MLB 2016 Changes

[Gothamite]

It could be me being jaded because I don't think the Mariners should wear blue and yellow, but I *don't* think those uniforms look good. In fact, I think they look awful. They're unnecessarily cream-colored, even though the franchise didn't exist when teams wore flannel uniforms. Yellow looks horrendous against cream, so they had to add a blue outline around the yellow outline, muddying everything. Then add in the awful, awkward looking recolored logo which also makes the hat look peculiar, and I think the whole thing is just one ugly, unnecessary mess.

I couldn't agree more. Well put.

[Warthog]

Maybe next year, the Blue Jays could start wearing their home whites and road greys. Wearing an "alternate" jersey for every game makes it no longer an "alternate".

[Packid]

I with they were becoming the Anaheim Angels again, but anything's better than the mess they have now.

[Jungle Jim]

With credit to Adam Leroy at www.neweracaptalk.com...

Bumping my concepts from ten years ago(!)

Since we've been following this story on the board, I thought you guys might have an interest in this news:

Link here (LA Times)

June 28, 2005

Anaheim Loses Its Battle for Now

In another defeat for the city of Anaheim, a state appeals court ruled Monday that the Angels can call themselves the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim for the rest of the season.

The 4th District Court of Appeal rejected the city's bid for an injunction that would have blocked the Angels from continuing to use the Los Angeles designation. The decision was announced late Monday afternoon on the court's website, and it left Anaheim Councilman Harry Sidhu wondering if the city should keep fighting the Angels in court.

So they're the LA Angels for at least the rest of the season. They're also looking pretty good to win in court in November, if the city even fights it that long.

Myself, when they do win, I'd like to see them put "Los Angeles" on the roads. And not just because I already worked up a couple concepts for it:

Maybe it's finally time.

Wait...your name is Adam? I thought it was Gothamite. Kidding aside, I had no idea that was you. Anyway, I like the logo.

Venturing into comments that probably should be in the concepts forum, but...

I noticed that in the large one I posted, the bottom part of the "L" and the crossbar of the "A" are not on the same line, whereas the small ones at the bottom of your post are. FWIW, I think I like the larger version better. With them on the same line, it looks like the "L" has a really long bottom part.

[ConcreteCharlie]

Maybe next year, the Blue Jays could start wearing their home whites and road greys. Wearing an "alternate" jersey for every game makes it no longer an "alternate".

I think the Blue Jays should just have a white home and a powder blue road

[The_Admiral]

I love that Los Angeles script, but I'd stick with the Big A by itself on the hats, what with it being such an enduring symbol of the organization. And again, that navy crown is enticing.

[Quillz]

I agree on sticking with just the "big A." The only time they've had an "LA" logo was during their early days. Every since then, they've had the big A, it's been one of the few constants of their identities.

[Gothamite]

Wait...your name is Adam? I thought it was Gothamite. Kidding aside, I had no idea that was you. Anyway, I like the logo.

Sorry, I'm not Adam.

But when you posted his cap concept, it reminded me of the concepts I drew up a decade ago and thought I'd share them. Not that my design (or his) was terribly revolutionary, just thought they were fun.

[krunyan]

Maybe next year, the Blue Jays could start wearing their home whites and road greys. Wearing an "alternate" jersey for every game makes it no longer an "alternate".

I think the Blue Jays should just have a white home and a powder blue road

I kinda agree with this. Only problem is that I like their grays. But the Jays are the only team not named the Royals who can wear the powder blues.

[BBTV]

Where's Showtime with his teasing posts?

[ConcreteCharlie]

Maybe next year, the Blue Jays could start wearing their home whites and road greys. Wearing an "alternate" jersey for every game makes it no longer an "alternate".

I think the Blue Jays should just have a white home and a powder blue road

I kinda agree with this. Only problem is that I like their grays. But the Jays are the only team not named the Royals who can wear the powder blues.

