[Albion] Should we be following Brentford?

[Arthur]

Personally, I hope we drop Nike at the next opportunity. I like this season's kit, but generally - they're too shady for my liking and I agree with everyone else. The kits are too expensive, released too often and the club are too greedy. A shirt should be for 2 seasons minimum but personally I think it should be mandated by the Premier League. It will never happen and obviously the clubs don't want it to, but that's my opinion.

Completely agree, always used to be 2 years. Has only changed because it's a good money spinner for the club. Whilst I'm not defending the club for doing so it is a supply and demand market. And again not wanting to defend our club I don't spend a lot of time following who is playing in what kit but I assume we aren't the only ones doing this. In fact I'm guessing by the thread Brentford are the ones bucking the trend?

One thing I will point out though is I very much doubt changing supplier away from Nike will make the kits any cheaper. Shirts a cheap rubbish regardless of the producer but all seem to cost the same.

Bring back Sports Express!!

 

[father_and_son]

3 kits... one changed each year. Can be one in each year or all 3 every 3 years but see no reason other than revenue generation (ie greed) from doing anything but.

 

[Jeremiah]

Can't we just not buy the kit and tell our youngsters "No , you can't have a kit this year" .

 

[father_and_son]

I like the idea of changing our uniform every two years instead of one and if we have the away uniform and home uniform ending in alternate years there's still a new uniform every year.

I know have the image of the Army decided to change our armed forces' uniforms every year. Would we all complain if the camouflage markings were too close together?!

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

I would imagine the sponsorship deal with Nike takes that decision away from the club.

Unfortunately this. As much as l would welcome the idea, l feel sure that the deal we have agreed to prohibits it. That's assuming that Paul Barber et al would even be agreeable to it in the first place, which l very much doubt.

Unfortunately money is God in the modern age.

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

I like the idea of changing our uniform every two years instead of one and if we have the away uniform and home uniform ending in alternate years there's still a new uniform every year.

Well the cost of a new blazer and school tie every year can be prohibitive to some families l agree.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Can't we just not buy the kit and tell our youngsters "No , you can't have a kit this year" .

I think some parents overestimate the importance of a new shirt. At The Amex I see shirts from every year and era so having an old one is not at all uncool. Then you get the kids like my son who grow out of wearing them all together. Took him to Villa on Saturday and he didn't want to wear colours (possibly because I don't either).

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

I think some parents overestimate the importance of a new shirt. At The Amex I see shirts from every year and era so having an old one is not at all uncool. Then you get the kids like my son who grow out of wearing them all together. Took him to Villa on Saturday and he didn't want to wear colours (possibly because I don't either).

Long live retro.

 

[BN41Albion]

Been thinking for years that football needs to be far more considerate of the environment. Absolutely no need for new kits, training kits, etc every year. I can't imagine the kits the players wear are worn more than once, either, which if so is shameful with what we know about the fashion industry's impact on the environment.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

I think some parents overestimate the importance of a new shirt. At The Amex I see shirts from every year and era so having an old one is not at all uncool. Then you get the kids like my son who grow out of wearing them all together. Took him to Villa on Saturday and he didn't want to wear colours (possibly because I don't either).

Nikes a lot cheaper than Stone Island, brace yourself!

 

[Tokyohands]

Personally, I hope we drop Nike at the next opportunity. I like this season's kit, but generally - they're too shady for my liking and I agree with everyone else. The kits are too expensive, released too often and the club are too greedy. A shirt should be for 2 seasons minimum but personally I think it should be mandated by the Premier League. It will never happen and obviously the clubs don't want it to, but that's my opinion.

This. Even if they strung a Nike shirt out for 2 seasons I still wouldn't buy it as I just hate them.

 

[Brovion]

Completely agree, always used to be 2 years. Has only changed because it's a good money spinner for the club. Whilst I'm not defending the club for doing so it is a supply and demand market. And again not wanting to defend our club I don't spend a lot of time following who is playing in what kit but I assume we aren't the only ones doing this. In fact I'm guessing by the thread Brentford are the ones bucking the trend?

One thing I will point out though is I very much doubt changing supplier away from Nike will make the kits any cheaper. Shirts a cheap rubbish regardless of the producer but all seem to cost the same.

Bring back Sports Express!!

Indeed. If the club didn't make money from it they wouldn't do it. The fact is they can bring out a new shirt every year and enough people are prepared to pay £25-£30 for it to make it worthwhile. Like you I don't follow who's playing in what, in fact I don't look too closely at what kits we wear, but aren't there three shirts? Nominally 'Home', 'Away' and 'Change'? If shirts change every year do we have three new shirts each season? If 'no' then the concept of making a shirt last for more than a season is already established and it's just a matter of extending it.

