MLB Changes 2017

[ScottieH4]

Long time troller, first time poster...I definitely prefer low-cut stirrup socks, but can accept a decent looking full sock.  However, Stance completely missed the boat on at least 90% of their designs.  How can they not take stirrup designs from each team's history, and make that their first design, or at least inspiration.  Instead, they wanted to reinvent the wheel.  And I agree, there should in no way, shape, or form, be more than 1 design allowed on the field at the same time.  Different heights/cuts, maybe...but different design altogether, NO!

[Silent Wind of Doom]

On 4/5/2017 at 2:38 AM, upperV03 said:

Neither of those socks for the Diamondbacks are Stance. The only team-specific Stance socks we've seen for them so far are these, and they've yet to be worn on the field.

Also, it's important to note that teams who are seen primarily wearing the solid colored Stance socks still have team-specific designs that they have at their disposal. It's just up to them whether or not they wear them, and for some teams it's up to each individual to decide which socks they want to wear. And regarding the stirrups seen on Miller and Lindor, and probably some other players as well, they are not made by Stance. They are just the regular old stirrups, and so far the only thing even closely resembling stirrups from Stance are the Dodgers' socks, which (to my knowledge) have not been worn on the field.

There are still some teams who we have yet to see the team-specific Stance socks for. The Mariners come to mind, as do the Giants, Pirates, and Braves. There may be more, and there are plenty of teams whose team-specific socks have been released but have yet to be worn on the field. Chances are each team probably has 2-3 different team-specific Stance designs, so I'd say there's still plenty more yet to see.

 

There's definitely multiple team options from Stance.  Both of the Tampa Bay options with their traditional striping (the TB one and the sunburst one) that we saw opening day had the yellow Stance logo on them.  Who knows how many options there are.

 

It's weird that the Diamondbacks have introduced new socks that are not Stance.  I really dig them, though.  Hope they keep them around.

 

 

Weirder still is that they went with Stance for the throwback.  I guess it's just a matter of what the team picks, though.  In the end, that's what this all comes down to.  Looking at what Arizona is doing, if the Giants or Orioles wanted to wear the old stripes, they'd just break them out.  There's nothing stopping teams from just wearing what they want.  This... this is what they want.  Which comes into this...

 

11 hours ago, jmac11281 said:

The whole Stance sock thing seems so half-assed. Some teams have team specific socks (A's or Dodgers). Some use generic multi-colored (Orioles/Giants). Why doesn't each team have its own design with its logo?

 

They do.  They all do.  They all have, like, half a dozen options at least, including generic stripes and solids.  Teams chose what they're wearing.

 

One interesting thing is the more insane outlandish designs are staying off field.  The rainbow socks were shown either, but these...

 

 

Also saw practice, but not gameplay.  At least the Astros seem to be keeping them just as practice wear.

 

On a side note, I haven't gotten to say so far...

 

 

I'm really digging the Brewers' socks.  The look has become really drab over time, but this adds a little more to the look and breaks things up.  It's something new, and a little more color, even if it looks really dark in this shot.  I also think the look looks good on the A's, as their thing is busy designs.  Although I do agree with Fernando that the perfect look for them is green stirrups over yellow.  I'd say with a logo over the ankle.

 

On the stirrups debate, it's a classic look.  It doesn't work for everyone, but if a team is wearing a classic look, wearing throwbacks, or can benefit from different-colored sanitaries.

Less than helmets, I'd compare it to belts.  Belts are completely unnecessary, and can be replaced with either a drawstring or 80's style elastic waistbands.  They were even ditched for a bit, but we moved back because we decided we just liked the way this looked better.

 

14 hours ago, panthers_2012 said:

Well what would help first is if THE STRIPES CONNECTED ON THE SOCK!!! 

What?  What do you mean connected?

[upperV03]

1 hour ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

 

There's definitely multiple team options from Stance.  Both of the Tampa Bay options with their traditional striping (the TB one and the sunburst one) that we saw opening day had the yellow Stance logo on them.  Who knows how many options there are.

 

It's weird that the Diamondbacks have introduced new socks that are not Stance.  I really dig them, though.  Hope they keep them around.

