- Sep 21, 2005
- 9,023
- 13,524
Not really corporate image and all that. The club is synonymous with the kit image wise, so he' d spend a bit of time on that decision...
THEN he'd go for the most money!
Ha, yeah.
"Tis a vision of beauty, Mr Puma"
Not really corporate image and all that. The club is synonymous with the kit image wise, so he' d spend a bit of time on that decision...
THEN he'd go for the most money!
Hope we stick with UA but I highly doubt we will as Nike will probably throw a ton of money at us to get back into London. Unfortunate because Nike will just stick us on one of their templates and be done with it. So we'll just have the standard run of the mill kits that multiple other clubs wear with different colors.
Also, UA has made some absolutely beautiful kits since they've become our outfitters. The 12/13's home and away's were brilliant and I personally liked the 3rd kit also. The 13/14 home was great outside of the collar. The away and 3rd kits that year are among the nicest kits we've ever worn, IMO. Last years 3rd kit was beautiful. As is this years 3rd kit. The issue the last 2 years have been finding a design that works with those big bolded AIA letters, especially on the home as that logo is red.
I like them. Simple and classic. Plain with the sponsor and badge works for me - we don't want to end up looking like a basketball team.One nice strip out of how many though? Nike's kits are mostly all boringly generic. You'd never see Nike give us anything like the nicer UA kits. Nike wouldnt give us last years 3rd, the beautiful 13/14 kits, the nice home and aways from 12/13. Maybe they'd give us something similar to this years homes and 3rds.
You want an idea of what we'd be wearing with Nike?
http://www.footyheadlines.com/2015/10/nike-2016-17-teamwear-kits.html?m=1
I like them. Simple and classic. Plain with the sponsor and badge works for me - we don't want to end up looking like a basketball team.