18 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. Hear, hear! Where did the bold stripe across the chest go? Where is the bright and engaging royal blue? A fail on the logo and a fail on the shirts.

  2. I absolutely agree with you. The Whitecaps have become a corporate entity rather than a soccer club. It is disgraceful how the marketers have screwed up our beloved Whitecaps. The logo was bad enough but the jerseys, especially the home one, are awful and embarrassing. Can you imagine how we would treat a team who came to Swangard and wore that apology for football kit? I will not be buying one either.

  3. I am not urging you to like something you clearly don’t (I can live with the logo, but I do not like the kits for the same reasons you don’t) but you can’t blame Paul Barber. This was in the works lone before he came to town.

  4. I have been a Whitecaps support since 1974. I cried tears of joy in ’79, I was a founding member of “The Jungle” back in ’83. I have followed them when they were the ’86ers, praying to the football gods to get our name back. Then it all happened and the Whitecaps came back, and as we all knew it would happen, regardless of what the experts say, the MLS had to come to Vancouver, the hotbed of Canadian Football. But this new logo means nothing to the history of the club. Should have gone back to the logo of 79. Simple, but classy. Sort of like a certain hockey team in the city. As for the uniform, well it is a disgrace. The sponsors logo would have looked fine in the middle of the strip, instead of Vancouver, or Whitecaps.
    Well I for one will not buy this kit, or anything that has that logo on it.

  5. The colour change is really offensive. I was worried navy blue was coming when we saw the logo, and I was right. As you say, it is that non-descript Spurs blue. Ahh… with the prominence of the Bell logo, colour, and ‘feel’, it’s all Toronto Maple Leafs for me. I’ll be grabbing any vestige of the original gear this summer as I can’t handle the overall package we’ve been given.

  6. I can live with the colour tweaks for two reasons: one, navy and light blue look better together than royal blue and light blue; two, Dallas, Kansas City, and San Jose already use royal blue, so navy helps differentiate (and for those who rightly point out that L.A., New England, and Philly all use navy blue: see point 1; I think navy looks better overall).

    • Who cares what other people have as their colours? Navy is not our shade of blue.

      • It is now. Even most teams in England changed/tweaked their colours early in their history. It could have been a lot worse. It wasn’t wholesale change to something like violet and peach for example. We could have done a lot worse.

  7. FYI, I like the logo…definitely don’t like the white kit…I’m okay with the blue…and the fact that I work for one of the sponsor’s major competitors guarantees that I will never wear either. But that’s besides the point.

    I think the response here is a little over the top on all fronts. You want tradition? The blue stripe on white has fine memories for a lot of people. But it’s worth remembering that it’s only been worn for 17 of the club’s 34 seasons. From 1974-78, it was a red-white strip that changed every year. The 86ers wore gold and blue, and red, black & white in the final years. A lot of us who weren’t around in the NASL days (myself included) have fine memories of that era. And it’s safe to say that my favourite memories of the club is in it’s current kit.

    But things change and I’m not going to howl at the moon.

    The real tradition of the club to me is based on two things:
    1.) The desire to win everything.
    2.) Advancing Canadian Soccer.

    If the club ever abandoned one of these two traditions, I’d be the first barbarian at the gate. But as much as I’m sentimental about old victories and comfortable memories, I want this club to take back its real mantlepiece in the soccer world. No disrespect to Toronto or Montreal, but whenever the world thinks of Canadian soccer, I want it to think Whitecaps. (And to TFC and Impact supporters, that’s a fair challenge to your clubs to take that from us.).

    Wear whatever kit you want. Don’t like the logo? Wear retro, or create your own kit. I’m wearing retro until they come out with a sponsorless shirt worth wearing. Eventually, the kit and logo will change, so that’s no big deal to me.

    But I want results. I want at least two rounds of playoffs in year one, and serious title contention every year after that. I want the Voyageurs Cup to wear layer upon layer of Whitecaps championships. I want the CONCACAF Champions League to be our birthright. I want hordes of Canadian players dreaming of playing in the Whitecaps Academy, and in ten years, populating every team in MLS and the big clubs in Europe.

