Time to rid mls of just adidas kits

But you just said that money is currently distributed equally. Given that, there must be some clubs that wouldn't do as well in a free for all market, otherwise there wouldn't be a benefit to distributing money equally. My bet is that its close to, if not more, than half the teams getting more money from a shared deal than an individual one (if ti were significantly less than half they never would have agreed to the deal in the first place). So why would close to, if not a true, majority of the teas willingly give up more money?

 

I can't read the teams' minds, so there's no telling what they would prefer. The earlier stated benefits of leaving the exclusivity contract may be enticing to some, whereas teams with relatively small merchandise footprints would prefer to just keep the money flowing. I imagine both NYC teams would be eager to leave so as to hook up with the suppliers of their parent clubs (City Football Group recently signed Puma, whilst the Red Bull stable is now with Nike), but that's all I can say for sure.

I am personally strongly in favour of opening up the contract á la the A-League, but as you say, there will be (financial) incentives for some to keep the current setup going.

 

So MLS teams get treated like the creme de la creme by their equipment manufacturer, and that's a bad thing?

 

If that means their fans get fleeced through 'cheap' replicas and expensive authentics, then that's a yes from me. A lower league authentic (there is no replica) top would cost you about 40 to 45 GBP in England - a fan of a Premier League club would be lucky to get a replica for 50.

 

That's because most teams in Europe are playing in stock jerseys that are basically just pulled from the EuroSport catalog with the sponsors and crest slapped on. The same exact shirt you can order for your high school team for ~$24.99 each. And you paid how much? And you think you're not getting fleeced when you pay $60 USD for it?

 

Nonsense, if you want to talk European football, brands like Erreà, hummel, FBT, Macron, Umbro, Sondico, Surridge, BLK, Givova, Zeus, Acerbis, Lacatoni, Erima, Uhlsport, Masita, Jartazi, Beltona, and Robey make excellent, bespoke shirts up and down the professional leagues in their respective countries. Heck, if you want to extend matters, you could argue brands like Mizuno, Warrix, Mawin, Grand, LGR, Vonda, Waga, and Thorb do the same in Asia.

Yes, those brands do also offer off the peg templates, but let's take Erreà and Macron as examples; they supply Inverness and Ross County with bespoke shirts in the lowly depths of the Scottish Championship. Umbro gives Carlisle in the English League Two bespoke kits. Masita and Robey make bespoke shirts for all their Dutch teams, be they Eredivisie or Keuken Kampioen Divisie.

Ironically, it is Nike, adidas, and Puma who are responsible for most off the peg nonsense; do take a close look at Northampton, Coventry, and Portsmouth's home shirts, as well as Brighton's green away shirt and see what they have in common. Yes, the big three are lazy gits, but to generalize Europe as some kind of catalogue teamwear wasteland is just flatout wrong.

 

Of the examples you gave Carlile is literally using one of Umbro's basic stock templates in blue and purple (I've always like Umbro, back in the early '00s they made some of my favorite shirts but they've never been particularly original or unique between them), and Inverness and Ross: same thing with a really cheap-looking screen print... adidas can whip up something similar for your pub team with the miTeam app nowadays for not much cash, and quite frankly it looks better.

Like, I get that you're trying to be anti-establishment for anti-etablishment's sake, but you're talking to someone who's probably Marie Kondo'd more jerseys by now than you've ever owned (as my wife can attest to). Based on your profile, you were 10 years old when the adidas deal was signed. You don't remember the bad old days. Getting gear from teams was a very mixed bag.

The authentic vs replica thing with adidas does annoy me a little depending on which ones get cut, but the authentics are higher quality, and adidas's authentics are still way cheaper than nike's. And if it's too much for you wallet, the previous season's authentics are always available for cheaper than this year's replicas.

But no, the league shouldn't ditch the massive infusion of cash that the league-wide deal gets it because you're too much of a broke-ass to pay for an authentic shirt that will last 20+ years even with heavy wear.

 

For anti-establishment's sake? Are you taking the piss? God forbid I just dislike a couple of brands.

Oh, never mind, you then make a half-baked assumption about my age (relevancy; about zero) and try to prop up yourself with a nebulous claim about how many jerseys you've owned - and to finish it off, I get an insult about my finances.

For the record, I own authentic Whitecaps, DCU, and Sounders kits, and lo and behold, they're all turgid quality-wise; I've stopped washing the DCU one for fear of Volkswagen and the stars above the crest coming off. My replica Union jersey I only ever handwash to avoid the Bimbo stickering frittering away. I also own the Ross County kit, hardly as 'cheap' as you make it out to be, but just disregarding that kit is about as easy as calling Carlisle's top a stock template (which template would that be?).

It's okay to disagree, but at least pretend to be respectful next time.

 

And Adidas website is a mess...

https://www.adidas.ca/en/search?q=montreal impact

 

So, the issue is Adidas Canada then?

Although.. Could be worse.. Do a search for "Colorado Rapids" on adidas.com and it defaults to "Colorado Avalanche". A search for "San Jose Earthquakes" defaults to a combo search for "San Jose Earthquakes" and "San Jose Sharks".

Good stuff.. Good stuff.