 

After doing a little digging it appears the Diamondbacks actually had both of those options in rotation last season:

The first image is from May 20th, 2016 and I'm not sure when the second image is from but it's clear from the truncated piping on the pants that it's from last season as well. So while the club hasn't newly introduced these sock options this season, it's still odd that they're being allowed to use them rather than the Stance socks.

[FiddySicks]

So, the D Backs wore their "Throwbacks" tonight. 

 

 

Sigh, pretty much confirmation that we're never going to get proper throwbacks ever again. 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

12 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Since when do the Brewers show their initials as MKE????

 

 

Weird.  Where did this graphic come from?  I thought maybe whoever it was was doing that with all the teams, but COL is Coll Airport in Scotland.

 

7 minutes ago, upperV03 said:

After doing a little digging it appears the Diamondbacks actually had both of those options in rotation last season:

The first image is from May 20th, 2016 and I'm not sure when the second image is from but it's clear front the truncated piping on the pants that it's from last season as well. So while the club hasn't newly introduced these sock options this season, it's still odd that they're being allowed to use them rather than the Stance socks.

 

Huh.  Can't believe this never got mentioned in the MLB threads of the past.  It's a nice look.

 

Back when all this was announced it was said that teams could wear other socks, just without any brand logos on them.  While professional quality hats and jerseys are a little harder to come by, anyone can grab a pair of socks, and they don't need official licensing.  While I was expecting some to do this, I wasn't expecting as much to see entire teams decide to skip Stance at a time.

 

6 minutes ago, Bucfan56 said:

So, the D Backs wore their "Throwbacks" tonight. 

 

Sigh, pretty much confirmation that we're never going to get proper throwbacks ever again. 

 

With the new socks, I'm feeling less and less like this is a throwback and more like an alt in the old colors.  I saw socks themed to the White Sox throwback.  The Diamondbacks are one thing, but... there's no way Chicago would wear those with their throwback... right?

[SilverBullet1929]

6 hours ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

Weird.  Where did this graphic come from?

Brewers Twitter page 

[WSU151]

8 hours ago, Bucfan56 said:

So, the D Backs wore their "Throwbacks" tonight. 

 

 

Sigh, pretty much confirmation that we're never going to get proper throwbacks ever again. 

 

It doesn't look bad in teal on that hat.  Better than white.  Not a total loss.

 

The only "proper" throwbacks remaining were throwbacks based after 1990 or so.  

[WSU151]

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but I have no idea why the Padres stuck with navy and white this year.  The brown and gold is just so distinct.  

[14er]

Reds are having some consistency issues with their batterman logo. Some players, but not all, are wearing a red/white/black logo on their pants while the batterman is black/white/red on jerseys, caps, and other pants. Anyone ever seen anything like this?

 

Also, the Stance version of the Cardinal's socks suck. Striping is way too wide and low. 

[damnyoutuesday]

Little late, but the thing about the Padres new uniforms is that they do look nice, but they're just really bland for a team with some iconic looks

[Raymie]

12 hours ago, WSU151 said:

 

It doesn't look bad in teal on that hat.  Better than white.  Not a total loss.

 

The only "proper" throwbacks remaining were throwbacks based after 1990 or so.  

 

The teal still looks a shade too light — like the current hue.

[mightyduck]

Brewers wearing their "throwback pinstripes" set against the Cubs tonight.

 

Do we have to start a collection in order to get Milwaukee to make this switch permanent?

[masterchaoss]

14 minutes ago, mightyduck said:

Brewers wearing their "throwback pinstripes" set against the Cubs tonight.

 

Do we have to start a collection in order to get Milwaukee to make this switch permanent?

yeah probably. its gonna be hard to convince them this two identity at one time thing is less profitable then going back to a look and sticking to it.

[Jungle Jim]

On 4/6/2017 at 6:54 AM, Gothamite said:

I like stirrups, but only very low ones, showing a minimum of white.  I'll take solid socks any day, I think socks should be a bold splash of color. 

 

Even thoigh they were the default look of my childhood, I just can't stand the ankle-thong skinny stirrups.  Not enough team color.  

 

 

Although, if anyone doubts whether the White Sox could actually wear white socks, they need only look at pictures like this one to see that white socks would work just fine with their pinstriped pants.  That's essentially what Robin is wearing anyway. 

