West Brom kit change

[robf]

I appreciate that there are bigger issues to be concerned about, but I do find it disappointing that there will be three Premier League sides (Southampton and Cardiff being the others) who have ditched their traditional colours:

 

http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2014/05/02/west-bromwich-albions-new-kit-given-thumbs-down-by-fans/?

 

I guess if enough fans don't buy it, it may force them to change it back!

[Smugsy]

The only change of colours I approve of are Southampton's. The less teams in red and white stripes in the world the better.

[Andy06]

Shame really seems tradition doesn't matter as much anymore

[chrissy_g]

quite like that shirt to be honest

[Caselord]

What are Southampton doing?

[markpvfc]

What are Southampton doing?

 

They've been playing in all red all season rather than the red and white stripes they used to play in.

[Spunk Trumpet]

We went from stripes to pinstripes in 84/85. Worked out really well for us......

 

Lardies in pinstripes still equals stripes.

[timvalefan]

Lardies in pinstripes still equals stripes.

 

Still look like massive deckchairs.

[Santa]

Adidas seem to struggle with teams who wear stripes for some reason.

[Caselord]

I'm often torn on the tradition debate. Whilst I agree tradition & heritage are important, sometimes change is a good thing in order to move forward. We haven't always been called port vale, we haven't always played in black & white and haven't always called Burslem home. If we were to change our strip & move grounds would that be a bad thing?

[DaneValiant]

It looks pretty smart though. Maybe that should've been a third kit or something. It's not the first time they've done it:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3320[/ATTACH]

 

Cardiff's change is a joke however.

[CAVALIER]

My Baggie mate hates it

[robf]

I'm often torn on the tradition debate. Whilst I agree tradition & heritage are important, sometimes change is a good thing in order to move forward. We haven't always been called port vale, we haven't always played in black & white and haven't always called Burslem home. If we were to change our strip & move grounds would that be a bad thing?

 

I'm not arguing things have to stay as they are. Otherwise, we'd still have players wearing hats and rushing the goalkeeper.

 

But most change (such as those about Vale you mention) are popular and consentual. And not all took place. In the 1920's the local paper tried to use the nickname the "Colliers" - they continued to use it in match reports and so on to try and get it accepted. The fans didn't accept it and it was dropped after a few years. So only popular changes tended to be accepted.

 

My concern with these changes is that seem to be disregarding the fans and are purely commercial decisions. Both Cardiff and Hull, for instance freely said their changes (red kit for Cardiff and the proposed name change for Hull) are to attract money from Asia etc.

 

The Baggies fans clearly don't want this shirt. If they did, that's fine, it's their club not yours or mine.

 

However, PL clubs say that only 20% of their revenue comes from the fans so they are not as important as pleasing the other 80% of commercial partners, so the clubs can simply ignore the fans wishes. This isn't the situation in the FL yet (or indeed in the past) but it's a worrying precedent that fans, the club's lifeblood are not as important as other things (like TV and commercial deals) to a club. *

 

So, I'm not arguing against this on the "traditional" angle - I'm arguing on the "greed" one...

 

After all, if it's just about satisfying the Asian or Chinese TV markets will PL clubs schedule games to suit those areas? Play in stadia closer to those regions? Perhaps, like Hull, change the name to attract the far east market?

 

* Those stats are broadly right, I reckon. Look at this Hull statement here where they say gate receipts have gone from 60% (FL) to 7% in the PL. And that "TV revenue" is the main income: http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/images/localworld/ugc-images/276270/binaries/EhabAllamLetter.pdf

[Caselord]

I'm often torn on the tradition debate. Whilst I agree tradition & heritage are important, sometimes change is a good thing in order to move forward. We haven't always been called port vale, we haven't always played in black & white and haven't always called Burslem home. If we were to change our strip & move grounds would that be a bad thing?

 

I'm not arguing things have to stay as they are. Otherwise, we'd still have players wearing hats and rushing the goalkeeper.

 

But most change (such as those about Vale you mention) are popular and consentual. And not all took place. In the 1920's the local paper tried to use the nickname the "Colliers" - they continued to use it in match reports and so on to try and get it accepted. The fans didn't accept it and it was dropped after a few years. So only popular changes tended to be accepted.

 

My concern with these changes is that seem to be disregarding the fans and are purely commercial decisions. Both Cardiff and Hull, for instance freely said their changes (red kit for Cardiff and the proposed name change for Hull) are to attract money from Asia etc.

 

The Baggies fans clearly don't want this shirt. If they did, that's fine, it's their club not yours or mine.

 

However, PL clubs say that only 20% of their revenue comes from the fans so they are not as important as pleasing the other 80% of commercial partners, so the clubs can simply ignore the fans wishes. This isn't the situation in the FL yet (or indeed in the past) but it's a worrying precedent that fans, the club's lifeblood are not as important as other things (like TV and commercial deals) to a club. *

 

So, I'm not arguing against this on the "traditional" angle - I'm arguing on the "greed" one...

 

After all, if it's just about satisfying the Asian or Chinese TV markets will PL clubs schedule games to suit those areas? Play in stadia closer to those regions? Perhaps, like Hull, change the name to attract the far east market?

 

* Those stats are broadly right, I reckon. Look at this Hull statement here where they say gate receipts have gone from 60% (FL) to 7% in the PL. And that "TV revenue" is the main income: http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/images/localworld/ugc-images/276270/binaries/EhabAllamLetter.pdf

 

Where would you stand if we were to follow suit on some of these examples? Move to a brand new more modern stadium with a 15k capacity and play in an black & amber kit? Is vale park viable in order for us to progress? If we moved away from black & white as our main colours, would that matter? Would moving stadiums attract more fans, either new fans or some of the old ones back? Would doing a re-brand of the kit create more interest & buzz?