• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

314 Platoon Sharer


About packerfan21396

  • Rank
    Go Pack Go

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    All things 'Scansin
  • Favourite Teams
    Packers, Brewers, Bucks, Badgers, Admirals

Recent Profile Visitors

5,823 profile views
  1. Also, Photobooth-hosted pictures are previewed as blurry, so I recommend steering away from that too.
  2. That'll be a condensed Serpentine.
  3. WCU must've relocated from Colorado... Combo of Colorado state flag colors and Nuggets' pickaxes isn't the best look for a western Cal team.
  4. (my mistake... Looked wonky to me, almost thought you were using Arial)
  5. Fair enough, I guess you did answer my question earlier. I just thought I might have cracked the code with a reputation point threshold, and was wondering if any of you knew something about that. But, @officeglenn addressed that theory, so the mystery continues... Thanks guys, keep up the good work!
  6. I know, I'm not too worried, just wanted to see if you guys had any insight. I think it was about 9 before midnight, 2 after; I'm not sure. I just see 1 like posts at the bottom bottom of the list and was just wondering why they were there where mine and other posts aren't.
  7. I guess I should've been clearer, I meant I'm no where to be found on the daily leaderboard, even in the list under the top 4.
  8. Not sure if you guys can figure this one out either, but going along on the "How the Leaderboard works?" train, is there a reputation threshold to even be considered on the leaderboard? I'm not trying to be egotistical here, but I escaped my lurking and occasional Concepts posting and made a splash in the News forum (for better or for worse) and I'm still nowhere to be found in the leaderboard even though my M barley study got 11 likes. It seems like only the big names of the board get put on the leaderboard, any confirmation to that theory?
  9. How? Michigan's M never changed shape... Milwaukee's M has at least 3 distinct styles. Absolutely, I love the Germanic set, both the Motre Bame and the M. Huge fan of Todd Radom's work.
  10. 1891 1910 1940 current . . . Yes. It has always been a wide slab serif M. As opposed to: 1905 1926 1952 1958 1970 Stretched out and condensed, sans serif and serif, consistent line width and skinny V portion; each era had a style.
  11. Fair enough, I did know about the AA Brewers precedent because I do follow your Borchert Field blog (Fantastic blog everyone, check it out). When I said Braves M, that M was implied too, but I didn't word it like that. That is an incredible stretch given that one school has had virtually the same Michigan M for a century and a half, while 3 different teams over 70 years in the same area had a block M that has evolved over its time so much so that you can identify the specific team by the type of M. But yes, like most baseball teams that's been around for a while, Milwaukee has a block letter.
  12. I'm using "calligraphy" as the description of a script that has been made as if it was written with calligraphy tools. "Calligraphy" can also describe the art of using tools and brushes to create typographical art or script based art. The "flaws" are subjective. I actually do not like the extremely stripped down M barley I just made to attempt to appease your "qualifications" to make it great. All the supposed rules to make a baseball logo doesn't generate a perfect logo. Logos with imperfections and quirks are the ones that become successful and become cult classics. From a typographical standpoint, the serifs, the disjointed top, and the thicker vertical lines are fine and mesh with the style of the font. If you're a baseball purist that's been fed a diet of arched block, equal width scripts, and at most single outlines for decades, then yeah, it's a change to the baseball landscape that might "look bad." If it's cumbersome, that it's not bland... Also, when was an athletic block M not bland? As much as I appreciate the Milwaukee Braves and that they brought it home to Milwaukee in 1957, the Brewers don't need to inherit their M. The Brewers wore a similar M in the 70's because they became a team so fast there wasn't a lot of time to create a look, hence them wearing lowercase letters and Pilot stripes. Also, my argument is not to get rid of the BiG forever. Because they brought it back in 2006 as a throwback, the BiG isn't going anywhere. If it hasn't been clear, then that's on me. My stance is that both M barley and BiG are good logos, which is controversial? Fandom for one always overshadows the other because that's how fandom works. Ball in glove is genius and classic. M barley is quality typography (when you separate it from the context that it's a baseball logo, one of the hardest landscapes to be remotely different without ridicule) that calls back the aesthetic of beer labels and the actual name "Brewers." BiG says the team's glory days, but M barley says "Brewers." BiG is important because of the team, M barley is important because of the symbolism. If the 2020 or 2021 Brewers run out the dugout wearing BiG full-time, fine. I still like M barley more as a better aesthetic. That being said, M barley is on the 2020 Brewers schedule, and brown and gold are on the 2020 Padres schedule. M barley was worn more than the BiG every year it exists except 2016, when they introduced the navy and yellow alts. I think the organization likes the M barley more on their uniforms.
  13. Then you're left with this: "Equal line weight" if you never rotate the calligraphic pen, no serifs, no disjointed top.
  14. That's an interesting thought that got me thinking what that'd look like. Assuming that the Reds, Angels, Marlins, Twins, Giants, Rays, and Rangers all have cluttered logos as well, then these quick and dirty fixes would be the options:
  15. Just figured that one out, that would be a modified TT Supermolot Neue Expanded Bold. Couldn't find the exact blackletter, but a blackletter with minimal flourishes on the uppercase should do the trick. That's most likely a custom script. That would be a compressed 080203. I would've gone with a compressed Knockout No. 54.