 

My friends and I all thought the skinny stirrups were cool in the 80s.  When we were issued lower-cut stirrups, we'd cut them at the bottom and sew in a piece of elastic, so they'd ride up higher.  Looking back, that single thin stripe down the side was pretty goofy looking.

 

By the same token, I didn't like the extremely low-cut stirrups the Reds wore in those days, but now they look good in retrospect.

 

Oh, and by the way, it looks like those things Yount is wearing were the fake stirrups, which were just socks with a stripe down the sides, all woven together.

 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

I think Miller and Lindor have it down, splitting the difference.  They may be a little high, but the cut coming halfway up the sock, leaving plenty of room for stripes or other features looks pretty good.

 

 

If only their teams would jump on the wagon with them.

 

Meanwhile, I definitely am happy to see that teams are not completely beholden to Stance, or rather that even though they are not legally obligated, they don't feel a sense of obligation to show brand loyalty.  They break out what they want.  What confuses me is the teams that are not going with proprietary stripe designs or such are just going with their own rather than rocking the Stance logo.  

 

 

If trying to figure out what's happening with Stance in this season has taught me anything, it's that socks are really friggin' inconsistent.  I mean, we knew that the A's and a Pirate or two wore non-uniform socks.  But teams seem to be mixing and matching Stance and non-Stance for various things, including wearing non-Stance solid colors one day and then Stance solid colors another.  Then when I went to see if Corey Seager and... I forget the other guy were still wearing the same socks with different logos, I found that Seager wore his pants down the second game after wearing them up the first game.  I figured players were either socks or not players, but apparently not.

 

Meanwhile, still haven't seen socks from the Twins.

[Ray Lankford]

The Padres added a sleeve logo to their brown jerseys and it looks like a blob from not that far away:

 

[dont care]

2 hours ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

I think Miller and Lindor have it down, splitting the difference.  They may be a little high, but the cut coming halfway up the sock, leaving plenty of room for stripes or other features looks pretty good.

 

 

If only their teams would jump on the wagon with them.

 

Meanwhile, I definitely am happy to see that teams are not completely beholden to Stance, or rather that even though they are not legally obligated, they don't feel a sense of obligation to show brand loyalty.  They break out what they want.  What confuses me is the teams that are not going with proprietary stripe designs or such are just going with their own rather than rocking the Stance logo.  

 

 

If trying to figure out what's happening with Stance in this season has taught me anything, it's that socks are really friggin' inconsistent.  I mean, we knew that the A's and a Pirate or two wore non-uniform socks.  But teams seem to be mixing and matching Stance and non-Stance for various things, including wearing non-Stance solid colors one day and then Stance solid colors another.  Then when I went to see if Corey Seager and... I forget the other guy were still wearing the same socks with different logos, I found that Seager wore his pants down the second game after wearing them up the first game.  I figured players were either socks or not players, but apparently not.

 

Meanwhile, still haven't seen socks from the Twins.

It's because for what ever reason the MLB has never required the socks to be uniform team wide, also with the stance deal they allowed for other socks to be worn still which is stupid if you ask me. For all the bad that the NBA does atleast they can get uniform sock designs and everyone wears them. The MLB looks like a mess every day they have 5 different sock patterns on the field, then you got another guy in stirrups for what ever reason, then the rest of the team wearing their pants so low they are dragging the dirt behind them as they run the bases. MLB needs to change its UNIFORM policy and fast.

[WSU151]

On 4/6/2017 at 1:38 PM, Ray Lankford said:

The Phillies/Reds game helps me to appreciate how the Cardinals wear their dark blue hat on the road when they play other red teams and makes me think that all teams should be required to have secondary hats for such occasions. 

 

Do you want the Reds to wear their black hats when they play in DC, Philly, St. Louis, and Anaheim?

 

 

[upperV03]

4 hours ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

Meanwhile, still haven't seen socks from the Twins.

One of their team-specific designs:

[Ray Lankford]

1 hour ago, WSU151 said:

 

Do you want the Reds to wear their black hats when they play in DC, Philly, St. Louis, and Anaheim?

 

 

Given the current options, yes.