Comments on: US Soccer pays tribute to 100 years with Centennial kit

By: musyarofah

musyarofah — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 16:08:19 +0000

In reply to Steve. and so does Walter Camp

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:08:43 +0000

I’ve just about had it with these things soccer leagues are trying to pass as “uniforms”. what a disgrace to all sports.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 22:11:33 +0000

Great looking.

I’m talking about Alex Morgon, of course.

By: ingmar66

ingmar66 — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 19:57:09 +0000

Nice uniform. Much better than the headscratching, puzzling stuff adidas put together for the MLS teams this season (except for the Union’s third kit which I really like). The simplicity of this set really works. That Nike is able to mess up traditional uniforms, just take a look at the Holland away kits of the past few seasons. Yech. Even worse, the Dutch federation’s logo has been changed a few seasons ago to include the Nike logo, disguised as the tongue of the lion.
But anyeay, this uniform is really nice. Simple does not always mean boring.

By: NN

NN — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:24:25 +0000

In reply to Stephen. In US is "Soccer"

By: SoccerLifer

SoccerLifer — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 03:33:46 +0000

In reply to F19. @F19: USA Rugby (?) actually owns the rights to the 'All-American shield' and any alterations to it would have to be made with their approval. As is, Nike and US Soccer are paying royalties for this look, or so the folks in Chicago say.

By: F19

F19 — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 03:16:58 +0000

Love it. Perhaps add an interlocking “US” over the stripes in the crest and bring back the sash, and that should be the permanent look for US Soccer. Sash has history with many of the teams from the past, including the famous 1950 squad that defeated England in the World Cup.

So much classier than the flying soccer ball early 90s cliché crest they still use for some reason, with the wrong colored stripes and field of stars.

By: Nathaniel Melvin

Nathaniel Melvin — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 02:25:08 +0000

They changed the pants! They’re now navy blue.

By: JR Francis

JR Francis — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 02:08:32 +0000

In reply to DJ. Well noted. I will clean up the language to be correct. Thanks.

By: Daniel Pecoraro

Daniel Pecoraro — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 22:54:39 +0000

In reply to Stephen.

If I had a nickel for every damn time someone posted the “football, not soccer” thing I’d be a millionaire.
Association football –> assoc football –> soccer. It’s a corruption/shortening of the same damn term.

By: DJ

DJ — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 08:16:23 +0000

Equally strangely, the women’s team has their own version, despite the women only having started up as a federation in 1985.

No, there are not two soccer federations in the US; only one. That federation sponsored its first women’s national team in 1985.

By: Josh

Josh — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 06:13:42 +0000

In reply to bill. At the bottom of this jersey the side hem triangles have 17 stripes and 11 stars.... whats up with that

By: bill

bill — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 01:20:26 +0000

About that blue triangle at the bottom of the side: the photo shows only 11 stars, not 13. I like the stars and stripes shield, but the rest of the kit is boring and the blue looks black. Wake me when US Soccer goes back to wearing red white and blue and gets a good visual identity.

By: Damon Selman

Damon Selman — Sat, 02 Mar 2013 01:14:12 +0000

Great jersey! By the way, Mr Francis, it is only fair that our killer ladies team should wear this. Not to wear this would be a crime against US soccer fans and players.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 22:41:36 +0000

In reply to Stephen. Wrong country, Stephen.

By: Charger77

Charger77 — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 22:15:37 +0000

Very simplistic, I love it.

By: Josh

Josh — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 22:03:28 +0000

They look very bright. Maybe a softer white would’ve worked better.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 21:56:35 +0000

IT’S FOOTBALL NOT SOCCER!!!!!!