You get what you pay for. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to take that. Especially given my profession. Time & Money. I would seriously doubt it. This is typically contracted out as are most professional design services (Architecture / Engineering / Etc.) Again, I doubt that, given the length of time between award of the team and First Kick.
Put the same sponsor on a black kit and it looks great, or change the Oklahoma from Teal to Black and it works just fine.
Tell me where you see this written down. (And "somewhere in a thread on Bigsoccer" may not count.) And then, please, name for me the 120 or so players from USL Pro last year who were unpaid amateurs. Start with 10, tell me 10 who were unpaid amateur players on USL Pro rosters last year, throughout the league. It's easy and chic to say that's the case, especially if it helps bolster your argument that one league is serious and worthwhile and another is bogus, but such a claim should hold up to some bit of scrutiny, wouldn't it? There's no generally accepted definition of "semi-pro" that I am aware of. It can mean different things to different people. There are levels of professionalism, and, obviously, players who play at higher levels of the game (usually) are able to make their living playing and doing nothing else. Not everybody can do that, though. Is the guy who makes $500 a month and lives with his parents a pro or a semi-pro? He's certainly a low-level pro, given that's not a lot of money, no matter what your profession. But where's the line? Is it $1,000 a month? Is it every player on your roster making $1,000 a month or more? Is it 2/3 of your roster making $500 or more? It's not a solid definition for all people. If you ask the NCAA, they'll say you are either a professional or you aren't, and whether it's $40 or $40,000 makes no difference (though they may only suspend you briefly in the former instance). The USSF considers a pro to be a pro once they go pro, whether their current team is paying them or not. (Once a pro, always a pro, unless you buy back your amateur status.) The NCAA (whose bylaws, admittedly, have struggled to keep up with the landscape changes for, say....the last 50 years or so) defines a professional team thusly: But that's to make a binary distinction between types of athletes and teams (pro or amateur for eligibility purposes). The sporting public often creates hierarchies within the professional side based on some nebulous criteria that begins - but should not end - with the level of remuneration to its players. In general, it appears as though NASL teams are "fully professional," doesn't it? I would imagine there are players at the low end of the wage scale on most NASL teams who don't live all that well and have outside employment (be it coaching or stocking shelves), but you'd expect the demands of playing in Division II would make it difficult to keep meaningful outside employment up for long. In general, USL Pro teams not named "Orlando" surely pay their players less than NASL teams - but that's been the case in D3 vs D2 forever. (And there are surely players in D3 making more than some players in D2, just as there are probably some D2 players making more than they could make in MLS, though MLS' increasing wages have probably reduced, if not eliminated, that.) How much USL Pro teams are paying their players and who's getting it is a matter of speculation. There is no database I am aware of. I have anecdotal evidence (I know what we were paying guys in D3 in 1997 and 1998 in Indiana and in D2 in 1999 and 2000, and I was told by someone in a position to know that Charleston was spending $400,000 on player wages in the late 1990s), but no hard numbers. No one does unless you have access to a team or teams' wage structure. But, this being Bigsoccer, someone says they thought they heard something or they knew a guy who knew a guy who said this, and before long it's "accepted fact," when it may not actually be fact at all. Then there's the whole "professional" vs "professionalism" conundrum. Surely Indianapolis is far more professionally-run than Richmond, and Richmond more professionally-run than Phoenix, but Charleston is probably a better-run franchise than Edmonton (and surely better-run than Virginia). Within leagues, there are teams that do things in a half-assed manner and those who do things professionally, and their wage bill is only part of that (though they probably track one another fairly well for a variety of reasons). Short answer: Every team in MLS, the NASL and USL Pro (and, supposedly, a handful in the PDL) is a "professional team," but the pay is, in general, less the farther you go down the ladder. How much less? We don't know for certain. Safe bet your average NASL salary is more than your average USL Pro salary and less than your average MLS salary. It seems like most people who use the term "semi-pro" do so because they want to use it as a pejorative. Truth is, there's a low level of professionalism and a high level of professionalism and a level in between. Until and unless someone can produce a legal or acceptable definition of "semi-pro," it's just a term people use to mean whatever they want it to mean at that moment, depending on their agenda. I haven't seen roster rules that allow a certain number of unpaid amateurs, I don't know who the amateurs supposedly are and I don't know what the tipping point is before a plurality of people consider something to be a "professional team" based on their own personal definition. But I'd love someone to point out to me all these amateurs who are running around in USL Pro not getting paid, because you'd have to have some pretty good reasons to play pro soccer and go through all this trouble for no money.
