MLB 2016 Changes

[Gothamite]

Not changing the uniforms, though. What that basically means is they're phasing out the jersey logo in print.

[The_Admiral]

The hat logo reads more as a D to me than the jersey logo does. It's a good move, but a better move would be a "primary" that isn't either one, like the Yankees have.

[Silent Wind of Doom]

I'd prefer the old Tiger walking through the D. Always liked that logo better as a primary, and it's still plastered all over Comerica (which I guess is kind of a strike against the idea of San Diego keeping the SD because of it being everywhere).

Although, seeing it in front of me again, I'd probably drop the extra outline.

[CubsFanBudMan]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

[The_Admiral]

The more I look at the new Padres script, the less I like it. The 2004 script would never work in brown and yellow (and oh, how the concepteers here tried), but the new one still represents a failure to let go of the last overhaul's design elements, something I always hate in uniform design. Really start over if you're gonna.

[larrypep]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

So they're still keeping the olive colored hat for the Marines camo jersey? I thought they were just gonna bite the bullet and wear the navy hat with it.

[Gothamite]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

And there's one more to add - they're reportedly replacing the wordmark on the Marine camo jersey with the new one.

[Gothamite]

The more I look at the new Padres script, the less I like it. The 2004 script would never work in brown and yellow (and oh, how the concepteers here tried), but the new one still represents a failure to let go of the last overhaul's design elements, something I always hate in uniform design. Really start over if you're gonna.

I understand that as a rule, but those design elements weren't bad in their own right. Their road wordmark is a good one, no reason not to adapt it into a home version.

I would have preferred a new design from scratch, but since they're not doing that you can't blame them for focusing on the few elements they have that actually work.

[Quillz]

This is so nice in brown. For me it would calm the nerves of those who think brown can only be garish.

Wow, this looks really good. And a nice way to incorporate brown and yellow (what they should have worn all along) without going overboard.

[Quillz]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

Still don't understand the purpose of the space on the 2004-present monogram. Someone suggested it's supposed to create the illusion the "S" is on top of the D," but I'm just not seeing it. It just looks like the logo is broken.

[benpc21]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

Still don't understand the purpose of the space on the 2004-present monogram. Someone suggested it's supposed to create the illusion the "S" is on top of the D," but I'm just not seeing it. It just looks like the logo is broken.

I tend to agree, but I've also heard the space is there to help create a "P" using the bottom part of the S and the straight part of the D.

[Quillz]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

Still don't understand the purpose of the space on the 2004-present monogram. Someone suggested it's supposed to create the illusion the "S" is on top of the D," but I'm just not seeing it. It just looks like the logo is broken.

I tend to agree, but I've also heard the space is there to help create a "P" using the bottom part of the S and the straight part of the D.

It's possible, though I can still see the "P" in the older variation that wasn't broken.

[OnWis97]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

Still don't understand the purpose of the space on the 2004-present monogram. Someone suggested it's supposed to create the illusion the "S" is on top of the D," but I'm just not seeing it. It just looks like the logo is broken.

I tend to agree, but I've also heard the space is there to help create a "P" using the bottom part of the S and the straight part of the D.

If so, it's not worth it...trying to be clever at the expense of a clean logo. I find the break in the D absolutely jarring.

[TheOldRoman]

The current SD, as previously mentioned, was intended to be monochrome

I don't believe so. Remember that when they came out with those unis in 2004, the road cap had a sand logo with a white outline. Even if that wasn't the primary usage of it, they intended it to be multi-color-adaptable from the beginning.

[TheOldRoman]

The more I look at the new Padres script, the less I like it. The 2004 script would never work in brown and yellow (and oh, how the concepteers here tried), but the new one still represents a failure to let go of the last overhaul's design elements, something I always hate in uniform design. Really start over if you're gonna.

Absolutely. I never really had a problem with the current SD until now. Now I can't get over the open spot. There's nothing worth salvaging from the 2004-current uniforms. If they're going brown, they shouldn't reuse any logos or wordmarks other than the swinging friar. They need to just get on with it and have someone design a new SD.

PROHINT: If you're doing brown and yellow, and need to keep things as clean and classy as possible, you should probably go with some kind of block over a wordmark or numbers with pointy serifs. Make an SD that connects and doesn't have any thorns.

[hawk36]

Just use this old version of the SD logo. Or what about add the other gap that should be there?

[TheOldRoman]

I think if they're going with brown and yellow, they should try to keep it as "traditional" or simple as possible. So no thorns or even rounded edges. I really like the fatter original SD. I think they could come up with some unique block that doesn't look like everything Nike is doing in college sports.

[Silent Wind of Doom]

Okay. I was hyper-focused on the Padres since they interested me more and we seemed to be getting more puzzle pieces with them. Now that that's done and gone, I figured I'd sift through what I could figure out on Arizona. From Nordiques' hints, here's what I put together:

-Six uniforms

-Colors will be sedona red, black, and turquoise, with sand being present only as a part of logos (I assume that to include wordmarks).

-Turquoise will only be on SOME uniforms.

-There will be a black jersey and cap involved.

-The wordmarks arch.

-The D-Backs script is on three uniforms.

-The original snakehead will be returning as an alternate.

-Snakeskin will be sublimated on the uniforms.

-The Snake D will be around "as an alternate logo", likely meaning it will only be on marketing and not the uniforms.

So here's a little thing I threw together based on this, a possible vision of what these new uniforms will offer. Hopefully Nordiques can give us some hints as to whether I'm hot or cold.

Disclaimer, I'm just going by what I've heard. Lord knows I wouldn't go in this direction myself if I were making a concept.

EDIT: The sublimated pattern is present on the black uniform, but it's hard to see because of how dark it is. It's the same pattern as the others.

[PJBenterprises]

I like your uni concepts, but I tend to think the words "DIAMONDBACKS" and "ARIZONA" will be in the new font:

[Sport]

The broken SD is the same logo they have had since 2004. It just stands out more when it is 2-color.

By the way, this might be one of the craziest pages to look at on CC:

http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/73/San_Diego_Padres/

Still don't understand the purpose of the space on the 2004-present monogram. Someone suggested it's supposed to create the illusion the "S" is on top of the D," but I'm just not seeing it. It just looks like the logo is broken.

I tend to agree, but I've also heard the space is there to help create a "P" using the bottom part of the S and the straight part of the D.

If so, it's not worth it...trying to be clever at the expense of a clean logo. I find the break in the D absolutely jarring.

I've always felt it was an unnecessary touch on an otherwise solid update of their monogram. That was the early start of that trend in logo design. It's a cool way to show dimension with only two colors and can look really good when done well. The problem is when it's outlined like on the Padres logo the effect is eliminated and you get this weird space where the outlines butt into each other.

This is also why they should've gone full yellow on the new hat logo instead of splitting it up into white and yellow. In addition to that they have a really cool new script and they don't use it on the homers.

I like navy and yellow for the Padres. It's a unique scheme in the bigs, but so far I'm not liking their execution