So long story short, it's ok to do it if it's been around a long time, but not ok if it's new. Makes you wonder at what point a logo that is ugly now becomes classy and "tradition"... 21 of 30 NBA teams feature a basketball in their primary logo. 18 of 30 MLB teams feature a ball, bat, or baseball diamond 8 of 30 NHL teams feature a puck or stick in their primary logo I can see you've studied this in some detail.
First, I count 14 MLB teams that use anything relating to baseball in their logos and the number of possible objects relating to baseball allows enough diversity that professional teams don't seem to overplay any one motif. I don't know if this is possible in soccer. As for the NBA, a lot of logos currently in use have been developed within the very recent past. I frown upon many of these logos as much as I would an MLS team using a generic soccer ball as the centerpiece of their logo and, in fact, it is because of poorly done logos in leagues like the NBA that I know how low graphic artists and ownership groups can stoop. I don't have a problem with new logos as long as they're done right and I wouldn't have a problem with any team featuring a soccer ball somewhere in their logo. However, I find it illogical to argue that a logo can look good even if it's nontraditional while arguing that a logo featuring a generic traditional soccer ball looks good at the same time.
AL East New York (Ball and Bat) Boston (Ball) Baltimore (Used to have a diamond logo. Not sure if they still do.) Toronto Tampa BAy (Baseball Diamond) AL Central Chicago Cleveland Detroit Kansas City Minnesota (Ball) AL West Texas (Ball) Seattle (Ball) Los Angeles Oakland NL East Atlanta New York (Ball) Florida (Ball) Philadelphia (Baseball Diamond) Washington (Ball) NL Central Chicago St. Louis (Bat) Milwaukee (Ball) Cincinnati Pittsburgh (Bats) Houston NL West Arizona Colorado (Ball) Los Angeles (Ball) San Diego (home plate) San Francisco (Ball) My post was not initially to get into a quibbling match on numbers, but it seemed to counter your assertion that no other sports logos or few other sports logos use the instrumentality of the sport except hockey, when the opposite showed to be the case.
It looks like they are trying to incorporate more of the 'dynamo' blue into the kit. Especially around the crest.
I'm going to disagree with the general consensu here and say that Dynamo need MORE of the blue color. I would much rather see away shirts in oiler blue than white- it's more unique. But this year's kits look.... Another note, I wish the Adidas deal weren't around- it makes things wayyyy to homogeneous.
Eww I hope they do not. Gals away was the best kit in the league full stop. to bad they never used it.
Here's a Red Bulls home jersey in a toddler size: Here's the away: I'm not thrilled with either but keep in mind that these are only the kids sizes. According to those that have seen the adult ones, they are much better looking.
Nope. Not that I'm aware of. All the draftees were presented with the appropriate team's scarf not jersey. I think MLS has done this for several drafts now.
http://www.footballshirtculture.com/09/10-kits/red-bull-new-york-09-10-adidas-soccer-jersey.html Both NY kits here full res.
Really really like the away kit. Could go without the zipper, but it's something I could get used to. New and innovative, a very well done kit.