A lot of these turned out better than I thought they would. Vancouver's full kit might have snuck in as my favorite. Minnesota is solid, Timbers are clean. I feel like these three clubs and KC are perennial leaders with their kits. The rest range from fine to meh. New England's kits I'm 50/50 on. I think they'll look great on TV but they also hurt the eyes!
Don’t like it. Shoulda kept the blue/white/blue look they had going. That looked sharp. I guess at least it’s better than a monochrome blue.
New England has always been one my most hated teams, but damn if that look isn’t great for them, even with the stupid shoulder stripes.
That Red Bulls jersey looks an awful lot like the amazing RB Leipzig Champions League kit. That kit was so good that my son was thinking hard between that one with Tyler Adams' name and number and a Chelsea Pulisic jersey before going for the Pulisic jersey.
The fact that DC didn't pull the trigger on red shorts for the black kit is a travesty. The pics with the red shorts make it one of the best of this cycle. Oh well at least we can blame MLS for forcing the full black kit again
Word is they’ll have red socks as the default, so monochrome shirt/shorts but at least there’ll be one element of the kit that breaks up the monotony.
Looks like the Rapids are not monochrome kits after all. Twitter release has white shorts with burgundy shirts, our traditional look. I'm glad.
I know we've been over it here, but I thought this was insightful of the decision to use the big shoulder stripes. https://www.inquirer.com/soccer/int...s-adidas-philadelphia-union-kit-20200206.html The decision to use those three big stripes league-wide drew criticism from fans who have long complained that MLS restricts teams’ creativity by having a jersey deal with one supplier. Maribeth Towers, MLS’s senior vice president of consumer products, has heard the criticism and doesn’t hide from it. That is one of the exact conversations we had when Adidas said, ‘We want to do the EQT stripes across all the clubs," Towers said.She added that Mike Walker, the league’s vice president of licensing — who came there from Adidas — told his former employer, “You know that we’re going to get dinged with the template word if we don’t get ahead of that story, and we don’t make sure that everybody understands that we did it for a reason.” The reason is a pretty big one: This season is MLS’s 25th. The league and Adidas wanted to have some retro elements in this year’s jerseys. So Adidas pulled out an old design with ties to American soccer and the world’s game.
Too bad MTL is de-emphasizing their blue in their away shirt. They also had less blue in their home kit this 2 yr cycle than their last one. IMO they should use more of their blue.
That argument would hold water with me if ANY of the nine remaining founder clubs had the shoulder stripes on their early uniforms. As far as I recall, none did. Just cause adidas did 25 years ago doesn’t strike me as relevant to mls. I feel like I’m going to be annoyed by the shoulder stripes all season long.
In 1996, the clubs had different uniform manufacturers—IIRC, Adidas had Columbus, DCU, and KC; Nike had NY/NJ, Tampa Bay, Dallas, SJ, and LA; and Reebok had NE and Colorado. But I agree with your point—the shoulder stripes will get old quickly.
To be fair Adidas painted themselves up to look pretty good on this but at the same time its not the real process on how teams get a say.
Jerseys will be for the full 2 year cycle like normal. Pending 3rd kits on the other hand.....still no word on who might get those but im pretty sure we can all guess who the top 5 would be.
El Capitán. 🕯️The Fabric of Los Angeles. Available now: https://t.co/l4yQIhCuLq#LAFC pic.twitter.com/3SXQBKvOrn— LAFC (@LAFC) February 9, 2020
135 bucks for an authentic this year!? Christ, that's more than the J-League jerseys i bought in Japan this fall, and those are notoriously known for being expensive.