But yes, in this era when we're trying to bash an environmental message through even the thickest of skulls, 'one-season' shirts should be seen as being on a par with plastic drinking straws.

 

[DJ NOBO]

Buy the training shirt.
Looks nicer.
Cheaper.
And it’s a better fit, if you don’t have the physique of the players.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Indeed. If the club didn't make money from it they wouldn't do it. The fact is they can bring out a new shirt every year and enough people are prepared to pay £25-£30 for it to make it worthwhile. Like you I don't follow who's playing in what, in fact I don't look too closely at what kits we wear, but aren't there three shirts? Nominally 'Home', 'Away' and 'Change'? If shirts change every year do we have three new shirts each season? If 'no' then the concept of making a shirt last for more than a season is already established and it's just a matter of extending it.

But yes, in this era when we're trying to bash an environmental message through even the thickest of skulls, 'one-season' shirts should be seen as being on a par with plastic drinking straws.

We currently have two new shirts a season, home and away, the previous seasons away shirt will become the third shirt so effectively that design gets two seasons use. The home shirt only gets one season use, I think the last time we had a home shirt last two seasons was the 14-15/15-16 season.

At £40 a pop for even a basic kids shirt with no printing it’s ridiculously expensive for something they will want replaced in less than a year. Thankfully my kids kits can be passed down to younger siblings and as my boys play a lot of football the older shirts still get plenty of use, but a revision back to each shirt getting at least 2 years and staggered releases so you’d only have to buy one new shirt a season would have the budget and save on waste.

I’d much rather we ditch Nike too, I don’t like their football shirts, I think the Errea ones were a lot better design and those kits we had integrated sponsors logo look so much than the iron on shit we have with Nike.

 

[Brovion]

We currently have two new shirts a season, home and away, the previous seasons away shirt will become the third shirt so effectively that design gets two seasons use. The home shirt only gets one season use, I think the last time we had a home shirt last two seasons was the 14-15/15-16 season.

At £40 a pop for even a basic kids shirt with no printing it’s ridiculously expensive for something they will want replaced in less than a year. Thankfully my kids kits can be passed down to younger siblings and as my boys play a lot of football the older shirts still get plenty of use, but a revision back to each shirt getting at least 2 years and staggered releases so you’d only have to buy one new shirt a season would have the budget and save on waste.

I’d much rather we ditch Nike too, I don’t like their football shirts, I think the Errea ones were a lot better design and those kits we had integrated sponsors logo look so much than the iron on shit we have with Nike.

Forty quid? FORTY QUID? As you can tell I don't buy replica shirts. I said £30 (top range) in my post. I arrived at that figure by working out what was the most I thought someone could possibly be prepared to pay for a bit of garish disposable polyester and then doubled it. Not even close.

Ah well at those prices (and profits) there's zero chance of us trying to become more sustainable. Thanks for explaining the 'rotation' policy though.

 

[Lethargic]

Yes.
But aren't the shirts so cheaply made that they only last 1 year?

Sent from my CPH2173 using Tapatalk

 

[BNthree]

Forty quid? FORTY QUID? As you can tell I don't buy replica shirts. I said £30 (top range) in my post. I arrived at that figure by working out what was the most I thought someone could possibly be prepared to pay for a bit of garish disposable polyester and then doubled it. Not even close.

Ah well at those prices (and profits) there's zero chance of us trying to become more sustainable. Thanks for explaining the 'rotation' policy though.

You're in for more of a shock:

 

[faoileán]

Two seasons seems sensible, no pressure for youngsters to keep up with the Jones and helps the enviroment.

Makes perfect sense all round, not sure the more globally immersed clubs would like to miss out on all that revenue created every year.
But feck them....

I also vote 2 seasons; I actually think it's counter's counter-productive changing the shirt every year because I won't buy one because I know it will be out of date 12 months later.

 

[Bozza]

I like the idea of changing our uniform every two years instead of one and if we have the away uniform and home uniform ending in alternate years there's still a new uniform every year.

And we used to do that relatively recently, didn't we?

It's a common sense approach because people know they can buy a shirt and get two years out of it with it being current. With the current setup, I feel there's no point buying my son a shirt for Christmas as it's only got a few months left in it.

 

[Insel affe]

I also vote 2 seasons; I actually think it's counter's counter-productive changing the shirt every year because I won't buy one because I know it will be out of date 12 months later.

Not only that, it comes out during the holiday season, so a vast swath of folks will probably not be able or just reluctant to buy tops etc at that time. Also most will buy around Christmas time as others have alluded to as a Christmas present, due to how expensive it can be, especially if you have several to fork out for, So then basically you get 5 months of a new kit, not fair really and punishes the less well off again.