( a ) Stop calling it "the MLS." ( b ) Right now, they're adding four teams, and one is already announced, another appears to be close and a third is rumored. So you wouldn't be going for one of four, actually, you'd be going for one of one, most likely. And, most importantly, ( c ) You could have all of those things and still not get a team because MLS is no longer a beggar in this equation. IF the Board of Governors felt Oklahoma City added something to the league and they wanted to make them Team #23 or #24 or one past that, great. They might do that. But they might not. There are no guarantees. Salt Lake City came in in 2005, when the league was one new investor shy of one new investor. I don't know that they're going to say, "Well, we already have a market the size of Salt Lake in here, so, what the hey, let's go with another smallish market," because when you look at what they've done lately in terms of market, it hasn't been Salt Lake type markets. (I should point out that almost no one in 2004 could have foreseen that Salt Lake would have been a successful MLS market, and if there had been no RSL the last 9 years, I don't know if they'd be considered today. Maybe they would, but it's easy to say that knowing what we know today.) Everybody's potential is limited. There is no such thing as a market with unlimited potential.
Pro bono for Soccer & Church. Everyone else gets billed at $150/Hr. There's a reason most people's DIY graphics / business cards look like ass, even with the dramatic fall in the cost of desktop publishing software. Yes, you can hire a freelancer, and some of them are great, but most of them can't hold down a job for a various reasons: 1) Inability to take design criticism 2) Inability to pass a regular drug screening 3) Inability to translate client ideas/comments into good design 4) See 2 5) Inability to grow as a designer.
It's the one you can count on the least to meet deadlines & most likely miss work for either health reasons or substance abuse, including alcohol & Rx Meds.
Not any more than anyone else. They just seem better when you're whacked out on goofballs. Talent isn't found in a pill, joint or a bottle.
Perhaps he is thinking of this announcement from Feb 2013: USL PRO Announces Academy Rules It allows for up to 5 roster spots on a USL PRO roster to be used by "academy" players. I'm not sure if any teams took advantage of this rule though.
The guy who has been doing kit designs on Reddit had some nice ones that I can't find at the moment. Phillips 66 was the sponsor, looked good.
http://i.imgur.com/8gyrWhT.jpg The website that has all the redesigned kits http://www.offtheballsc.com/nasl-redesign/
I checked out your website and really like a number of your MLS redesigns. Well done. I don't care for the black/blue combination in your OKC design, but appreciate the effort! I'd love to see any other ideas you have for our team.
What makes you think the feathers are appropriate? Overall, really poor color mix with the blue & black. Try not copying the Earthquakes
I didn't ask where you got it, I asked what made you think it was appropriate, given the controversial use of appropriated Indian culture for sports teams and "fashion". It's use for "new" sports teams is essentially a non-starter, and thankfully is rapidly declining. So I ask, again, what made you think it was appropriate? That's actually worse. Congrats.
Strike Two. Did you think that would make us Indians feel more included or something? Why didn't you use the Stars & Bars on your redo of the Silverbacks uniforms? That seems culturally appropriate, or maybe a plantation in the background? Some cuffs & chains too. You answered a different one.
Dude get over yourself. If you are so pissed about it get the legislature to change the state flag. Last I checked Indians didn't have a monopoly on the use of feathers in logos. This political correctness will be the end of this country.