New Fire Logo is...interesting. For a people undefeated, our Fire Crown stands for the founding legend of Chicago. pic.twitter.com/ZlSMgLx3Da— Chicago Fire FC (@ChicagoFire) November 21, 2019 I'll await @Lazy Assed Assassin's professional opinion but...this is !@#$ing awful. Why did they rebrand to RSL? Glad they incorporated the "Fire Crown" as a nod to Chicago's history, as I would have otherwise never known that Chicago was founded by Baal, Prince of Darkness or perhaps a Balrog of Morgoth (depending on artist rendering). Probably explains the fire. So the logo is already better for capturing this obscure aspect of Midwestern history.
The logo looks amateurish and I don't like the font either. The colors look nice but they aren't Chicago Fire colors. IMO they should have gone for a refresh not a reboot.
Oh my god that is awful. I don’t understand the logo except for the tie in with the name. Is it a known thing? anyway it just looks cheap. Their logo before was actually really good. It didn’t look 90’s dated to me at all. This actually looks much more dated than it did before.
FC Cinci with a little holiday fun. I'll allow it. Welcome to the league, ya galoots. check the whole thread. Who’s ready for tomorrow? 🍽Here’s a thread to hold you over: @MLS teams as #Thanksgiving dishes. Gobble Gobble, ya bunch of turkeys! @ColumbusCrewSC pic.twitter.com/DeJzTpxlV5— FC Cincinnati (@fccincinnati) November 27, 2019
https://www.espn.com/soccer/major-l...f-nashville-sc-assigned-to-conferences-by-mls Nashville will be in the West Miami in the East.
Seems obvious, but Nashville's only a little further West. Some were speculating Chicago might bump to the West.
There are many issues with the new logo, made all the worse by the fact the old logo, while not winning any design awards, was solid. It seems like they’re trying to emulate the Kansas City Wizards to Sporting Kansas City transition and shedding all that was associated with the team. The difference being the old Wizards logo was arguably the worst of a pretty terrible bunch from the inaugural class of '96.
Rivalry wise, Chicago, St Louis, KC and Minnesota would make sense in the west while Nashville, Atlanta, Columbus, Cincinnati, Charlotte and Indy would make sense in the east.
My understanding was that they put Nashville in the West as a temporary measure, which will change next season with the new additions. I'm guessing that despite Chicago being a little further West, it was considered less jarring to put the new team there and keep the established Eastern Conference team in place, rather than have them switch for a year. Edit: of course, MLS's many detractors have taken this as an horrific act which completely wipes away any trace of credibility the league might have.
Damn, I wanted to see VAN, SEA & POR heads explode. On second thought it wouldn't be worth it - I can't wish that on AJDLG.
Rumors of Vela to barcelona floating around again. I hope it happens lol. I am so sick of him in the league. I thought he'd be a disaster, but has done a ton of damage so far.
I understand the frustration at LAFC's success but Vela is good for the league. And what is good for the league is, in the long run, good for us Galaxy/soccer/MLS fans. MLS needs "stars" like Vela and Ibra to draw viewers and increase our future TV contracts, the lifeblood of the league. tldr vers: Our answer shouldn't be hoping our competition gets weaker, it should be demanding that we get better.
I get that in principle, I guess, Why not both? In a capped league, there are explicit limits to how much better the Galaxy can get compared to a team like LAFC. In general, I don't buy that as a Galaxy fan I'm supposed to be invested in what's good for every soccer team in, like, the country? SKC getting Alan Pulido or LAFC keeping Vela doesn't benefit me and the people I bring to games as a paying LA Galaxy season ticket holder. Nobody would go to a Chelsea fan and be like "Well, I know your season sucks, but look how good Liverpool's doing!" What would benefit us as LA GALAXY FANS is if LAFC sold both Rossi and Vela and had to rebuild their SS winning team the same year we're rebuilding ours. Does anyone want to face this same LAFC without Zlatan?
I guess it depends on how big a viewpoint you are taking. It's true that it would be in our interests for Vela and Pulido to be in the EC rather than competing with us. But what I said is also true -- the league needs stars to improve TV ratings so our next TV contract doesn't suck and so the growth of MLS isn't stymied. Look I want the Galaxy to win as much as you do. But I want to do it because we improved, not because our competition got worse. And I want the league to continue improving and the quality of play to get better and more exciting every year. I don't like the fact that our coach did an interview today where he complained two or three times about league budget constraints preventing him from going after the players we need. Another factor behind my feelings is that most of our problems are self inflicted. No one made the Galaxy sign crappy players to long term expensive contracts. Well Klein did, but no one made us hire him. IMO we need to get our shxx together rather than wishing ill on our competition. But I understand YMMV.
I agree with everything in your post except the implication that all of the team's play by the same rules, when IMO this is clearly not true. I believe the deck in stacked in favor of the recent expansion teams. They got a lot of allocation money that the older teams in the league did not get. As we have seen with Atlanta, this can lead to a permanent advantage if teams use this largesse to sign young stars and then sell them on in a few years. They are also not burdened by old contracts. If the league truly wanted a level playing field at a minimum they would eliminate the rule that limits teams to only buying out 1 contract a year and then only in the off season. They could also provide more GAM and/or TAM to the teams that don't make the playoffs. Alternatively, they could allow those teams to completely pay for one or more of their DPs and free up this salary cap money for non DP salaries.
Well we can hangup the idea of AJ DeLaGarza ever returning. He signed up with Becks in Miami. https://www.intermiamicf.com/en/post/2019/12/02/inter-miami-cf-signs-defender-aj-delagarza
In promising news for the league Charlotte paid $325m (!) for their franchise. That's pretty surprising given the last two franchises went for $200m. Encouraging to know that at least some businessmen have done the math and see a very bright future for MLS. Now I just want to see some of that money being translated into a more generous salary cap. https://www.espn.com/soccer/major-l...me-mls-30th-franchise-for-record-$325-million I'm just sad that my Triangle area didn't fight harder to get the NC franchise.
Yes and no. I don't want them to be successful, obviously, but I would much prefer that we beat them (or anyone else for that matter) through our own merit and improvement, than through them basically hobbling themselves. As for what MLS is doing in general, that's important on two levels: 1) The better the league is overall, the more enjoyable it will be for us to watch (especially if we're competitive). 2) The better the standard of the league, the more credible it is to be successful in it and the better the profile of the Galaxy (not to mention better revenues, players, coaches, academies, etc).
The league really should have done away with the expansion draft by now. One of the ways established teams with longer histories can be competitive is by establishing a development pipeline where younger players breaking in, but not necessarily superstars, are productive in the 23-26 year old range and turn into solid professionals. Signing USL seasoned younger players to longer term value contracts is a great way to put together a competitive team. Think a lot of Romneys and Stereses filling in the gaps. It's not easy to get a team full of these players but if you manage to groom and sign one of these players you are guaranteed to lose them in the next expansion draft. With all the allocation money thrown at the expansion teams, the expansion draft should be gone. Hanging onto these fringe value players has an added bonus with the stability it brings to MLS teams fan favorite types (those who work hard, are underpaid, and sometimes stick longer with the team than a lot of the starters).
I'm not an "MlS Detractor", and for two decades have been hoping it becomes a powerful league. But I sure have no belief that emulating baseball is the way to go.