    Am I unreasonable? To me, these are the things every supporter, regardless of your club, has the right to be unreasonable about. Losing the kit? They can always bring that back. The desire to win is much harder, and more worthy of keeping.

    • I agree with much of your comments, Bill, just pass me a vomit bag for whenever our team runs out of the tunnel! Perhaps I will just pretend to be blind and listen to the radio commentary. I am very disappointed with the Caps on this one, but I have to give them credit that this is the first wrong move they have made since Kerfoot took over. I feel a bit like those people who go to the Art gallery, look at a piece of art and say “my kid could have done that”

      • Big Bill: Your post treats the Vancouver 86ers as though they were the Vancouver Whitecaps: they were not. The 86ers were, in fact, a wholly different team than the Whitecaps. The current uniform has been a part of the Whitecaps from 1979 to 1984 and from 2000 to 2010. That is 17 of 21 seasons.

  8. WHOA! YOU CAN’T DO THAT! If the Vancouver 86ers don’t “count” towards the team history, than neither do the Whitecaps years from 2000-2010 since they were EXACTLY THE SAME CLUB. The fans voted to change the name of the 86ers to Whitecaps, so Lenarduzzi and co. gamely purchased the Whitecaps trademark (since it belonged to someone else) and that allowed them to make the name change. The 86ers years are just as valid a part of the Vancouver Whitecaps FC MLS push as the Whitecaps 2000-2010 (which is why I would love to see yellow 3rd kit). Now IF you say that the only legit kit is the Whitecaps of the NASL, then you still have to deal with the old red and black logo and kit. Either way, Vancouver’s teams only wore the blue bar across the chest for half their existence (whether you go NASL-only, or total soccer history). The blue bar was the best, but it was NOT the only and Big Bill is correct. Whitecapsfan, I like your blog, and you SHOULD spout your opinions since this is a blog, but feeding misinformation to your readers and playing fast and loose with the facts is only going to have people tune you out. Hate the new lo0go and kit, but be honest with the history.

    • The history is the 86ers were a different club. They were formed 2 years after the Whitecaps went defunct. When Kerfoot bought the club, he did not buy the 86ers, but the Whitecaps. The 86ers had no legs in the MLS and no legs as a logo or as a brand. What made the Whitecaps a Vancouver legend was what occurred in 1979. If not for that era, no one would want to bring back the team name. The colours of 1979 to 1984 were the Colours of the Vancouver Whitecaps, and have been since 2000. No one outside of a very small community knows about the 86ers, but people all over the world know the Whitecaps and their kit. A good friend of mine watched the Whitecaps beat the Rowdies in 1979 live in Santiago, Chile. No one ever watched the 86ers outside of a small local community.

  9. Where do you guys (Jeremy and Whitecapsfan) get your facts from? A few misleading facts in your comments here. Where do I start? For one thing the team was still the 86ers in 2000, they weren’t the Whitecaps. Stadnyk bought the team during the final games of the 2000 season where he immediately turned it into a minor league sideshow (skateboard/bmx ramp installed in the south end for the first game as new owner with some idiot on a microphone yelling about the stunts being performed even as the national anthem started). But I digress. There was no fan vote to change the team name, Stadnyk did that on his own. They did not purchase the name either. John Laxton transferred the name free of charge in exchange for a percentage of merchandising profits. Now back to your argument!

    • Thanks K-head. You should really be made the team historian. These minor factual discrepancies do not change the substance or force of my argument however.

      • True (about the factual errors not changing the substance of your argument), I’m just they type of guy that feels the need to correct the errors when I see them (when I’m sure of the facts). Just happens that I used to collect and scrapbook as many 86ers/Whitecaps news articles back in the day so I had those facts at hand. I’m definitely not trying to be a know it all, I obviously no nothing about the present team!

  10. there are sporting goods that are very cheap but the quality is not very good :;-

  11. Vancouver Whitecaps?? Who are they? I though the team name was Bell

    I agree. What a disgrace.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: