sitboaf

Well… color me surprised! Don't misunderstand me–they're beautiful, and the fans will eat it up. I just thought current ownership had washed its hands of the pre-Parcells/Redcoat era.

This would be surprising. The Patriots have gone out of their way to avoid red ever since it was pointed out that our Revolutionary enemies, the British, wore red coats. We'll most likely see white Pat Patriot helmets over white & white.

Excellent points, and I thank you for dropping some knowledge on us. I will amend my assessment of the ChiSox to "drew on several local inspirations to make a beautiful uniform that, to an outsider, might appear as just another alternate set." Certainly the team was aware they were not creating something fully unique, and that might dampen outside sales, but the ultimate arbiter is the team's own purchasing base, and I'm guessing in that regard, the money will talk–loudly.

Wow. Agree to really disagree I guess. I've spent my whole life about an hour outside Boston. My first thought about the city is the Freedom Trail, the start of the Revolution (Lexington, Concord, Paul Revere, etc.), and Patriots Day - Massachusetts' own unique holiday, on which the marathon is run. It's the unofficial start of Spring for the whole region. FWIW, I don't think about the bombing when the marathon comes up. At least not right away. The tradition of the race has not been overshadowed by it, IMO. I'm kinda glad they didn't go straight up Revolution, since the Patriots and the MLS team are already there. Your MBTA idea is decent, but lots of MLB cities have subways, and it might be hard to see the MBTA-ness of a subway design.

He clearly un-retired just to wear the creamsicles. AND so we could add an entry to our "Right team, wrong uniform" post.

Good observation. There's a wide variation in approaches, for sure. To me, succeeding at your City Connect lies in how well your uniform reflects the community, regardless of whether it looks recognizable as part of the regular brand. In other words, this is a chance to attach a secondary brand to your club. A city brand. Not a team brand. Whenever I see a comment here in New England like, "Boo! It doesn't look like a Red Sox uniform!" I say, "Good, Because it's supposed to reflect Boston." Houston, Miami, SF, and KC landed in a middle ground, with city/history features AND recognizable brand elements. I can certainly understand that. But to me, the ChiSox and Angels failed, making delightful alts, while misreading the assignment. And the Dodgers? Were they trying at all? Their recent additions of black have at least helped draw a distinction, but to use your MLB-issued blank check to make essentially another Cactus League uniform? Just why?

Exactly right. One of the better looking CC uniforms, but after reading the presser pointing out all the surf culture elements, I thought, great idea. But, uhhh… that’s it? This is just a mid-century PCL team.

Just to toss out another idea as to why the Navy alts are being worn... If the team has decided they are moving back to Royal and are done with Orange, then they're DONE. Why place a fresh order of playoff jerseys in orange when the team has decided to move on from that look?

I don't mind the lower-rez constructions. Although the Flyers quality is noticeably better than the Wild's. My issue with these Minnesota jerseys is that the color space seems to be in RGB, and the colors don't look like they are possible to produce using fabric. Not sure how Paint works, but I'm guessing you don't have a lot of control over your color modes. There are other cheap design programs out there (Affinity?) which might get you better results. I'm interested to see where you will take the teams– and why.

I feel your pain, but it's very wishful thinking to assume, in the event the D-Backs move, that you'll be anywhere near the top of the list for another team. Gary "Saguaro" Bettman isn't the commissioner of MLB, Rob freaking Manfred is.

Oh, that's nice. Dear Tampa Bay Lightning, Purple is wiiiiiiide open.

