• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by SFGiants58

  1. WASHINGTON NATIONALS (former San Diego Padres) - National Fatherhood This one was a bit of a rabbit hole to climb down, but it produced some fascinating results. It's been widely reported that the San Diego Padres almost moved to DC in the 1973-74 offseason. Owner C. Arnholt Smith was looking to sell the team due to financial struggles and in anticipation of the IRS charging him for tax fraud. Joseph Danzansky, President of Giant Foods, made an offer to buy the Padres for $12 million and move them to DC. The move was nearly successful, with the NL unanimously approving it and Topps designing their 1974 set with it in mind: The team even developed a road uniform that fit with the stylistic conventions of the early/mid-1970s while also replacing the brown & yellow banana set with a traditional navy & red:1 However, it was not meant to be, as the team would have to pay off the hefty amount of money left on their San Diego Stadium lease (15 years' worth).2 Couple that with an $84 million lawsuit from the city for breaking the said lease, and you've got a problem. The sale fell through, which allowed Ray "The Founder" Kroc to buy the Padres and keep them in San Diego. However, what if the relocation went through and Washington got a new team? How would their appearance change as they chased trends and updated their look upon moving to the Navy Yard Stadium? Going off of this Washington Post article from 2016, I figured that the most likely name for the team would have been "Nationals."3 I could only find one source for the "Stars" name that's been often reported by historians (based on a guess made by Ebbets Field Flannels' Jerry Cohen).4 Danzansky's son and Peter Bavasi cited the "Nationals" name as the leading candidate, so it seemed the best idea and more distinct than "Stars." Their colors would still be navy & red, and unlike the modern Padres, navy & red wouldn't be an issue. The basic structure of this design is that of the 2004-2011 San Diego Padres. with a few cues from the 2005-2010 Nationals thrown in. Drop shadow would only appear on white and grey backgrounds, with navy backgrounds featuring basic outlines (and some allusions to the shadow split in the star/letter design). The Astros' 2013-present block font is the base, as a modern block style that fits with the prototype and the modernish font I call Petcopark.ttf. The primary logo uses a home plate backing (Padres) with a new take on the three-star pattern of the DC flag. The secondary is my modernization/de-North Starized version of the prototype cap logo, while the tertiary is an update of a supposed Sen(ationals)itors design. The uniforms borrow from the Padres' 2004-2011 set, with some adaptations for navy/red. A cursive script is on the home uniform, complete with an inverted tail. I used the 2005-2009 Nats' arching pattern on the road uniform, which is my way of mimicking the bowtie wordmark. The numbers are double outlined block standard, a la the 1991-2003 Padres. I added a sock stripe pattern meant to mimic the asymmetrical pattern on the sleeves and pants (no red/navy touching). The navy alternate sheds the drop shadow and adds the tertiary patch, akin to the Padres' old navy alt. A fauxback to the 1974 uniforms is the second alt, with an appropriate cap and an adjustment to the sleeve patch. I based the script off of the 1974-77 home look, which fits well with the "cursive/fancy at home, block on road" pattern used by the Padres throughout their history. The primary dugout jacket features the cap logo on the front and the primary on the back (with the tertiary on the sleeve), while the fauxback utilizes the prototype's "Washington" wordmark. It was surprising how well the Padres' formula worked for the Nats. While I would never want the current team to adopt anything that resembled this set, I liked dissecting the 2004-2011 Padres' identity and figuring out what made it work. C+C is appreciated, as always! Up next, a funny little twist! 1 Author's Note: When we say we want the Padres to bring back brown & yellow, the 1972-73 banana peels aren't an option. 2 Credit to @bosrs1 in this CCSLC thread about the Washington Padres. 3 Jake Russell, “San Diego Padres Were Once so Close to Moving to D.C. They Had Uniforms and Everything - The Washington Post,” The Washington Post - D.C. Sports Bog, June 16, 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2016/06/16/the-time-the-san-diego-padres-were-this-close-to-moving-to-d-c/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.12b3e5479833. 4 Jerry Cohen, “The Washington Padres? – RULE 19 BLOG,” Rule 19 Blog - Ebbets Field Flannels, accessed October 11, 2018, http://web.archive.org/web/20150309095357/http://www.rule19blog.com:80/?p=31.
  2. Hey guys, sorry about the hiatus. A mix of real-life and a bit of a creative burnout put the brakes on this series. Don't worry, a new entry is coming within the day! Thanks, guys! Why yest they do! The first option is a sedate version, while the second is a bit more "experimental" (e.g., sticking more to the spirit than the lazy click-n-fill common to the promotion). The font is Badloc, used by several of the TATC teams. I like it more than Serpentine. Thanks! I originally wanted to bring out a slate/black/bronze set, but I figured that the team wouldn't have changed their color scheme wholesale (being in a traditional baseball market). However, like the 1990s Rangers, redistribution of existing colors made more sense. Black drop shadow, while era-appropriate, looks like clown feces (like it did for the Rangers). Thank you. I had a lot of fun reconstructing the prototypes. Blue with yellow outlines on the road uniforms looks lovely, while also separating them from the Pilots a bit more. Thank you very much! Thanks. I doubt that Finley would have adopted the state name, since he's not naming the team after a state organization. He never tried to adopt a state name in his various moving proposals, so I ruled out that option. I also dislike state names, so I wouldn't have a team adopt one outside of certain circumstances (e.g., Minnesota teams and the upcoming Carolina Twins). I'll get around to the Texas Athletics at some point later in the series.
