MilSox

Another reason I hate the current Brewers identity.... it was literally change for the sake of change and got rid of this potentially timeless look way too quickly. Instead, it has only the painful post-Robin Yount years to be associated with. I play a lot of Ken Griffey Jr. on the SNES though too, so I have a soft spot for this one.

I would argue they can get away with it precisely because the name is so relevant to the region. Plus, the BiG has the added advantage of steering clear from any imagery that could be construed as marketing alcohol to kids... not that I see that happening anytime soon in a place like Wisconsin. We think nothing of getting hammered at a toddler's birthday party, FFS!

My point about the W is that the scripts would be a lot more legible without the drop shadows. But because of the cap logo, it needs them in order to match. I just wonder how many tweaks you have to make before you end up with something different enough to justify scrapping the entire thing. I get the feeling that a lot of Brewers fans are sick of the current identity simply because of the perception that it keeps getting forced on us when its obvious what the fans prefer. But I'm gonna go off on a tangent now because this is the unpopular opinions thread... I don't actually mind when baseball teams combine their city and nickname for a cap monogram. I'll admit my biases as a BiG loyalist are at play here. But I also logged in a lot of hours playing Super Baseball Simulator 1.000 as a tween and teen, which made me curious about Japanese baseball where this is a much more common practice. Yomiuri Giants: Chunichi Dragons: Yakult Swallows: Hanshin Tigers: In some cases, the "city" is actually the corporation that sponsors the team. The Yomiuri Giants for example, play at the Tokyo Dome and wear scripts that actually say "TOKYO" on their road greys.

If that were true, it would only be popular with the over 30 crowd. Not people who don't remember or weren't even around for the BiG's original run. It's the cleverness of the hidden "mb" that's allowed it to endure. I would also have to disagree that only a "few" tweaks would be needed to make the current identity work. You'd have to start by getting rid of that goofy MS Word number font. The current gold doesn't contrast well enough with gray, making it a muddled mess on the road unis. The scripts are unbalanced to accommodate numbers, which is a flaw in their design. Those half-assed droptails look goofy, yet don't actually work when extended all the way (several attempts at this have been made in the concepts forum). Even the blue Milwaukee jerseys exposed another design flaw... that weird blob behind the W that's needed to accommodate the drop shadow. I also feel the current M really only works when you pair it with that heavily flawed identity package. You can't really pair it with other scripts the way you can with the BiG. Wheat can come in all different shades of gold, depending on age, texture, and lighting.

If that logo looked a bit more like this I might agree with you. But as it is, no one can say the BiG is somehow more outdated than the "current" early 00s drop-shadowed mess of a logo. I know that's not necessarily what you're saying here, but it's the most common reason I hear for why people should prefer the newer stuff.

I'm pretty neutral on which shade of blue they go with going forward, as long as they stick with the yellow. I think most fans prefer royal, and I don't blame them. But navy has the advantage of having represented Milwaukee teams for much longer and looking less like the Cubs. This particular uniform though, is the epitome of the best of a bad situation. It might be the best example of their current identity, but it has to be compared to the fauxbacks, which blow it out of the water.

Especially considering Milwaukee's prominent place in the original AA. So many missed opportunities. But given the politics of the area, it's not at all surprising. Most people who don't live in Milwaukee proper literally hate Milwaukee.

Look no further than their 1969 AL expansion mates, the Brewers, if you want an example of how diluted and messy it can get when you move away from a proven brand for no reason.

Point taken, but the other problem is that the Monarchs trademark is owned by the Negro League HOF, and is a significant source of its revenue. For the Royals to take on the Monarchs identity, they would have make it worth the NLHOF's while, which would probably include funding and maintaining the museum.

Kansas City's American Association club was known as the Blues. I always thought Royals was the perfect name as it alludes to both the Monarchs and the Blues.

Purple wasn't very popular locally once the 90s trend was over. Meanwhile, these were going for $50 on eBay during their last year of the previous (red & green) uniforms. I was willing to give the current identity a chance. But as time goes on, it becomes more and more obvious they dropped the ball.

