• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by SFGiants58

  1. First off, that season was an outlier. It was after two .500 seasons, but it was the only postseason appearance for the team in brown. The 1990s teams had two playoff appearances, one in 1996 (91-71) and the 1998 run to the World Series (98-64). It's a minor difference, but it's an indication of some sustained success compared to the Taco Bell period. They also won two division titles at Petco Park (2005 and 2006) and came close to two additional playoff appearances (2007 and 2010). Sure, the 2005 team only won 82 games and had a first-round exit, but it's still a part of team history. Go through the various MLB threads on the boards. You'll see that any time the 1998 uniforms show up, there will always be people praising them. There's a demand for them, and offering them up as full-time throwback alternates is smart branding for any navy fans who despise brown. Eh, I'd say it's smart branding to keep a 1998 throwback on-hand. Let's face it: the team has spent nearly 30 years in navy, and that original pinstriped home uniform is probably the best-looking navy-centric uniform. That's not saying much, but it's good to keep in mind. Look at how much people loved the 2016 "white S, yellow D" cap, and you'll see how much there's still an audience for that '90s set. There's a whole generation of Padres fans who grew up with the team in navy. There are a bunch of people who prefer navy, even on these forums (I'm not one of them). Just an occasional throwback to the one decent navy period uniform (which coincided with the 1998 team's surprising run and the rare sustained success the team had) is all I'm asking.
  2. But 1998 and the first sustained run of success! That has to count for something, right? Sure, it’s a non-descript look with a crappy drop shadow and poorly-rendered typeface, but it’s part of the best era of team history. It’ll be nice to wear when the team retires #15 for Bruce Bochy (during the last season of his Giants contact/after he retires following next season - a likely outcome given his health).
  3. Well, the Giants just eliminated the Cardinals by losing to the Dodgers. That’s got to count for something, right?
  4. Twice (1999 and 2000), while the Mariners have done it once (in 2006).1 The Mariners also borrowed the Pilots' sock stripes for the "fauxback" monstrosities alternates. (Side Note: the Mariners should honor the storied PCL Seattle Rainiers far more than the failed Seattle Pilots and their pre-1993 identity. Leave royal/yellow in the rancid dumpster of history/for the Brewers). I'm still holding out hope that we get a Pilots vs. Pilots match next year to commemorate the team's 50th anniversary. If it's at Safeco Field, Mariners in the home uniforms and the Brewers in the road set. If it's at Miller Park, do the inverse. Better yet, they can each wear different styles of caps! 1William F. Henderson, Game Worn Guide to Mlb Jerseys: (1970–2015) Seventh Edition (Philadelphia, PA: Aardvark Publishing, 2015), 793, 795, 1384.
  5. Calgary isn't afraid of its Atlanta heritage. The Jets adopting the Thrashers' light blue is their tiny way of paying tribute to their regrettable roots. It's not like they'd reskin this thing with the Jets' logo/type set:
  6. The record books are untouched, which is good. The kids can learn the lineage from that and not the team themselves. However, I'm conflicted. It's rubbing the relocation in Hartford fans' faces, while also ignoring that the team has done far more as the Hurricanes than they ever did as the Whalers. There's a difference between acknowledging your past and celebrating your past. Acknowledging it is all we should care about, as some of it is not worthy of celebration. The Whalers' miserable existence (look it up) and the circumstances surrounding their relocation aren't exactly something to celebrate with a throwback. Likewise, the Hurricanes have some history to celebrate. Bringing back the Cup-winning sweater as a throwback (instead of the semi-modernization they wear now) would be a good example of this. Resurrecting the Whalers is just a trashy cash-in to play on a wave of nostalgia that pours salt on healing wounds. As long as the record books are intact, teams should chose what parts of their history to celebrate. The Giants and Braves homage their past locations extensively, while the Orioles and Twins only pay minor tribute to their old homes. If the "kiddos" (problematic rhetoric there) want to learn, they can do the research without the teams force-feeding it to them.