I think the Brewers and Blue Jays are the only teams that truly would look best with a powder blue road. Of course thats with the Brewers in their old colors. I would rather see royals in grays

[The_Admiral]

No one would look best in a powder-blue road. I've advocated the Royals having a bluish tint to their greys, but I don't want to see full-on shirt-and-pants powder blue ever again.

[SFGiants58]

I agree on sticking with just the "big A." The only time they've had an "LA" logo was during their early days. Every since then, they've had the big A, it's been one of the few constants of their identities.

Apart from 1965-1970 and 1993-1996:

However, the point still stands. Their current font is too bold (in the typographic sense) to allow for a solid "LA" logo that doesn't look too much like the Dodgers' logo. The "LA" feels a little too forced with the font.

No one would look best in a powder-blue road. I've advocated the Royals having a bluish tint to their greys, but I don't want to see full-on shirt-and-pants powder blue ever again.

Same here. I'd thoroughly enjoy having more teams experiment with the grey base of their road uniforms, like a sandier grey for the Padres and a light blue-tinted grey for the Rays. However, I really don't want full powder blue uniforms again.

[Still MIGHTY]

I wonder what the impetus for dropping the "of Anaheim" is right now. Assuming there hasn't been any back room negotiations between Arte Moreno and the City of Anaheim, the Angels are still in the same contract that forced them to have "Anaheim" in the name. I wonder if it's some sort of concession by the city to tide over Arte and keep the team in the stadium, or it's just the Angels going ahead with it.

It's not even like the "of Anaheim" has even been referenced lately. On broadcasts (TV and Radio), the team is referred to as simply "The Angels". Los Angeles Angels shows up on the graphics, but thats how it is. Anaheim is still in the dateline in print and I'll occasionally hear those in highlight packages say "down in Anaheim". The location is completely absent from any merchandise.

IDK. We're so far removed from the original change, and it is what it is at this point. We as fans all know Arte's intentions. Always have.

As an Orange County native, it sucks that the small identifier isn't there. But they're still playing in Anaheim and their still our team. So... blah. I don't know.

[Gothamite]

I wonder what the impetus for dropping the "of Anaheim" is right now. Assuming there hasn't been any back room negotiations between Arte Moreno and the City of Anaheim, the Angels are still in the same contract that forced them to have "Anaheim" in the name.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that contract has expired. Couple years ago. The new lease agreement has no naming stipulations.

As you said, they've downplayed the location for the past several years. Perhaps this is an indication that they're going to start again, the first move in actively reclaiming Los Angeles.

[Lumbergh]

I loved the "Anaheim Angels" name, it brings back memories of small David Eckstein and co. and it feels less commercial and less money driven than "Los Angeles Angels." To me, I always saw the name "Angels" as a nod to the city of Los Angeles by just purely being called the Angels, I mean the city name literally means "the angels" obviously... By going by Anaheim Angels it distances the organization from the Dodgers and gives them a nostalgic, Green Bay Packers-esque, smaller market feel.

[Gothamite]

I loved the "Anaheim Angels" name ... it feels less commercial and less money driven than "Los Angeles Angels."

That's pretty ironic, considering that the city of Anaheim paid the team to use it.

[ohryan]

Per today's Uni Watch, the LA Angels of Anaheim will be simply the "LA Angels" next season.

They should be the Anaheim Angels.

Might as well be the Albuquerque Angels. They don't play there either.

[ohryan]

I loved the "Anaheim Angels" name ... it feels less commercial and less money driven than "Los Angeles Angels."

That's pretty ironic, considering that the city suburb of Anaheim paid the team to use it.

[Lumbergh]

I loved the "Anaheim Angels" name ... it feels less commercial and less money driven than "Los Angeles Angels."

That's pretty ironic, considering that the city of Anaheim paid the team to use it.

Which is understandable in wanting to build a brand and what not, but not worth it in the end. Last time I checked the Anaheim Angels won the 2002 World Series.