While we're at it, there are two 281C Blue teams! But that's a dead horse I'm almost tired of beating. Plus another team in Winnipeg that's 2 shades of Blue. That seems a bit crowded. I think Seattle is more in a Teal & Blue space. They don't really look like anyone else, anyway. It's really the Black & Red clump and the Red/Blue oversaturation (ha ha) which are problems 1A and 1B. I think we've actually got SIX red and blue teams (WAS, CBJ, FLA, NYR, MTL, COL). Colorado has unusual variations of both Red and Blue, so they're OK. Florida embraces Gold enough to look distinct, but... Their red and blue shades are identical to both Columbus AND Washington, who don't have the benefit of a third color. Something has to give there. Can I be color king for a day? Tampa swaps to black and some neon shade (green? light blue? That yellow that Columbus used to use?). Ottawa becomes Red & Gold/Yellow (only occupied by Calgary currently). Carolina changes back to the Whale(r)s with Blue & Green (only Vancouver lives there). Columbus embraces both the cannon and the navy/steel blue/cream triumph they've worn. LA goes back to being the only purple team. Vegas, instead of Black & Gray, embraces Black & Gold (imagine that!). and Winnipeg starts over again with new colors and a logo that wasn't made by a 14 year old. I just solved a lot of problems! Taking the rest of the day off.

Perfect. These are gorgeous. Feels like the future.

Feels a bit weird to have arrived at this place in my heart, but to me, the Absolute Essence of Duck is both "black with orange and gold", AND the brilliantly silly original mask logo. I too am glad the current color scheme and the old logo work well together. Seems inevitable that they become that. Chris Ramirez nailed it in his Icethetics concept on June 22, 2020. Except maybe stick the Webbed D logo on the shoulder. https://www.icethetics.com/concepts/anaheim-now-and-then

Yes, please. The SF and NYG white/red uniforms are so boring. They look right off the department store rack.

That's a good point, but the city connect orange (2028) is, in fact, a slightly different orange than the standard orange (172). I am left baffled.

As a casual Red Sox fan, I didn't really think of the other teams outside the AL East so much. Cleveland and California seemed dark blue (maybe the red helped set it off), and Boston uses a non-navy blue in so much of their marketing that I knew they used blue, too. But until embarrassingly recently, I had incorrectly thought that Boston's away jerseys from the 1980s had black BOSTON lettering.

Yeah. The frustrating this is this: San Francisco HAS a color. I'm having a hard time thinking of any city that identifies with a single color better than SF does with International Orange, the color of the Golden Gate Bridge. AND THEY DIDN'T USE IT.

I kinda agree with throwuascenario. When I was a kid, I just assumed the Yankees and Tigers wore black. As an adult graphic designer, I understand that NY, Detroit, Boston, Cleveland, Seattle, Minnesota, Atlanta and St. Louis ALL wear 289c (Midnight Navy). If it's so dark you can't tell it's blue without being TOLD it's blue, it's too dark. But dark blue that's got, you know, some actual, observable HUE to it? That's fine.

My initial reaction was also happiness about the return of the sunrise palette, but that the hat seemed too busy. But the place my brain went to first was keeping the orbit and removing the star.

Not sure what leads you to believe the Dolphins or Cardinals might change. Going back into the 60s, we have a handful of small tweaks and 1 modernization (Miami in 2013). Those 2 seem pretty locked in.