  3. Oh, it wouldn’t be a permanent solution AT ALL. It’s a way to ease the transition away from the name and to brainstorm an appropriate replacement/focus group several options (logo variants/color scheme changes or redistribution/etc.).
  4. Part of me wouldn’t mind Cleveland dropping the “Indians” script from their home uniform in favor of the “Cleveland” block wordmark. It doesn’t work well for the Texas Rangers, but it’d be effective for Cleveland (emphasizing city over controversial nickname/downplaying the nickname as much as possible). Dumping the navy jerseys would also be a good idea, if only because they’re associated with the team’s numerous choke jobs in the playoffs (the nineties teams, 2016, and 2017). I’d prefer a red jersey for them, with the city wordmark.
  5. Darling, the Red Sox last made the World Series in 2013 with a markedly different team. This decade, they’ve had: -one decent year (2010) -one spectacular collapse (2011) -three last-place finishes (2012, 2014, and 2015) -two first-round exits (2016 and 2017) October has been relatively Red Sox-free over the past decade. Besides, their playoff appearance number is not close to the Yankees’ number of appearances over the past two decades. I get that you don’t like Boston fans and media. Maybe you should do something about that.
  6. All that means is that we're spared an NLCS full of Judge-Altuve size comparisons. For that alone, I am thankful. Number 28 will have to wait, preferably until 2020. It'll be nice to have a Yankee-free decade in the World Series.
  7. It’s been stated in this thread that brown is a package deal with yellow, so the former will come with the latter. I’d normally eviscerate this suggestion, but I can see your point. It’s partially a reaction to the trashing of the initial Petco Park set (the one with the khaki road set) in favor of the “navy only” look, with the dumping of navy/yellow only exacerbating the situation. The team’s decisions have invigorated the consistently-present pro-brown/yellow fans, with more joining their number. The 1998 look has some decent elements (the cap logo and the updated Swingin’ Friar), but navy/orange is already handled better by the Astros and Tigers (and Mets, just with royal instead of navy). It should stay as an alt for navy fans (e.g., @bosrs1 and those whose fondest memories of the team were in navy).
  8. Also, that helmet was front-and-center for one of the most famous catches in Super Bowl history: Also, it has the same amount of titles associated with it as the GIANTS helmet, plus an additional Super Bowl appearance. The ship has sailed for dumping the current design.
  9. Reds-Dodgers was a big one when both teams were contenders and together in the NL West (because Chicago and St. Louis threw a hissy fit and became NL East teams). However, realignment and their respective mid-1990s doldrums squashed it.
  10. Do you think he’ll get the Mike Mattheny treatment, where management keeps him on for far too long due to playoff appearances and regular season success?
  11. How about the Oakland Raiders of the Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh? ?
  12. Nope. We shouldn’t honor that monster who helped to start a centuries-long genocide. Indigenous People’s Day is what it should be renamed. It’s a day of reflection on stolen land and what can be done to ameliorate/pay reparations to Native American communities. Find a more respectable Italian hero, like Garibaldi, Da Vinci or Michelangelo. But I digress. Anyway, I’m just wondering how the ASG patch will look on the jerseys. Will it have a jersey-colored backing or a white backing?
  13. Little Red Sambo has met its undignified end on Indigenous People’s Day. Fitting.
  14. Fixed. My hope for the league flippers World Series remains, while the MOD EDIT series is eliminated! It doesn’t look like the Astros missed a beat at all.
  15. Rocktober, and Jeffries’ time as a closer, are over!
  16. I can see the logic behind limiting the Whalers throwback to games against the Bruins. Sadly, I have the sneaking suspicion that those two games will be among the few times that anybody takes note of the team.
  17. I'm just happy the team dumped the worst road jersey in franchise history by the time they won the series. The jersey doesn't use their trademark font, employs a generic block script for the team name (even if it had a historical precedent), and features placket trim that appears nowhere else in their look. I know we throw around the accusation of something looking like a "cheap knock-off" repeatedly, but this is the only uniform set that really deserved it.
  18. That’s like the 2010 Giants in reverse. A roster that looked pretty unimpressive (save for the pitching) and would have been lucky to be over .500 somehow won the World Series.
  19. Don’t the Blues only exist because the Wirtz family wanted to unload the aged St. Louis Arena on some schmucks?
  20. This is their grey! There are many others like it, but this one is their’s! Without them, their grey is useless! Without their grey, they are useless! ? Just accept that they call their shared grey shade a silly name and move on. It’s no different than giving a car or a computer a name. “Dodger Blue” is just a non-unique usage of 294 C, but nobody tries to lambast them for that name.
  21. Oh Oakland, why do we delude ourselves that you guys have a chance in the playoffs?
  22. I’m a 1959-68 guy for the Cubs’ uniforms (especially the road). Add red red outlines to the home numbers and a different bear patch and there you go!
  23. Cleveland vs. Atlanta would be worse for the networks, because MOD EDIT. Ah, who am I kidding? MOD EDIT would present a lot of coverage opportunities for controversy.
  24. Here's the thing: I don't. I'm all for going back to brown full-time, but I'd rather have the team keep a tiny bit of navy around in throwback form. It's been their primary color for a generation and has historic connections to the PCL Padres. I'll let this quote sum it up, from @bosrs1: ...and another: I can respect that, and wouldn't mind throwing people like that a bone with a dash of navy. Also, trying to say that older titles "meant more" because of a different playoff format earns an eyeroll from me. Expanding the playoffs meant that more teams had a chance at contention and sustaining it. If anything, teams have to put up more of a fight to net a title.