re: MLS Rankings (by uniform)

Bleed, I agree completely with most badges that have a football in them. Can't stand that.

The difference here, is that a mascot has always been a part of American sports culture. Most football clubs sprung up from sporting clubs that were already in existence, which added football as it became too profitable to ignore. Many of the "City" and "Athletic" clubs existed as rowing/tennis/lawn bowling clubs. Once football came in, then became professional it all changed and they got popular.

They weren't founded with mascots or nicknames, those just sort of came organically from fan/member usage or newspapermen or local area activities. Some simply derived from the colors of the kit.

But starting a new league at the end of the 20th century, where marketing, branding, product placement are tantamount, especially in the United States, there was no way MLS was going to be able to thrive and survive without the ingrained nickname and "visible" mascot.

Of course we've seen MLS change, too. Dallas began it's life as the Burn with the Bad-Breath Horse on the kit. Seems after a few years, the supporters demanded change and got it. Salt Lake and Toronto came into the league with "soccer" nicknames, because it seems that fans WANT to be serious about the soccer. Same with Houston Dynamo.