Re: Amen. I like the Fire's away white--especially last year's with "Chicago" across the blue band on the front (I liked the fact that it said something different than the home). And I do like white in general as a football colour, but when everybody does it, maybe it's a bit much. New England's white looks good, but the Wizards and San Jose are a bit boring. But, since none of our teams have white home kits, white is the safest choice... One thing English teams do is have away strips that often in no way relate to their home colors (red or yellow away for Rovers, yellow for a lot of people, actually...except leeds--their yellow and blue was related to their old kit...). Anyway, I don't think the teams here want to do that because they'll loose the identity that they are trying hard to establish. Call me crazy, but I liked Colorado's green kappa kit. Distinct.
I like LA's unis...the color scheme is different and I don't mind the sash at all (a la Bologna, Inter,) Then again, I liked the first Metros 3rd kit (almost all black) or their first kit if it didn't have the lightning bolt motif. (I liked the half/half that was white/black) so what do I know. I also liked the Green Rapids one too. I don't like making it an away kit because it is too close too blue/black. I am a big fan of having a team with one jersey and an away kit...the current white ones are too bland.
Dude - i am so there. I know I have a hang up about this but I cannot explain the depths of my hatred for the auto-robotic, reflexive use of all-whites by MLS teams. It grates me every game I watch - and I watch them all. I expect it - I look for it and then I see it and it pisses me off. If you filled up the Grand Canyon with all my hatred for this weak and unimagintive thinking by the retards in MLS marketing, it would spill over and flood the state of Arizona and turn Phoenix into Venice. I look at photos or see highlights and I have to concentrate to look and see who exactly which team is playing. It should be automatic. Instead - it all looks the fu**ing same. 10 teams - 20 uniforms - 9 are white. 45% of MLS uniforms are stark fu**king all white. Brilliant. I actually applaud DC for going with balck shorts occassionally with their white shirt. I have issues.
i'm a little bit taken aback about how many people really dislike LA's kits. i really like them, and i think they're much better than the quasi-pinstrips from 3 years ago. i will admit though that the current color scheme is pretty bad-->nice comparison with the crayola box! the galaxy should go with gold and navy. i guess the reason why i like the kit is because it resembles river plate's and vasco da gama's. but i don't think there's any bad or hideous with the diagonal sash; i think it's classy and it's different...not that many teams have it. interestingly, the diagonal sash was formerly used on the usmnt (i'm not sure when) but it appeared recently this year during the us/new zealand friendly.
All this anti-Dallas stuff is stupid. Oh yeah, we have such crappy uniforms - solid red jersey with black shorts. Real radical. Way out there. So different than say San Jose with solid blue top and black shorts. How about the Metros jersey. Sure its got red and black stripes, but the front collar is funky and teh sleeves are sheer - like some sort of lingereie soccer shirt. Same with LA - that sheer sleeve stripe is dumb. But I will give LA a break. The stripe is at least unique and different for MLS, something the league usually does not approve. Sure the colors are a bit lame but you can't have everything.
i meant to include images of some other kits that use the diagonal stripe and compare them to the galaxy's kit...took me a while to find decent images vasco's kit: the retro usmnt kit: and river plate's kit: so i think that galaxy's kit is pretty sharp but i think they need to alter their color scheme some...
i too would love to see colorado go back to green, even if the stay with green and black stripes. we've got every shade of blue (kc, sj, col, ne) and we need some variety. i think columbus, dc, and metros should keep their kits for a while and develop some tradition because those just don't need any changes. i don't think la's jerseys are that bad. i hate the galaxy but i won their jersey and have it hanging on my wall. at first, it's weird to look at just because no mls team has had the diagonal stripe. but after you get used to it, it looks real sharp.
Only can speak for the Quakes'...which is ironed on. (And so far, after a few seasons, still hasn't disintegrated in the washer....)
I like the all black look for both the Crew and DC. The Crew looks nice with the team name across the front. It's only a matter of time before retro Clash jerseys become the rage in the U.S.