  7. Nope! People are, for the most part, satisfied with the Texans and like their branding. Heck, there are many who prefer it to the Oilers' look. Yes, it was a poor decision to relocate, but it's not like the replacement identity was so awful that the original name had to come back (see Charlotte Bob-horne-cats). People are fine with the Giants and Dodgers doing New York/Brooklyn throwbacks because of the Mets. I doubt anybody wishes or wished that the Mets adopted the Giants or Dodgers' names. Nobody wants the Brewers to be the Braves, nobody wants the Mariners to be the Pilots, and few people really want the Timberwolves to be the Lakers. Also, the NFL retired the Oilers' branding, meaning that the Texans couldn't have adopted the name even if they want to do so. I don't know if this is correct, but I think that means that the league makes money off of Oilers merchandise instead of the Titans. Honestly, I'd rather have the Whalers fade into history. If a team relocates, rebrands, and doesn't have a replacement, a throwback is a bad idea. I hope the Nats never even consider an Expos throwback and stand firm on their "let's barely acknowledge that part of our past" sentiment.
  8. You wanna go for a swim? ? But seriously, good luck with that. This Giants team has been in a complete free-fall in September, trying to justify Evans’ firing/reassignment and the importance of aging stars. Ah well, I can’t complain. The Giants made the most out of their window.
  9. WASHINGTON SENATORS, PT. II - Inline for succession The what-if scenario here has the Sens MK II surviving into the 1990s, facing a similar identity crossroads as the Texas Rangers. In order to boost fading merchandise sales and draw interest to a developing window of contention, the team underoges a significant redesign. This overhaul would see them promote an oft-neglected color in their set (navy for the Senators, like red for the Rangers), while embracing metallic colors and emphasizing a new font. In a bit of synchronicity with the NL Nationals, the font is a modified version of Albertus. The redesign was a huge hit at first, but interest eventually fades by the early-00s and the team overhauls their look again (either to my previous concept or a 2005-09 Nats-like design). I modified the primary logo of the previous concept to include a new backing shape, inspired by the Rangers' 1994-2002 primary logo. Since the Capitol Building rendering (from the late-00s) looked like a believable rendering for the mid-90s, I kept it. The insignias are modified versions of my Sens MKI "block W" and a new interlocking DC. The tertiary logo homages the DC roundel of the Nats, with the Rangers-style stripe backing. Gold has precedence over red in the identity, reflected in the Nats-style navy/gold batterman. The uniforms are standard fare for the mid-90s/early-00s, with thick placket striping and simple arm/pants trim. The wordmarks use a similar layout to the Diamondbacks and Devil Rays, placed on a slant. They also feature a gold inline, mimicking the style of the Rockies while adding a metallic flair to the look. Sleeves feature the primary logo as the patch. The numbers are a modified version of Albertus (condensed and with squared-off tops for the "A," akin to Albertus Nova Black), while the names are Block Extra Condensed on nameplates (akin to the Rangers' early-00s uniforms). The alternates are pretty standard for the time, with a sleeveless version of the home uniform and a navy jersey for both home and road use. This jersey emphasizes the "W," with the justification of that design's precedence with the MK I Senators/AL Nationals. It features a "DC" cap, first with a gold bill and then with a navy one. I figured that the metallic bill would fall out of favor around 2000 or 2001 (like it did for the Astros and Mariners). The jacket takes cues from the 1990s Rangers, with contrast-colored sleeves. However, the contrast emerges in the form of a gradient from gold to navy. The Sens' 1990s overhaul would be a perfect blend of what the Rangers and NL Nationals produced in the '90s-early '00s, emphasizing former accent colors and increasing metallic colors' presence in the identity. While I doubt the look would have stuck around to this day, it's still a fun simulation. C+C is appreciated, as always! Up next, Washington nearly gets a replacement in the 1970s.
  10. Thanks. I thought so too, especially because the pale gold fades into the white without the pinstripes. Thanks, guys! It does have a bit of a "HEALTH" vibe to it, which I like. I'm a bit hesitant to make it the primary, as it doesn't spell out the team name. Thank you. The swap works well, with both this concept and my Project 32 Nationals. Well, the 1980s and '90s are full of attempted relocations, with flirtations involving Toronto, St. Petersburg, and DC. That I do! Episode 60 of Team Four Star's abridged series just came out, so I'm on a bit of a fix right now. I'm not all that into Eva, but I know the gist of it. Consider Eva part of the .gif list now! The Alternate Take should be up soon.
