I’m trying to get any biases I have about teams out of the way nice and early. I’m thinking about where I stand on Chelsea FC. Turns out that I’m indifferent. Chelsea’s kits are blue and they tend to be just that.
Price: $70. What was the norm for a Premier League soccer jersey has become something of a bargain. Relatively, of course.
Comfort: Ah the good old 1-10 scale. 1 being crap, 10 being a Tailored by Umbro shirt, the Chelsea shirt gets a 9. Very light and very comfortable. Doesn’t really have that jersey mesh feel of the new Manchester United or Celtic shirts but it is just as light-weight. The material is really soft as well. Definitely a nice shirt to wear.
Popular VideoThis young teenage singer was shocked when Keith Urban invited her on stage at his concert. A few moments later, he made her wildest dreams come true.
Design: I do like the Chelsea blue. I really do. I love the fact that it’s just as iconic as the Liverpool or United red. The fact of the matter, though, is that it is the same blue every single year. Adidas have tried to change it up a little this year by throwing some red onto the kit (on the collar and piping on the sleeves), a color that hasn’t been seen on a Chelsea home shirt since the 1994/1995 season. There has been red on Chelsea kits going back to the late 1950’s (on the socks). With that being said, it doesn’t look any less right.
I’m a stickler for details and there is one thing on this shirt that absolutely bothers the hell out of me. On the collar, right on the white part, there are some crop circles cut into the collar. It’s hard to tell on some photos just because it is white on white and the circles just seem so… pointless. Now, I’m sure that Adidas has some sort of technological reasoning for it like “they improve blood flow to the legs” or “they make you run like Lampard even if you’re as chubby as him.” Speaking strictly design-wise, it’s wrong. A plain white collar would have been class.