• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by packerfan21396

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. Then you're left with this: "Equal line weight" if you never rotate the calligraphic pen, no serifs, no disjointed top.
  6. 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:
  7. 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.
  8. They've been wearing navy M wheat alts most of September
  9. Sure at field level, but I'd say it's more equal than you think. It's also skewed this time of year because of the navy BiG postseason gear.
  10. I know my impact on this board is next to none, but I'm not really a new member. Sure, I didn't join a decade and a half ago, but I also didn't join yesterday. I never once said I want the BiG gone... I actually do like the throwbacks and wouldn't want them to get rid of them. Also, the name Milwaukee Brewers calls back to over a century of baseball in Milwaukee and the birthplace of the American League, so I wouldn't want anything too modern for the Brewers anyways. That's a bold claim considering its colors will remain on the left field stands on 4 of 6 postseason banners and has a history of successful seasons tied to it. You can't say that about the Germanic era.
  11. I also live in the Milwaukee area, and I agree. I'm not disagreeing with the idea that the majority of fans would want the BiG full time. I'm just of the mindset that the Brewers look like a team called the Brewers when they wear the M wheat.
  12. None of them are, and like I said it's only a brand because of the success the Brewers had wearing it. If you take away the context, the ball in glove is extremely generic. Let's be clear, I'm not saying the BiG is a garbage logo, I'm just saying that the M wheat is the better aesthetic for a "Brewers" team.
  13. I don't suppose you think everyone that disagrees with you is "edgy"? I'm not trying to be contrarian because it's "trendy" or "cool." I genuinely think the M wheat fits the aesthetic of a team named Brewers better than a generic baseball glove. I addressed this: Longevity doesn't just make the ball in glove instantly better. Montreal's M blob is a quite garbage, confusing logo with plenty of problems that manages to stick around as a "great" and popular logo. The only thing that "dates" the current look is the drop shadow and non-MLB block. But, drop-shadows and proprietary fonts, though rare, are not new to baseball.
  14. Extremely unpopular opinion that probably screams how I am but a child on these boards maybe moreso than my awfully constructed username: I like the M wheat more than the Ball in Glove, and I'll tell you why. To get it out of the way, yes I am a Brewers fan that has only remembered and has only been to Miller Park with the Brewers in the M wheat which is makes this opinion super biased. Sure, the best era of Brewers baseball, second to right now, occurred when they were wearing the ball in glove. Sure, the ball in glove throwbacks and current navy and yellow alts get lots of love by the fan base and gets a lot of sales. Sure, I'll buy plenty of navy and yellow ball in glove merch when it becomes the full time logo in 2020 because of Nike and the Brewers' 50th or 2021 because of Miller Park becoming AmFam Park. BUT To me, the ball in glove, as genius and peak 80's design as it is and as the best fan-made logo in professional sports, is way too generic. Any team with the initials M.B. could use it and it'd fit right in with any coloring. The uniform it accompanies is equally generic. Yankee pinstripes with a vertically arched athletic block wordmark is not unique, sorry, but it is classic baseball. Same with, at the time, powder blue and a script. Then the 90's came and some Milwaukee-flavor was added with a great Germanic font and monogram that was also classic, but the Brewers still sucked and green was added for no reason, so it didn't catch on and is now (in my opinion, unfairly) established as the worst look in Brewers history. Then the 2000's came and eventually a new stadium accompanied their current look (a year late). You have some classic beer-label inspired scripts paired with wheat imagery creating a look clearly made for a team called "Brewers" from the Brew City. The drop shadow might be too modern for baseball purists, which I get, but overall, its a great look that conveys Milwaukee more than the image of equipment used by every baseball player drawn the right way so that two letters are hidden. I don't even know where to begin here. How someone confuses a drop shadow white M with gold wheat underneath, with either a teal outlined silver S with a compass, a yellow M trident with or without a star behind it, or a drop shadow yellow S is way beyond me... It's extremely obvious that the beer label stylized M with beer ingredient underneath might represent the beer team. If the argument is that the M wheat is only relevant because it's been the primary logo the longest of any Brewers logo, then that argument can be used to explain why the ball in glove is still relevant since it's still being used in some form or the other. If the Brewers never had 10 of the franchise's, now, 18 winning seasons and the franchise's only World Series appearance wearing the ball in glove, maybe the extreme fandom behind the ball in glove logo might not exist, or maybe the ball in glove might not eventually replace the look that looks the most "Brewers" from a design standpoint and has the most postseason appearances tied to it. But that being said, Nike, I am not wearing a volt ball in glove with gradient wheat shoulders and hyper-modern scripts and numbering. Please don't with the ball in glove, Nike.
  15. Was curious about Power 5 college football divisions, so I made this one: (ACC: teals, Big 12: red, Big Ten: gray/black, Pac-12: blues, SEC: yellow/orange) So basically, Power 5 has nice in-conference division separation for every conference except the ACC, but there's a whole lot of conference overlap. The best groupings and division name accuracy goes to the Big Ten, in my opinion.
  16. I actually took a look at the divisions while screwing around in Google My Maps a while back, and this is what the divisions of the Big 4 look like for the 2020 or 2019-20 seasons: NBA 2019-20: NHL 2019-20 (Atlantic is red, Metropolitan is orange): MLB 2020 (AL is shades of red, NL is shades of blue): NFL 2020: The NBA is the ideal OCD division separation, and the MLB is a nice duel league tri-regional division separation.
  17. Well, I'm of the mindset of trying every manipulation of letters to come close instead of giving up. I'd rather come close than not at all. Sure, Bear Down isn't the prettiest, but it comes close, and that's what I'll be doing here. Coming close if there's complex letter combinations, or making it nice if there's more straight forward letter combinations. As much as it humors me when I unintentionally make a funny phrase, I appreciate the suggestions @BellaSpurs has made for Go Pack Go to help improve moreso than telling me how off I got it. I'll go back to the drawing board for some letter combos to make Bear Down a bit better, but I guarantee some of these are gonna be rougher than others.
  18. Welp, that's the thing with ambigrams, everyone will read them differently haha. I'm glad the "Bear" was obvious though; I was worried about the "R."
  19. This one gets to be abstract some places, but for the Bears: Bear Down (bEAR Down)
  20. That's fair, I'm trying to find that medium between >Pack and *bolt*Pad*bolt* to make it obvious that it's only part of the k. Update:
  21. Yeah, that's the thing with ambigrams, is that you have to force perceptive and a good ambigram is like 60% legible. I could try spacing the p/ck out a bit more and maybe adjust the G/O a bit more. 69 Pad 69 is pretty funny though