The player jerseys that I've seen up close have had the logo/team name as raised felt, either ironed on or some kind of washer-resistant glue. The numbers/names are flat iron-ons. By the way, all the numbers/names for every team are in the same font and only come two ways: a black number with a white border (which you can only actually see on the crew/galaxy yellow jerseys, since it is only used on the away kits) and a white number with a black border. This is fine for teams who have black as a second color (Chicago, Dallas, San Jose, etc.) but why should the Revs, Wizards, Galaxy, etc. have black numbers on their jerseys when it isn't even one of their colors? Tom
Refer to the MLS doctrine of lazy-ass, lame thinking on easy and cheap decisions. I can only assume and hope they got some kind of discount for mass ordering only whit eand black numbers and that somehow some moron decided he would save .01 per number by not ordering a red or blue or whatever. Yay. MLS saved $112.00 by sticking with the black and white scheme. If colored numbers cost nothing extra - then this dude is a true moron. Actually he is a moron either way. One problem with SEM is that when one dude makes a dumb decision - 10 teams look like idiots instead of just the one he would have worked for.
The ONLY away white jersey I like is the one for the Fire. At least it says "Chicago" in bold red so you can actually tell who it is. The rest can burn in hell. Kidding...
yes, all-white away kits suck (although i think the fire managed to pull it off). i did like what dc united did and added a pair of black shorts to their white shirt. another thought is instead of using white, why not just employ a light color. take for example: sky blue shirt/black shorts for san jose?...definitely could work.
Boy howdy. And mostly unchanged since 1996. Every year, the Burn have had red shirts and black shorts. Call me wacky, but I think that's how you build this thing called "tradition." That being said, I liked the 2001-02 jerseys better than this year's model. I prefer the collar. And it was a darker shade of red.
I was going to post pictures to prove my point about Dallas always having red shirts and black shorts since day one, but that would involve posting that picture of all the 1996 uniforms, and I don't think we want that.
Oh, go ahead and post 'em...the newbies need to see just how hideous 1996 was. As far as this year goes, I also loathe the "all-white aways" rut the league finds itself in. It looks so sharp on TV when the Crew is in yellow and the opposition is in red/blue/black/teal...
I wholeheartedly share the disdain everyone has for the all-white away uniforms. Suggestions: Try using colored shorts in the away kit like DC United does sometimes. Try using white shorts in the away kit, or a lighter complimentary color. Or even white shorts in the primary home kit. San Jose would look pretty good with blue shirts, white shorts, and black socks, or even silver socks. And there is nothing wrong with wearing a white shirt at home, either. I always thought the Revs would look awesome with a white shirt, blue shorts, and red socks, and I think I saw them wear this get up for a July 4th match last year. That could be a primary kit that they wear all the time unless there is a conflict. Lastly, if there is no conflict, ala San Jose's blue versus Chicago's red, don't wear the away uniforms at all. I don't care about black and white TV viewers. - Paul
Must be in the minority here, but I think the Fire now have the worst kits in the league. First four years were very good, but the serpent tongue stripes on the shoulders really bother me. My preferences for overall kits: 1. DC United--biased probably, but they have had MLS's best for eight years now. Home and away. 2. Metrostars--Like the new home kit and I like the white away kit. 3. San Jose Earthquakes--I like the blue & black, and the away whites with just a little blue is also nice to me. 4. Columbus Crew--I prefer the black over the yellow, but still nice. 5. Colorado Rapids--Yeah, green and black would be nice, but the new kit isn't too bad; I honestly like their away kit better though. 6. Los Angeles Galaxy--Like the traditional soccer look with the sash. 7. Dallas Burn--Don't have any problem with the home red & black. They've had the same look for a long time now, but as was posted before, they are creating a kit tradition. 8. Kansas City Wizards--I like both home and away equally; not really that bad at all. 9. New England Revolution--Way too plain for my taste; I like the '99 Revs away white kit the best of any MLS kit ever next to DC United's home black. They need to go back to that style. 10. Chicago Fire--As posted before, I hate the serpent tongue stripes. Go back to last year's kit; it was awesome.