  11. A blue/white recolor calls for the "Toronto" font, Penumbra Serif (Semibold or Bold). The Blue Jays use a version with an inline, while the Leafs should use it on the 1967-70 logo (easily their best). The Raptors in blue/white with this font would be an excellent look, and it'd be easy to shirk Raptors for Huskies (when/if the time comes).
  12. You know what’s funny? The year the Caps won the Cup is the year they temporarily dumped the retro sweaters. Maybe it’s a sign to leave this dull look in the past and have a modern-style third/a throwback to the slate blue sweaters?
  13. I was thinking Bill Ponderosa. Frank said it himself, Pondy is the coolest.
  14. Same here. I'd also enjoy "Stags," since we have so few deer-based team names in sports. Pines (but not that 1970s-style logo) would be OK, as would Beavers and Mavericks. I'm sure there's going to be a big pro-Beavers contingent among the fans (history), along with Mavericks (the famed independent team).
  15. The Pines one is kind of decent (if we're talking 1970s revivalism/aping the Blazers), but the rest look like under-designed Brandiose clones. I'm not a fan.
  16. WASHINGTON SENATORS II, PART I - Sens in Scarlet The story of the expansion Washington Senators is one of pain and frustration. Urinatingtree covered it a bit in his Texas Rangers video (in his typical style), but I'll try to get into a bit more detail as to why they left. Basically: 1. The team never had a solid foundation in ownership. The first two ownership groups suffered severe financial losses, while Bob Short consistently planned to move the team out of DC for a variety of reasons (e.g., going into debt, raising ticket prices, and fighting with the Armory Board over his stadium lease, etc.). Setting a $12.4 million price tag for selling the team didn't help matters.1 2. On-field failures compounded the team's financial woes, with only one winning season in their 11 campaigns. Short's meddling with the infamous Denny McLain trade also did not help the team build upon their brief bout of success. @pmoehrin sums up that year wonderfully in this post, referring to Ted Williams' time as manager: TL;DR: This .gif, with the Sens as Lapis/Android 17 and ownership/finances/poor play as the Hellzone Grenade energy.2 But what if Short sold the team to local investors and the team turned it around eventually? What would they look like? Thanks to a few discoveries from William Henderson, we now know that the team may have deleted navy from their already red-heavy uniforms at the onset of the double-knit era.3 This red-centric trend would continue for a bit, with the team reintroducing navy in small doses throughout the 1980s and '90s. The "Senators" script and "Curly W" insignia would receive several tweaks over the years, with a "Washington" script appearing in the late-'90s/early-'00s. By the time the team moved to the Navy Yard Stadium, they'd be wearing a slightly more ornate version of that "one winning season" design, much like the NL Washington Nationals of today. The logos have not received much modification from my Senators MK I concept. I've flipped the color balance to be red-heavy, while replacing Albertus with Futura (I prefer Futura to the Nats' Neutraface). The 2011 update of the "curly W" is the secondary, while the George Washington crest design (from my alternate take of the 1901 Sens) shows the "W" with the DC city flag and the 1961 founding date. The uniforms borrow a bit from the Nationals and Rangers. The striping pattern is a slightly more balanced version of the asymmetrical stripes used by the Rangers and Nats (1970s-style when on white/grey backgrounds), while the scripts are modified versions of the Nats' cursive wordmarks. I placed the primary logo on the sleeves. The number font is a slight update of the Sens/Rangers' early-1970s font.4 The Friday alternates feature an alternate navy cap with a red "Curly W" outlined in white. This was my little homage to the 1963-67 design and the 1961-67 color balance. I went with "Senators" at home and "Washington" on the road, as the "Curly W" looks terrible on a jersey. The tertiary is now the sleeve patch, for some variety. The second set of alts includes a "clash kit" for playing red-heavy teams on the road (e.g., their 1961 expansion buddies, the Angels). The throwback is my way of homaging the 1959-60 Senat(ionals)itors (and both clubs' history with pinstripes) through elements of this identity package. The dugout jacket is a palette swap of my Sens/Nats jacket, albeit with a different striping/pocket pattern and the "Washington" cursive script. The Second Senators had the basis of a decent look towards the end of their run (only red-heavy team in the AL East), which proved to mesh well with the modernizations provided by the modern Nats. Heck, this could work well as a concept for what would have happened had Bud Selig gotten his way and named the team the Senators (before DC city officials rightfully told him that the name didn't work because the District of Columbia has no senatorial representation). C+C is appreciated, as always! For the alternate take, what if the Sens underwent a bit of a 1990s makeover? 1Andrew Sharp, “Washington Senators II Team Ownership History | Society for American Baseball Research,” Society for American Baseball Research, accessed September 24, 2018, https://sabr.org/research/washington-senators-ii-team-ownership-history-rangers. 2Dragon Ball Super spoilers: I really hope Lapis/Android 17, the savior of the multiverse, enjoyed his little family cruise. The .gif is from episode 46 of DBZ Abridged. 3William F. Henderson, Game Worn Guide to MLB Jerseys: (1970–2017), Eighth (Philadelphia, PA: Aardvark Publishing, 2017), 2958. 4Ibid, 3407.
