CASE STUDY 007: American Origins
How important is individualism, unique kit creation, and aesthetic autonomy when it comes to creating a lively and engaging sporting culture?
Major League Soccer, the US and Canada’s premier professional footballing league (on the men's side of the game) was founded in the aftermath of the 1994 US World Cup. League play began in 1996 with 10 founding teams. When we examine the records of that inaugural season, one visual component stands out in particular. Different manufacturers produced the teams' kits.
Nike, Adidas, Puma, and Reebok all took a punt on a team (or a few) in that inaugural season before the likes of Kappa, Macron, and several others entered in the following years. Noticeably, the kits featured dramatically varied patterns, color schemes, fonts, materials, and more. In the current market, MLS kits from the 90s comfortably range from $200-$1000 on eBay.
This level of uniqueness is a far departure from today where all 30 MLS club kits (and fan gear) are produced by Adidas. With slight variations, each kit is produced on the same template, with the same markings, and the same textile composition. The room for variation has been minimized. The Adidas - MLS partnership dates back to the inception of the league in 1994, but it wasn’t until 2004 that we saw the league-wide adoption of Adidas as the kit manufacturer for all clubs.
In our research for this piece, we visited our friends at @classicfootballshirtsnyc, and dug through their MLS archives. Touching the 1998/99 Dallas Burn Nike kit, you could feel the flexibility of the elastane blend, the sewn-in collar had a presence to it, and the overall quality was exceptional (mind you, we are talking about performance technology from over 25 years ago). When comparing that to the 2001 Tampa Bay Mutiny kit produced by Kappa, you had a completely different silhouette than the boxy Nike cuts of the early 2000s. Famous for their tight-fitting silhouettes, donned by the likes of the Italian National Team, Kappa had become known for their innovative “Pro-Kombat” technology. The skin-tight Tampa Bay Kit, hugging their captain and Colombian footballing legend, Carlos Valderrama, created a distinct aura and stylistic point of reference for Soccer in Florida at the time.
Visual distinction is a central component of brand building for these clubs - and it goes beyond color. Visual distinction is a non-exhaustive equation that includes everything our eyes can interpret. Color of course is a major driver, but textile, typography, and silhouette all play essential roles in creating a product that catches the eye and the heart. MLS clubs must be brands in order to achieve financial viability, become attractive investment prospects, and grow the game in the United States. And so, when we look at the varied range of MLS kits from the pre-2004 era it begs the question, “Would the visual culture of the league be better off without the single-manufacturer model?”
That question is more easily asked than answered. Adidas offered a level of legitimacy as a world-leading sports apparel manufacturer, a guaranteed level of product quality, and substantial financial investment at a time when Major League Soccer needed it most. It’s a uniquely American approach to developing a visual sporting culture - the MLB, NFL, and NBA all have the same single-manufacturer model as the MLS and have undoubtedly benefited from the attention and investment a single sponsor provides. But it's rare you see the question asked about tradeoffs incurred in these types of partnership agreements. The loss of a team’s aesthetic individuality creates an overly corporate feel that US sports are often criticized for by our neighbors to the North, South, East, and West. A sanitized appearance that may come across as inauthentic and unappealing to fans.
So finally, we must go directly to the source and ask, as a fan, what would you prefer? The solidity and uniformity of a league-wide sporting manufacturer deal, or the individuality and risk of seeking out a unique partner for your team.
