But how do you explain brilliant stuff like the Nigeria shirts from a few years ago? That whole range was so interesting.
I also think clubs and Federations have more say than we realize. Look at the atrocities Nike produced for the USSF. All it would take is one call from Soccer House in Chicago to tell Nike to knock this shit off. But it never happens because the USSF doesn’t actually care about the kit design.
I think that comes down to the company sometimes wanting to pays its dues to a specific demographic or maybe show a particular market some love in the hopes of growing their market share there rather than them actually saying “wow let’s really flex our creative muscles here and show the world what we can do!! For the arts and artistic integrity!!” when at the same time 10 other European nations in mature markets just get the same shitty template but with different colours.
A lot of adidas kits for this season look more traditional. Man Utd, Leicester, Real Madrid and Arsenal with collars for example.
The launch of the new minimalist logo comes with the new Raglan-sleeved template and it seems from some of the designs that they’re pushing more modern look, either minimalist for older fans or crazy shit for youngsters.
I wonder whether rather risky designs like our away top will backfire. Will they sell loads? Is this aimed at youngsters? Will it date really quickly? I think the answer is “yes” to all three.
Our new “Pac-man on acid” top will date as badly as some of the Puma’s baffling designs - I’m looking at you dirty, washed-out gold diamond shit we wore back in the bad old days.
I don’t think they care if it dates quickly especially if the team is successful while wearing it. That kind of kit can become a cult favorite because it’s a cultural relic and because of the team’s achievements while they wore it.
Hmmm, you’ve hit the reason why I can’t decide whether to get a yellow one while they’re available and store it away. If I’d done that with more of my shirts I’d be able to pay a chunk of my mortgage off by now.
Buying two and wearing one can pay off if you play the long game.
This club could create a huge revenue if they went vintage for a season or two
No shirt advertising, names only on the back .
A 1970’s red and white and the gorgeous yellow and blue shirt of that era .
Let’s get back to tradition.
No sponsor means less revenue, you’d have to massively increase sales of shirts to make up for that loss, let alone to actually make it more profitable.
As much as I like the old shirts without sponsors and with set home and away colours, I don’t think Arsenal can afford to take such a hit on commercial income.
Tradition is fine but change is also very important, kits will have sponsors (most of the time) and each collection released by adidas is done with the deliberate intention of profiting from their deal with the club. The more they sell, the better the next deal will be, which eventually benefits the club and its fans. That’s how football is nowadays.
That’s better. I’m having that in the long-sleeve version or the “life-styler” without that effing sponsor.
Does anyone get the feeling our away shirt is aimed at younger fans and the third kit is for us old duffers? What with the colours from our away 82/83 kit and the AFC lifted from our 91-93 home shirt and shorts.
It’s one of the their best so far. Delighted to see dark green and blue again. I’ll be interested to see what the long-sleeve and “Lifestyler” versions are like.