota - Dark Gray (primary, dark) NYCFC - Light Blue (primary, light) LAFC - White (secondary, light) Cincinnati - Blue (primary, dark) Portland - White (secondary, light) Atlanta - Red/Black (primary, dark) Philadelphia - White (secondary, light) Toronto - Red (primary, dark) New England - White (secondary, light) Colorado - Red (primary, dark) Kansas City - Light Blue (primary, light) Corrections appreciated. Back to 10 white shirts in the 12 games. 11 of 12 home teams wore their primary shirt. 4 games were primary v. primary, 1 was secondary v. secondary. 9 games were dark v. light so that seems to be the plan but there was one dark v. dark and two light v. light so it is not a strict rule.
Prop for putting in the effort, not unlike some of the kit graphics I see for the EPL on Twitter, which tracks usage across the season. Is there any particular reason why Columbus decided to wear black? I know they've swapped yellow and black around in years prior, but it seems a little odd still. A trick to get fans to buy both kits rather than just the home?
There used to be more elaborate kit tracking threads but that was even more effort: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/ml...-season-long-uniform-tracking-thread.2029626/ https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/2017-mls-uniform-kit-tracking-thread.2039164/ I got tired of doing it week after week. Marketing was probably the main idea for Columbus wearing black. Most MLS teams wear their non-primary shirts a few times at home. Kansas City used to be notorious for wearing all different shirts at home. They barely had a primary kit some years. One reason why I'm doing this is to try to figure out what the MLS rules are for kits this year.
Interesting, although I suppose a lack of rules might be a rule in and of itself. Some European leagues are particularly fussy about kits, so I'm surprised to note the Crew can get away with this in 2019.
"get away with this"? Wearing a secondary shirt at home is getting away with something? I guess I don't follow European leagues that closely but I didn't realize teams had to always wear their primary shirts at home. And this is nothing new in MLS. If you follow the links that I posted you'll notice that in 2017, the most recent year that I kept the stats, the home teams wore their secondary shirt 5% of the time that year. That wasn't often but it wasn't zero.
Sorry, European bias shining through in the way I worded my previous reply. There is a consensus among fans, especially in England, that a team must play in home colours as often as possible (this including away matches too) - I strongly believe in this philosophy too, but then club here tend to be so old and steeped in tradition that a certain degree of snobbery is to be expected.
Hey, maybe you can explain something for me. When kits "clash" does that mean they are different or too similar? As far as I can tell the word "clash" means to be different. Even the OED says: I can't find any definition of "clash" that means too similar. But it sure sounds like British speakers are using the word that way when talking about kits. I would think, speaking American English, that you would want a clash of kits but it sounds like it is the opposite. We'll save saying "floor" instead of "ground" for another day.
A kit clash, in Europe, means that two sets of kit are (too) similar to one another. Arsenal playing Manchester United with both sides wearing home garb is a clash. Although I hate arguing semantics, it is a misappropriated word in the strictest of senses. Your mileage will absolutely vary in terms of what is and is not a clash, though; Manchester City and Chelsea played one another with both sides wearing their home tops. Some would say that's a clash, as both are blue, whereas others would consider it absolutely fine. Things get a little more iffy when more than one colour is at play. Let me refer you to this excellent article by Museum of Jerseys; https://museumofjerseys.com/2018/09/10/not-a-wise-kit-choice-at-morecambe-for-swindon/ For the most recent World Cup, FIFA enforced strict dark/light regulations to ensure even colourblind people could watch matches without too much confusion; although a similar rule does not exist in any of the domestic European leagues, teams do often go for a dark/light away kit when their home is light/dark, and some do seem to wear them at inappropriate times. As an example, Watford barely ever have to change (only v. Wolves, and possibly West Ham and Burnley), but seem to trot out their green away kit as often as possible. This might be for commercial purposes, but it is interesting to note nonetheless.
So "clash" for kits has a meaning completely unrelated to the other meanings of the word "clash". Weird but interesting. Ugh, and the word "top". That just sounds so wrong for men's clothing. There is a whole discussion of light v. dark earlier in this thread. That is what I was talking about when we were trying to figure out the MLS rules this year.
We play fast and loose with our languages. For what it's worth, talking about a jersey over here will result in puzzled looks - same for 'primary' instead of home. Something I suspect you may find interesting is the Kit Crimes Twitter account, which is a good example of how people think about away shirts being worn when there is no clash between the opposition and a club's home/primary shirt; https://twitter.com/KitCrimes
Back when they had the extremely popular argyle kit, right? Is it my imagination, or did they have four kits at one point? For some reason I'm thinking they had a dark blue, a light blue, the black argyle, and a white & silver argyle in a single season.
I think you're conflating the 2013, 2014, and 2015 seasons into one big clump of memories. Can't blame you considering striking yet samey SKC kits can be. https://www.colours-of-football.com/colours03/usa/kansas/kansas_1.html Don't get me wrong though, I love everything they've put out since the latest rebrand. That being said, I wouldn't mind a throwback kit, getting a bit of that 90's look back
I don't think they ever had 4 shirts but in 2016 Kansas City had three shirts: Light Blue, Dark Blue, and White (with the silver argyle pattern). That year SKC wore the Light Blue (ostensibly their primary shirt) 13 times, White 12 times, and Dark Blue 9 times. I'll have to look to see what they wore for home games but my recollection was that they wore all of those. EDIT: In their home games Kansas City wore Light Blue (primary) 7 times, Dark Blue (secondary) 4 times, and White (third) 6 times. As I said, they really mixed it up. This is a 2016 chart that kyleburkholder used to make. It shows all of the kit combinations that year.
Now this is hilarious... Nobody else in @MLS is shocked by this?!#IMFC fans ordered jerseys on the official website, but they received @WhitecapsFC jerseys... Right names, wrong team. Incredible. I've received messages from 5 different fans claiming the same thing had happened to them. pic.twitter.com/CqAAlcHuQs— Nicolas A Martineau (@nik_martineau) March 19, 2019
Saputo doesn't care about Montreal, why should MLS? But damn, that is just horrible. I wonder if it has happened with any other clubs, or if it is just the Canadian operations that f**ked up.
Thank you both. I kind of thought that I mixed in the two third shirts in my mind. Either way, they definitely had a great stretch from their rebrand through the end of the third kits. The black argyle kit was dope.
Speaking of traditions for old leagues around the planet, in Argentina domestic competition, it is tradition that if there is a color clash, then the home team will wear their secondary uniform. Thus allowing their own home fans to view the visiting team in their uniforms that they are traditionally known for over the generations. As well delivering on the concept that it is not the road team that should bring a different jersey, but any home team can just easily reach into their own closet and put on a secondary uniform with much more ease. I.e. a gentleman's gesture when a guest to the party shows up at your door wearing your same shirt. Example of this is when Rosario Central plays away to Boca Jrs at the Bombanera. Both sharing the same color scheme of Blue and Gold, thus Boca sports their secondary uniform.
As Purdue fans will tell you on U. of Washington's choice of the color Gold, the specific color used is Old Gold. Thus, as far as colors in our nation's vast sporting culture goes, teams like LSU are indeed Gold and is Vanderbilt or as well our U.S. Military Academy at West Point are in good order using the concept of Gold in both traditional and Old Gold forms, but still calling it just Gold in their songs and community.