Most kits now look crap, with no Sponsors WBA, Leicester Cardiff etc Couldn't they find any Sponsors or didn't they want any?
talking of kits thought our looked class all red yesterday and the best kits this year are the puma ones
You think kits look crap with no sponsors?! We'd sell far more shirts if we didn't have a sponsor's name on the front. but to answer your question, I guess clubs whose sponsorship deals ran out have been having trouble obtaining new sponsors given the state of the economy, companies can't really justify it. I guess that's why we are also seeing clubs "donating" their shirt sponsorship to charities.....e.g. Wendies, Huddersfield
RE: You think kits look crap with no sponsors?! Looks bare, rather go to shop and bu a plain (whatever colour club it is) shirt and just get someone to sew a badge on.
Oh well seems like the corporations have finally won when people would rather walk around with a big advertisement on their chest and pay for the privilege! Then again, I guess it's no different to people who would rather pay £80 for a designer shirt to go out in that has the designer/manufacturer embazloned on the pocket than £20 for one without!
i think it depends on the sponsor ours is okay cos it matches cos it isn't a logo plastered onto the front, it's ust writing. whereas when the wendies had chuppa chups, or the blunts had big chinese letters on, then i'd rather have a kit withut a sponsor.
blunts had big chinese letters ? do you mean DESUN I always thought that they were sponsered by The Sun Newspaper and it was translated into DEDA. I have since learnt is was actually a chinese soft drink
They look far better without sponsors International kits look much better than team kits for that very reason
