All-Purpose, Never-Ending Soccer Thread

The Red Bull kits should look pretty good, going by the stuff the company puts out in Europe.

Red Bull Salzburg...

 

Inky, the colors should be similar. Word is that Red Bull wanted blue, while MLS wanted them to keep the red and black. Red Bull agreed on Red. So the new home will be red. The new away is up in the air. They might be white, they might be blue. A buddy of mine that owns a soccer store said blue, but he also hear white. Another buddie that knows folks in management said white, but he also heard blue.

 

Screw it, go with both white and blue.... I mean, come on, everyone else is going to three jerseys anyway.....

 

Crass, I wasn't sold on the 1836 nickname for Houston. But I like this one. The best way to help the MLS grow is by embracing corporate sponsorship. Coors Light should buy the Rapids and rename it the Colorado Silver Bullets. Change the Wizards to the KC Masterpieces. Anything to help the league and the sport is okay by me.

 

Ive's weighs in on this.
Several lines I liked:
There once was a soccer team that joined its country's top soccer league just before the turn of the century, figuring it was healthy enough to flourish. Things didn't quite work out that way. Financial struggles nearly led to bankruptcy, but instead led to a sale. The new owners decided that its new club needed a new name and new colors.
...
No, in this instance the club was a little English outfit called Newton Heath. Founded in 1878, Newton Heath almost fell into bankruptcy in 1902 before John Davies, the owner of a local brewery, bought the team and saved it from financial ruin. He changed the team's colors from green and gold to red and white and changed the team's name from Newton Heath to Manchester United.

If you want to ignore that because you feel snubbed by the name New York Red Bulls then maybe you're better off joining the army of zombies who would rather watch European soccer on television than invest themselves in their own domestic league.

If you choose to protest a team because you don't like the name then are you really a fan, or simply an idealist missing the point?

 

And, for the obligatory New Jersey whiners.....

http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/5400094

My favorite points:

"There are companies all over the world that recognize this point about New York," Lalas said. "Other teams that play in Giants Stadium also reflect this."

The reference to the New York Giants and New York Jets isn't relevant, said George Zoffinger, president and chief executive officer of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority. Zoffinger threatened to kick out the team, which has played at the Meadowlands through its 10-year existence.

"They will not play in our stadium unless they have New Jersey in their name," he said.

I also want to know how the reference to the Giants and Jets isn't relevant.   It's one thing to say it's not relevant, but give me a reason....  Keep in mind, these are also the same morons who were slighted at a friendly played there between two foreign nations that didn't play the US national anthem prior to the match..... Someone's got a bit of an inferiority complex, no?

 

I suspect the Jets and Giants were grandfathered in somehow ...

But the team ought to use this name and logo:

 

I agree with a lot of that column, but one line annoys me:

Look, the level of play in MLS is improving and I'm glad to see it seems to be getting onto financially solid footing.  If there was a local team I'd go to a lot of games, and would probably get season tickets.  As a kid I had season tickets to the California Surf of the old NASL, and attended most of the home games for the LA Aztecs, too.

But if Arsenal v. Blackburn is on TV at the same time as Real Salt Lake v. Chivas LA, I'm watching the Prem.  Every time.  As much as the MLS is growing, the level of play is still worlds apart.  That doesn't make me a zombie;  it makes me a soccer fan who wants to watch a better game.

 

And your sitting at home watching two teams you'll likely never see in person will help MLS ... how?

I apologize if that seems a bit harsh, but I'm really amazed at the number of people (not just you) who dismiss MLS as an inferior product, yet refuse to do anything to help the league grow and thrive. It's understandable if you're in Spearfish, South Dakota, and you don't have an MLS team within reach ... I'm talking about people in Denver, Chicago and New York (among others) who'd rather pledge allegiance to some obscure club they'll never see in person than be bothered to turn out - for a much cheaper price, let's not forget - and support the club in their own backyard.


PCL -- honestly, this little rant wasn't aimed at you. It's just one of my pet peeves with the American soccer community ... right up there with Jim Rome and the USSF management team.

 

Except PCL or any other soccer fan shouldn't feel morally obligated to watch what they feel is an inferior product. It's MLS's job to produce a product compelling enough to make them turn away from Chelsea-Aresnal on their own voilition for a reason more genuine than noblesse oblige. I as a fan have finite time and finite money (very, VERY finite money). I'm going to spend both where I want to spend it, and if that means watching the ACC men's basketball final instead of a low D-I women's final that involves a local team, so be it.

 

(NOTE: The "you" refers to no one in particular. I just hate writing "one".)

If you are an American, and a soccer fan, it is logical to assume you wish to see the sport of soccer succeed in the United States of America. This includes a stronger league, a stronger national team and pool, and a stronger international presence in how our domestic league and our national team are regarded by those overseas who have had the game longer than we have had the NFL.

Therefore, you should support MLS. Yes, for noblesse oblige. Please do not put your nose in that air while "waiting for MLS to get stronger." Help it get there, be here now, as you hopefully were a decade ago, when it is at the start of something potentially special. No, I don't mean buy season tickets or something, and I certainly don't mean choosing a mediocre MLS game on TV over a quality Champions League matchup (unless you happen to be part of a Nielsen family).

But please don't ignore the league so you can show "knowledge" by understanding that AC Milan-Inter Milan is a more impressive matchup than Galaxy-Chivas USA. Great line, Trooper Bari, about those who pledge allegiance to overseas teams they will likely never see play in person.

Then, a decade or so from now whenMLS is firmly established with diffrerent owners for each team (yes, it's getting there, slowly but surely) and our national team has become even better, you can point at the Johnny-come-latelies who hop on the bandwagon (as so many did after summer 2002) and ask with the rest of us, "Where the hell were you when the league, when the sport in the US needed YOU?" I cannot stand the bandwagoneers, who showed up when the national team showed well. Where will they be after our tough draw kills us this summer?

I will not forget that sense of pride I had when it was clear the 2002 world cup team succeeded largely due to MLS players, and I remembered attending games in cavernous stadiums in 1996. Though I can't say I ever watched the Surf or Aztecs, for what it's worth.

 

I'm curious as to how many times one would ever encounter a circumstance in which a top EPL game would be on opposite the MLS.
Their seasons have almost no overlap. MLS runs April-October, EPL runs August-May.
In England, the time difference means live games there start here at either 7:30 a.m. or 2:30 in the afternoon. I'm pretty sure MLS never has kicked off before breakfast.