MLB Changes 2015

[Gold Pinstripes]

Man, looking back at that image it is a thing of beauty. The Pirates really should at least part time have a real vest in the rotation.

Couldn't agree more. The Pirates should always look like this:

These were totally awesome!

I can probably add some insight here, couldn't agree more about bringing the home and road versions back. That set was used by the Bucs from 2001-2008, but despite the good history from the 1960s, the team continued losing once PNC Park opened in 2001. Off field changes in the front office was a factor in the decision to revert back to sleeve jerseys, including the black alternate. For a couple years or so, the Bucs did have a sleeveless home Sunday black pinstripe uniform, but that was phased out. My guess is that if the sleeveless vest ever returns, it would just be the home version.

[BBTV]

And I sorta get the "red vs. blue" thing the Dodgers and Angels have going on, but I also find it completely unnecessary. I know it's not like an official thing or anything, but I still don't think it's a necessary thing. One team shouldn't have to look it's worst just so a city can have a color battle. I'd never want the Mets to switch to orange primarily just so New York can have "blue vs. orange".

I don't prefer the mostly red Angels look because of the red vs blue dynamic. I prefer it because I think it's the best look the team has ever had. Honestly? I prefer traditional looks but a lot of the older Angels looks with navy caps? They look like Jewish west coast Red Sox at best and generic at worst. The heavy red look not only looks great but gives the team a vibrant and unique look. A look that has a World Series Championship associated with it.

The red vs blue thing with the Dodgers is just a really cool bonus.

Because nothing's more vibrant than logos and wordmarks that are the same color as their background.

I do love it when someone tries to prove to me that my opinion is wrong

For the sake of discussion though...

Just look at that wordmark blending into that background. Travesty, I know. As for the hat? Yeah, the A is red, and so is the cap. Given that it's 2015 and the era of HD and has a thick and bold outline? I don't see it as a problem.

Take the front number off those jerseys and that uniform moves up to the top tier IMO. Even still, I have it near the top of the next tier. Easily best they've looked.

[phutmasterflex]

Why would Majestic have a large inventory of cream jerseys with old royal blue Majestic logos on them? The Mets' cream jerseys were pinstripes.

Because of the second reason I stated. It's just my guess as to why they would continue to use the old logo. Just a guess since nobody has confirmed why they still use the old logo.

[damnyoutuesday]

Until they run out of stock of the old jerseys, doubtful

It's not a case of that, as Seattle's new jerseys still have the old logo:

That's not what I meant. Stock of blank jerseys. Majestic probably has a huge inventory of blank cream jerseys that probably had the majestic logo already on them. That must be the reason why we still see a bunch of them around.

Or maybe (and this sounds silly for a big company) but maybe the old logo is stitched on and the machines they use only know how to stitch that logo. All the new logos are on BP jerseys and those aren't stitched, but applied felt I think.

New twins uniforms have old logo, and they are white

[tohasbo]

Until they run out of stock of the old jerseys, doubtful

It's not a case of that, as Seattle's new jerseys still have the old logo:

That's not what I meant. Stock of blank jerseys. Majestic probably has a huge inventory of blank cream jerseys that probably had the majestic logo already on them. That must be the reason why we still see a bunch of them around.

Or maybe (and this sounds silly for a big company) but maybe the old logo is stitched on and the machines they use only know how to stitch that logo. All the new logos are on BP jerseys and those aren't stitched, but applied felt I think.

New twins uniforms have old logo, and they are white

Again to prior points it is probably a point of old inventory jerseys.

[Gothamite]

I'm finding it hard to believe that they stock two years' worth of blank jerseys.

[IceCap]

EDIT: Just saw you'd already responded to Diamond a page back. Missed it, my bad! I promise I'm not trying to argue at all! I do respect your opinion. I'm just sharing some thoughts, that's all

It's all good! My "opinion" response to Diamond was more along the lines of him telling me I was wrong to call the Angels' identity bold. I find it bold. To me that's not really something you can prove or disprove. It's just personal opinion.

I don't know, I just can't get past the whole red on red thing the logos have going on, and the fact the Angels wore a navy cap of some sort for a little over 40 years.

I get that but let's be honest. While the Angels date back to the early 60s they aren't exactly a "legacy" team. Them going from navy caps to red caps wasn't exactly the Yankees going from navy to red. The Angels and their various blue capped looks never really established much of a legacy. So you add an inglorious history to the fact that the last navy caps were, quite frankly, a joke? The switch to red was a great way to refresh the organization's look without completely ditching the team's identity. The red A and halo remained intact and the colour scheme of red, white, and blue remained. It managed to be both new and respectful of the past at the same time. I'd say it's a look that's even more respectful of the past then the last set with a navy cap was.

