Next Seasons Kit Sponsor.

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

AIA Or HP ?


  • Total voters
    140
The shorts on that home kit posted are nice I think, the snippet of the away kit looked good too, like the colour and collar, reminds me of this years French kit
 
Wait ... here's another rumored home kit for next season:



I very much prefer the (simplicity) version that I posted before, but this version (which looks like a mix between a rugby and a cycling jersey) feels more legitimate ... something that Under Armour could actually make. (Though it's not too bad.)

Oh and is that a zipper on the collar? I can't tell.

The cockerel is on the wrong side and facing the wrong way !
Mirror pic maybe.
 
you recon there's any truth to the photo?

kit looks average..please levy sign a deal with nike...

I've been quite impressed with UA. This year's shirts would be classics if not for the sponsor logos, and the brand's fitting is a much more athletic cut than Nike, Adidas, or Puma.
 
I've been quite impressed with UA. This year's shirts would be classics if not for the sponsor logos, and the brand's fitting is a much more athletic cut than Nike, Adidas, or Puma.


you like UA cause your yank...(yes I no nike is too, but UA seems huge in the US but non-existent anywhere else)
for me nike remains the best looking as they stick to the basics and don't overcomplicate shit...
how about a plain white jersey with no stupid collar thing and no v neck, the badge and pehaps a blue and yellow ring around the neck..and FFS no red AIA
 
cahspur cahspur

like this UA example but make it white, get rid of the V in the collar area, have the white strip blue, add the badge, some yellow as the outside line of the blue and done...ill have 3 thanks..

 
you like UA cause your yank...(yes I no nike is too, but UA seems huge in the US but non-existent anywhere else)
for me nike remains the best looking as they stick to the basics and don't overcomplicate shit...
how about a plain white jersey with no stupid collar thing and no v neck, the badge and pehaps a blue and yellow ring around the neck..and FFS no red AIA

1) Haha I don't blame you for the American association, but in truth UA was a sponsor for the rival American football team to the team I support before they got behind Spurs, so on the premise of previous associations UA was already on negative terms in my eyes and in fact I actually originally greeted the news of our deal with disdain. Then I seen last year's home, and my opinion changed quickly.

2) I'll give you a weird collar this year on the home, but I'm not a fan of the T-shirt collar. Looks very cheap to me, and in my playing days I preferred the V-neck or polo collar because they allowed the torso to breathe a bit better and they kept shit away from my throat while running or while tossers were tugging on my shirt.

3) Yeah, Nike does keep it simple and in that I certainly agree with you. But UA's this year weren't all that complicated if you take out the sponsor. Also, as I said before, the fit means a lot more to me than sheerly keeping it simple.
 
1) Haha I don't blame you for the American association, but in truth UA was a sponsor for the rival American football team to the team I support before they got behind Spurs, so on the premise of previous associations UA was already on negative terms in my eyes and in fact I actually originally greeted the news of our deal with disdain. Then I seen last year's home, and my opinion changed quickly.

2) I'll give you a weird collar this year on the home, but I'm not a fan of the T-shirt collar. Looks very cheap to me, and in my playing days I preferred the V-neck or polo collar because they allowed the torso to breathe a bit better and they kept shit away from my throat while running or while tossers were tugging on my shirt.

3) Yeah, Nike does keep it simple and in that I certainly agree with you. But UA's this year weren't all that complicated if you take out the sponsor. Also, as I said before, the fit means a lot more to me than sheerly keeping it simple.

Tbh on all new kits with collars the only one I like would be UTD's current...I'd have no problems with our kit the same, except white with a blue collar...

I think we should also stick to the mat white instead of the shiny white
 
White one with Eriksen: love it.
White one with yellow: we made a confident decision to remove yellow from branding. This looks like a sample may have been made up and (probably) rejected.
Navy one: poor photoshop job, but i doesn't mean it's not the option we're going with. Personally I don't like it - not a fan of fold-down collars.
 
Nike does keep it simple
Nike kitted Man U out in a tablecloth as recently as two years ago. And they put Barcelona in a ludicrous gradient fill around the same time as well.

Now they're simply cynically taking advantage of amf feelings to present fake retro designs, a liberty they have not because of some plaudit deserving, overriding design philosophy (their shoes aren't simple, after all), but simply because they are so above and beyond every other brand in terms of recognition that they can just use templates from 40 years ago with updated materials and call it a day.

As cocks of the walk, Nike have no pressure to be distinctive, so instead they're derivative and let the football hipsters lap it up.

Fuck Nike.
 
that Navy away kit if real is the nuts!! the home kit iv seen is also very nice once you get over the AIA in red plastered on it. The home kit with the yellow is defo a fake kit for 1 the badge is on the wrong side of the shirt.
 
Back
Top Bottom