I'm already sick of it, TBH. I think they really botched a chance to bring back the green rainbows like everyone wanted.

Too close to the Brewers for my tastes. Or at least what the Brewers should be wearing. The original Buccaneers colors would look good for the Rays too. Especially if the Bucs insist on sticking with pewter.

The old ABA Floridians colors are the most Florida colors ever. I feel like the Rays could pull them off with minimal effort.

Not understanding what makes the Brewers script more generic than, say, the Dodgers, A's, or White Sox. All are universally regarded as some of the best uniforms in baseball.

On royal blue pinstripes? Waaaay too Cubs-like for my tastes. The 1982 look has proven its timelessness over the past decade. Much like the Jays and Astros, they really don't need to reinvent the wheel on this one. I would prefer button down versions of the powder blue roads, but I'd be happy with Gothamite's suggestion as well. EDIT: If they brought back the gold-paneled hat, I'd pair it with the homes rather than the roads. Or limit it to batting practice or a blue alt. Better color balance that way.

They're not even the only Brewers farm club who gets it... ...hell, even teams outside of baseball get it... I get that the 1982 fauxbacks and the BiG aren't everyone's cup of tea. But it's a distinctive look that's instantly recognizable as "BREWERS," and it happened completely organically. The organization stuck with the current look for almost 20 years now... not only did it lose, it seems to lose a little more each year. Why are they still fighting it?

I know powder blue is a divisive issue, but I feel like the Brewers were one of the few teams who actuly pulled it off. I'd put the Royals and Phillies in that category too.

Since the Timber Rattlers have gone all in on marketing themselves as a Brewers affiliate, maybe an identity refresh as the Wisconsin Micro Brews is in order? Not like everything about their current identity wouldn't lead you to believe they're a Diamondbacks club.

If they were to adopt this permanently, they should affiliate with the Brewers.

Franklin is about the only municipality in Milwaukee County that you don't automatically free associate with something or someone the way you do with West Allis and State Fair, South Milwaukee and The Crusher, Oak Creek and John Matuszak, etc. It may as well be known as one giant walking fart. That said, I'm still rooting for Barn Owls.

That was my knee jerk reaction at first. But the more I thought about it, the navy ties them in with the entire history of Milwaukee baseball; from the original Brewers, to the AA Brewers, to the Braves. The Brewers are now the NL Central's only predominantly navy team. And navy would also go better with cream, which I want the Brewers to add to their color palette. Don't get me wrong... I'd still be more than happy if we got wholesale button down versions of 1982 as a rebrand. But I'm just not as against the navy recolor like I was at first.

War Pigs, Barn Owls, and Haymakers are definitely the "least bad" of this bag of turds. Broilers and Bovines could maybe work too depending on where they go with it. But this is southern Milwaukee County, so lets not fool ourselves into thinking anything but Crop Dusters is gonna win. Have you ever been around Polish people? This is the land of John Matuszak and The Crusher.

Good god, this is legit? I can't honestly think of a better microcosm for the difference in mentality between Chicago's suburbs and Milwaukee's suburbs than the American Association. The team from Rosemont, IL is shoehorning the civic flag of another municipality into every single aspect of their identity. Then you have the team that will be playing in Wisconsin's most populated county adopting an identity that suggests they play in the middle of nowhere. I was hoping that with this being the American Association and all, we might get an identity that hearkens back to Milwaukee's history with the original AA. Instead we seem primed to get a team named after a fart joke.

This was announced a few months ago, but appears to have flown under the radar. A new ballpark being built in southwestern Milwaukee County will be home to UWM baseball and an American Association franchise. I don't know if the Wisconsin Timber Rattlers trademarked that Wisconsin Brats identity. Nor am I a huge fan of this food-centric trend of minor league nicknames. But can you imagine a more natural rival for a team called the Chicago Dogs?