The logos and wordmarks don't stand out at all against the red, and there just never seemed to be any rhyme or reason to going primarily red. I really see it no differently than if the Mets were to go orange-wild and ditch the royal for an orange cap with orange logos and wordmarks outlined in royal and white. It'd be an unnecessary venture into a look that is far less visually appealing and cohesive. I think that sort of move would be pretty unpopular. All in all, I really don't think the Angels did anything different than that, essentially. It's just not a look I can get behind at all.

I never found it hard to see the red A or wordmark against a red background. The outlines were more then sufficient and television definition improving certainly helps.

As for why they went with red? I think a big part of it was to stand out. Most teams that have a red, white, and blue colour scheme emphasize blue over red. The only teams that were emphasizing red over blue at the time were the Cardinals and Phillies, two NL teams. It helped give them a look that was both grounded (it wasn't all that wild once you break the elements down) yet also unique.

The difference between what the Anegels did and what the Mets are doing in your example? It's actually really simple. The Angels as a primarily red team work, in my opinion. The Mets in orange? That would look terrible. Sometimes it's as simple as "this looks great, but another team doing something similar looks bad." A lot of the "rules" of sports aesthetics have a lot of exceptions because it's all so subjective.

I remember when the Angles changed, and I remember thinking it was a really sharp, fresh, and unique look. I still feel this way. Sometimes a new look that really works ends up looking dated (Houston Rockets), but the Angels' set still works for me. I always found that their previous uniforms ranged from the awful (Disney look) to generic (most of the pre-Disney stuff). Their current set, to me anyway, finally gave them an identity. Ditching the red caps for navy ones would be a step back towards looking generic, in my opinion. Too many far more established teams rock the primarily navy/bit of red look.

[phutmasterflex]

I'm finding it hard to believe that they stock two years' worth of blank jerseys.

It is hard to believe. But I can't think of any other possible reason why Majestic will still trot out jerseys with their old logos.

[CubsFanBudMan]

And I sorta get the "red vs. blue" thing the Dodgers and Angels have going on, but I also find it completely unnecessary. I know it's not like an official thing or anything, but I still don't think it's a necessary thing. One team shouldn't have to look it's worst just so a city can have a color battle. I'd never want the Mets to switch to orange primarily just so New York can have "blue vs. orange".

I don't prefer the mostly red Angels look because of the red vs blue dynamic. I prefer it because I think it's the best look the team has ever had. Honestly? I prefer traditional looks but a lot of the older Angels looks with navy caps? They look like Jewish west coast Red Sox at best and generic at worst. The heavy red look not only looks great but gives the team a vibrant and unique look. A look that has a World Series Championship associated with it.

The red vs blue thing with the Dodgers is just a really cool bonus.

Because nothing's more vibrant than logos and wordmarks that are the same color as their background.

I do love it when someone tries to prove to me that my opinion is wrong

For the sake of discussion though...

Just look at that wordmark blending into that background. Travesty, I know. As for the hat? Yeah, the A is red, and so is the cap. Given that it's 2015 and the era of HD and has a thick and bold outline? I don't see it as a problem.

Take the front number off those jerseys and that uniform moves up to the top tier IMO. Even still, I have it near the top of the next tier. Easily best they've looked.

The red on red doesn't bother me at all and I agree that it's the best look for the Angels, despite the history.

[masterchaoss]

it's a great look but there is one thing that really bugs me about the Angels and that is they named after Angels and for some reason use the color of Demons, I honestly think that if drop the red and went to navy/blue and gold or maybe even just white and gold it would fit better than colors they wear now IMO.

[IceCap]

it's a great look but there is one thing that really bugs me about the Angels and that is they named after Angels and for some reason use the color of Demons, I honestly think that if drop the red and went to navy/blue and gold or maybe even just white and gold it would fit better than colors they wear now IMO.

It's a fallacy to assume that red is only associated with demons and cannot be associated with angels.

Red works.

[SCalderwood]

it's a great look but there is one thing that really bugs me about the Angels and that is they named after Angels and for some reason use the color of Demons, I honestly think that if drop the red and went to navy/blue and gold or maybe even just white and gold it would fit better than colors they wear now IMO.

It's a fallacy to assume that red is only associated with demons and cannot be associated with angels.

Red works.

... Well, it is now the 21st century, and red is clearly not the color most people associate with angels.

