i'd say it's more cynical than it is bitter. i just hate marketing speak and marketing ploys, especially so when it's couched within the concept of fandom. i mean, think about it. two of the most important matches of the year (the home opener and last night's game), when we should be showing off our pride and passion of who we are as a club, we elect to wear, from head to toe, a uniform that is entirely unrepresentative of anything about this club. it's all black .. black and silver actually, which is even worse, given this town. the only motivation for wearing those uniforms is to increase demand to sell more of those jerseys. i mean, if the club wants to embrace black as one of their colors going forward, then fine. that'd be awful, of course, but at least it would lend a plausible idea that wearing them in such high profile matches (when kit clashing isn't even a concern) isn't only about the dollar. tl;dr: i'm still upset that we weren't able to get the job done when it was right in front of us, and i'm looking for other areas in which to express my displeasure rather than focus on our shortcomings on the field.
My understanding is that the league decides what colors everyone is going to wear. Home team, visiting team, the goalkeepers, even the referees. I remember seeing a pre-game sheet that the league distributes which shows all parties what they are wearing. The kit man makes a point to call them primary and secondary rather than home and away jerseys. But even that is pretty arbitrary. Now, if you want to get mad at the club for even having a black jersey to begin with, I would understand that, although I would disagree because I think they are pretty cool. But they didn't "elect" to wear black for those matches, the league told them to.
if you can show me any sourcing on that, then it would change my opinion, but honestly, that sounds absurd that the league would tell each team which jersey to wear. my wager is that the pregame sheet likely does exist, and the league probably controls the ref's colors, but it's all based on the input from the home team first on which they're going to wear. then the away team makes their decision with the league having the veto ability in cases of clashing or whatever. no way the teams are not largely in control of what they wear.
The SKC kitman was the one who said that, someone asked him on Twitter and he shared the pregame sheet and said the league made the decision. I'm not going to go search through all his tweets to try and find it so I guess you can think I or he or both are lying if you want.
weird that you jump to me claiming that you're lying. i just find it so unbelievable that the league would dictate to each team every game what they're wearing that i'd like to have more than just hearsay. is it possible that the kitman was only talking about that one game? maybe there were extenuating circumstances for that game, which would be understandable, but it's been misunderstood to be the general rule for all games when he was only addressing that particular game.
I recall from several years back when Jimmy kept wearing the pink? kits, that the decisions on keeper kit colors and ref shirt colors was made by the league and not the team. I can't comment on the jersey for the broader squad.
I think this is the article from this morning when I saw the top of this thread, (paywalled after the first view) but MLS has been deciding the kit selections for each game since at least 2014 based on stuff I've seen in the past. I can look at my work computer's history tomorrow for the article from 2014 (I believe also about FC Dallas) discussing the assignment sheet showing the league decision for kits colors.