  17. Thanks! With a team that has such a rich and varied visual history as the White Sox, it's always fun to experiment with them. Thank you! I'm starting to like the non-pinstriped one a bit more, as it jives more with the 1917 inspiration. I'll update the post to reflect that later. The Brewers prototype bit made me a little disappointed that the team didn't use the second design or adapt the first design to the Pilots' color scheme. While the radical arc Tuscan lettering is a bit derrivative of the Red Sox/Mets and the scripts are fairly standard, the blue/yellow would have made them a tad more unique. All I can say is that I'm glad that I won't be revisiting blue/yellow and Milwaukee for a long time. The '76-'81 Sox logo will be the base for the "initial" (read:throwback) design, as it fits with the similar aesthetic of the Supersonics from the period. I'm tempted to use royal & kelly for the initial design, with the team adopting a more sedate navy & green-heavy teal color scheme once the 1990s roll around or the team moves into the neo-retro Safeco Field. Thanks. Ask, and you shall receive! It's like the 1990-93 uniform, about 20 years before that set's inception. Thank you! I can see where you're coming from with smaller sock stripes, but I like that the thick stripes add a nice colorful punch to the design. It helps the flag-style imagery come across in the concept. I'm glad you liked the merged set. The Brewers had all the ingredients to get their look right the first time (either with Tuscan or scripts), but circumstances made it so that it didn't happen. Heck, the BiG would fit in well with both designs. The Sens MK II should be up soon!
  18. But muh cheap jokes and parroting of reactionary statements! Trying to “redeem” Loria is a fool’s errand. P.S. Jorge Más wouldn’t have made the team’s situation better. If anything, he’d have tried to go all-in on a team with a low ceiling. That’s how you get a Giants-level clusterbleep of terrible contracts that cripple a team’s flexibility.
  19. The shoulder patch is a fantastic logo, but that’s all I’ll praise about it. I get that they might want to save a “from the ground up” rebrand for when Jumbo (dirty player) Joe finally hangs up his skates, but it can’t come soon enough.
  20. Never trust the Yorks to get anything right.
  21. If you’re going to design a proprietary font, make condensed and extra condensed versions. It’s not that hard.
  22. Addison Russell’s ex-wife opens up on his abuse. Yikes. Update:
  23. Either pass the stool or get off the can, Marlins. If the fans want the classic set, do a Diamondbacks/Brewers-style full-time throwback at the very least. I’m a fan of the Art Deco set’s potential (especially with that blue shade), but Loria’s directives meant that it has sadly never gotten a chance to fulfil it. Now it’s just going to be tossed in the dumpster in favor of renovating an early-1990s design that didn’t age all that well.
  24. Put it in royal/kelly, stick a 2D Ottawa Centurion-style version of Johnny Canuck on the shoulders, and you’ve got the best the Canucks have ever looked (with some slight modernizations that don’t involve Agency font a.k.a. sports’ Times New Roman).