If you are still having that much trouble understanding this, do a google image search for "angels" in one window, and a google image search for "devils" in another window. Your "angels" window will be almost entirely showing colors like white, light blue, and gold, for pages and pages. Your "devils" window will be almost entirely showing colors like red and black, for pages and pages. There is really no debate here. Red is clearly associated with devils much, much, much more than it is ever associated with angels, regardless of the few pics that were posted here (and whatever the **** century they are from).

I think the Angels could look good (and more appropriate for their name) by switching to some sort of light blue, white, and yellow/gold color scheme. But I am not necessarily advocating that the Angels drop the red, because I think it is important for them to look different from the Dodgers, to keep their tradition, because I just plain think their current identity and uniforms look good, and because a color scheme that looks too "angelic" may come across as being not solid enough or "tough/agressive/intimidating/bold" enough. But at the same time, I can at least admit that it is silly for a team named the Angels to cover themselves in a color that is clearly understood to be the color of the devil by most people.

As for the wordmark blending into the background, obviously people are talking about the red alternate, not the white home jersey.

[FGM13]

Who the hell cares if the Angels are wearing a so-called non-angelic colour? It's not they're not wearing a "demonic" colour scheme, it's just red. Last time they tried going lighter and more "angelic", we ended up with the Disney periwinkle era, which belongs in the past. The red vs. blue aspect in LA is great, and that's why the Angels should stay in red.

All this does not, of course, excuse the red-on-red alts. Those numbers and wordmark should be white. I wouldn't be against seeing what a white logo on the cap would look like, either.

[sportstar1212]

I happen to like the red-on-red alts. Yeah, I know, go ahead and throw :censored: at me, but I think it doesn't look that bad. I've tried in the past to make the wordmark and cap logo white on the red uniform, and it just didn't look right. So I say, just leave it as is.

[The_Admiral]

Was "Jewish Red Sox" an autocorrect? idgi

[IceCap]

Oh Mr. Calderwood. A long-winded response that boils down to "you can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true" isn't going to cut it.

The statement was made that red isn't a colour befitting a team named "Angels." I can post pictures all day disproving that because artists throughout history clearly disagree. Going "well it's the 21st century, man" is just the snarky way of celebrating your own ignorance.

Was "Jewish Red Sox" an autocorrect? idgi

Their throwback halo cap looks more like a yamaka then a halo. The font and colour layout from the jersey that goes with it pretty much copies the Red Sox. Hence why I call that look the Jewish west coast Red Sox look.

[Diamond Dweller]

And I sorta get the "red vs. blue" thing the Dodgers and Angels have going on, but I also find it completely unnecessary. I know it's not like an official thing or anything, but I still don't think it's a necessary thing. One team shouldn't have to look it's worst just so a city can have a color battle. I'd never want the Mets to switch to orange primarily just so New York can have "blue vs. orange".

I don't prefer the mostly red Angels look because of the red vs blue dynamic. I prefer it because I think it's the best look the team has ever had. Honestly? I prefer traditional looks but a lot of the older Angels looks with navy caps? They look like Jewish west coast Red Sox at best and generic at worst. The heavy red look not only looks great but gives the team a vibrant and unique look. A look that has a World Series Championship associated with it.

The red vs blue thing with the Dodgers is just a really cool bonus.

Because nothing's more vibrant than logos and wordmarks that are the same color as their background.

I do love it when someone tries to prove to me that my opinion is wrong

For the sake of discussion though...

Just look at that wordmark blending into that background. Travesty, I know. As for the hat? Yeah, the A is red, and so is the cap. Given that it's 2015 and the era of HD and has a thick and bold outline? I don't see it as a problem.

I never tried to say you were wrong for having that opinion, just that I disagreed with what you said.

Obviously I only meant the red alternates when it comes to the wordmark. And just because you can see the logo doesn't excuse the red-on-red thing. It still has absolutely no pop against the red background, and looks muddled. Contrast looks good, and their hat doesn't have that at all. It's like the whole black Mets thing. Sure you can see the blue hat logo and wordmarks, but they still have almost contrast on the black backgrounds and that's why it doesn't work.

[Sport]

I think the red A on a red hat is fine. The blue outline and the white outline and the inner darker bevels make it stand out enough.

And in the American League there are already 10 teams who wear blue hats. 8 that are navy blue. The AL was dying for some color when the Angels switched to red.

[Dynasty]

I was never a fan of the red-on-red, regardless of how many outlines the logo or script had to separate it. That being said, their current look is by far the best look they have ever had so I can dig it.

[monkeypower]

I like the red on red look of the Angels and there is enough multiple border colours around the logos, wordmark and numbers on the hats and alternate so it still stands out.

"Too bad the jersey is red on red. I can't see the name of the player, what number the player is or what team he plays on."