Good timing, all. I also have been meaning to do the NFL next. One point I didn't really mention earlier: As I make all these assumptions of brands being settled in this age of so much changing merchandise: there is now LESS of a need for teams to overhaul the brand. If organizations continue to be allowed to have throwbacks, alternates, city editions, etc etc, and people will still buy those things, it takes the pressure off a team to overhaul its brand. So, while I predict we will see many more alternate looks, innovations in fabrics and textures, I think main branding elements will remain stable. Again, this is barring team relocations and new ownership, which can blow things up real fast. Anyhoo... the NFL: Arizona Cardinals: 52 years and counting. DONE Atlanta Falcons: Moderate tweak is now 19 years old. Basic idea has never changed. DONE Baltimore Ravens: 23 years of the raven head. But it's a bird head, and not where they started. Going to go out on a limb and say this is a MAYBE. Buffalo Bills: 48 years. DONE Carolina Panthers: 27 years. DONE Chicago Bears: so DONE Cincinnati Bengals: 18 years of the B. But this can't be where they stop. We want a kitty. WILL CHANGE Cleveland Browns: Not a real logo. And colored "not brown". Not the original franchise. But 52 years of orange helmet is enough evidence. DONE Dallas Cowboys: DONE Denver Broncos: The old D seems nearly as iconic as the current logo, 26 years later. WILL CHANGE Detroit Lions: 52 years. DONE Green Bay Packers: DONE Houston Texans: People hate on this logo, but 20 years makes it seem stable. MAYBE Indianapolis Colts: DONE Jacksonville Jaguars: ha! They may move before they swap the logo, but nothing here seems permanent. WILL CHANGE Kansas City Chiefs: above my pay grade. But FWIW, it's ugly. UNSURE Las Vegas Raiders: DONE Los Angeles Chargers: You know what? It's hard to do a good lightning bolt. And this one is pretty good. Boring, but been around forever. I thought that maybe they'd try to resuscitate their AFL "shield/horsey/bolt" some day, but that treads on rival Denver's territory. The bigger question is "will either LA team ever leave light blue and yellow? Or will someone leave town first?" I guess DONE? Los Angeles Rams: New logo is well-made, but lacks personality. WILL CHANGE Miami Dolphins: Basically unchanged for 56 years. DONE Minnesota Vikings: Basically unchanged for 61 years. DONE New England Patriots: Flying Elvis is looking dated and will leave the building before too long. WILL CHANGE New Orleans Saints: 55 years and only a color swap. DONE New York Giants: 61 years ago, the "ny" came into being. The 1976-99 "GIANTS" was a monstrosity, IMO. They've gone back to the ny. And I think they'll keep it this time. DONE New York Jets: Have gone back to their "football within a football" logo and have had it for 39 of their 59 years. They might add a plane icon back in there, but otherwise DONE Philadelphia Eagles: 26 years of the current bird head. Still looks fresh. DONE Pittsburgh Steelers: so DONE San Francisco 49ers: 54 years of the "SF Oval". DONE Seattle Seahawks: Basically unchanged since day 1. DONE Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Quarter century of the Skull Flag probably means DONE Tennessee Titans: 25 years in Tennessee, 23 with the same Titans logo. I'm sorry, but it's too ugly and outdated to last much longer. WILL CHANGE Washington Commanders: Too new to make a call. Do people even like it? Will Dan Snyder ever sell the team? UNSURE

This is a fine assessment. I did not dare to speculate about the NBA. Firstly, because it's the big four sport I follow least, and secondly, the league is becoming more and more merchandise driven. It is closer to some futbol leagues now, constantly adding new uniforms while exploring new branding. Who's to say, 10 years, and 5 looks from now, the 76ers don't stumble onto something that usurps their iconic 76 number lockup? Or maybe their logo gets left alone and everything around it changes. There's just too many variables being added in the NBA to be sure about much of anything. I can totally see that league "pulling a Bieber" and introducing 30 hip-hop, country, and pop music jerseys in 2027.

Yep. Beyond my pay grade. My larger point is that the current logo has undergone many tweaks since 1935, but no overhauls. Today's Hawks logo would be instantly recognizable by a time-traveling hockey fan from the 1940s.

I agree with all this. The Angels have followed the natural course of most logos (sports or otherwise) in our lifetimes–they boil things down to the core of what resonates. In other words, most logos get simpler over time as less and less information is needed to trigger peoples' brand awareness. Even at their inception, and thru the "state outline" period, we can see now, with retrospect, that the "A with halo" is their core identity. But you make a great point about the Angels' colors not being their "forever colors" currently. But I think colors aside, they are at a stopping point. Your cap thought is a good one. The Pirates, Padres, and Rockies may very well go the way of the Yankees, retaining their cap lettering as a secondary logo (a "forever cap"?) while having a different main logo. All but the Yankees seem destined to change the main logo, but I can see the caps remaining constant.