Jump to content

MLB 2016 Changes


FiddySicks

Recommended Posts

About the supposed teal... have we all realized how it's been lightened up so much that it borderline looks like a sky blue and, in the darkness and against the darkened gray it almost looks like a glow in the dark volt version of teal? Number one I don't like glowing volt feel to it and number 2, more importantly, how are you make a connection to a throwback color when it's not even the same color that you claim for it to be?

Yeah we need to stop calling that teal. It's turquoise, which is found all over the southwest, but it's not the same color they once wore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the supposed teal... have we all realized how it's been lightened up so much that it borderline looks like a sky blue and, in the darkness and against the darkened gray it almost looks like a glow in the dark volt version of teal? Number one I don't like glowing volt feel to it and number 2, more importantly, how are you make a connection to a throwback color when it's not even the same color that you claim for it to be?

Yeah we need to stop calling that teal. It's turquoise, which is found all over the southwest, but it's not the same color they once wore.

It isn't teal (Marlins 90s color), it isn't turquoise (Arizona 90s color), it isn't Northwest Green (Mariners color)... its something totally new and it seems out of place. SHAME!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed that what I think is the BP cap (the original snakehead logo) is a 5950 as opposed to a 3930. I guess this means New Era is using the 5950 for BP caps now, although maybe they made this change previously, I don't remember. They do still offer the 3930, but I guess they are just "replica" status now.

It's been 5950 for 2 or 3 years now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was just a matter of time before the zany, Nike style uniform elements found it's way to baseball.

Some of the new D-Backs elements are cool, others maybe not so much. I'll be curious to see the darker gray on the field. I think it might look pretty good. The "snakeskin" :rolleyes: doesn't look terrible on the pants. I need to see more of the jerseys before I can say if I like the "snakeskin" :rolleyes: jersey look or not. Based on the pictures so far, I think the new D-Backs look may not be as awful as us traditionalists fear it will be. My bigger concern is that in a few years, this D-Backs look will seem tame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. Thank's to Illustrious Leader, I've finally been able to actually see the uniforms. Seriously, were they trying to hide how bad these uniforms looked with the terrible lighting? So, here's the good, bad, and ugly on these.

The choice to go with black text is great. If you're looking for a change to make, it looks really good. It's sleek, it's modern, it's a nice update. Honestly, getting a good view of the shoulder sublimation, it doesn't look half bad. Is it new or groundbreaking? No. It's retreading things other teams have done in the past. However, given how when I'd originally seen the dark/small images, these looked like solid colored patches with large patterns in them. Maybe it's just that it's better than I thought. Maybe it's how good this shade of dark red looks against the white. Maybe it's that I feel safe and secure in the entrenched baseball stronghold that is the Northeast that no matter what crazy fads come it won't get anywhere near me. But I actually don't mind the shoulders.

The side patches? Barely visible half the time. Stupid? Yes. Amateurish/batting practice? Yes. But I'm mostly ambivalent/neutral on them. What drives me crazy is that they don't go to the armpit, but actually fold back down the sleeve and break up the sleeve piping. That just looks incredible stupid. The sublimation on the hats would be inoffensive or maybe even cool for a fashion, BP, or All-Star cap, but I'm unsure about every day. I'm going to have to reserve judgement on this until we get into the season.

I don't know what to do with these pants. What's with the weird gundam-skirt-ish pattern on the front of the pants? And this breaks up the pants striping as well. It seems just to be a weird flourish for no reason. It looks incredibly stupid.

The dark grey is also fine. I'm a white/grey kind of guy, but I'm really fine with teams playing with what grey they use. But on the list of teams I'd think should do it, the Diamondbacks would not be one I'd ever think of. The Padres and sand, the Marlins and teal, the Royals/Blue Jays with blue... I can see different shades of grey, but the Diamondbacks don't seem to need it. I don't have a problem with it, though.

Snake head logo is awwwwesoooome.

People complain about the D-Backs name, but I don't know why. Sometimes you can't fit everything on a jersey. Just ask the Philadelphia 76'ers. The script doesn't look bad. Is it because people can easily make an insulting nickname out of it? With shortened names like "Yanks" and "Sox", this is nothing new. You can get over it.

The alternate is where things start falling apart. The teal they chose is way too pale. I wish I could pick out exactly what I've seen that has that color, but the color is really light. Why make something a touchstone to the past if it isn't even the same color? And this brings up the biggest problem in this set: consistency. When I made a stab at how I guessed the set would look, I made sure to make the striping inconsistent because I figured the final product would be as well. Little did I know. The wordmark on the teal alternate appears to have THREE OUTLINES!!! I still can't get over that. The black text has a red outline, then a white outline, then a teal outline. To call this overkill is an understatement. But to make matters worse, the number right underneath is black with a white outline and then a teal outline. Then the numbers on the back have a red outline then a teal outline. And the name on the back is just black with a teal outline. The name is the only thing that matches the piping on the uniform. It's a complete mess.

The number font itself is... I don't know. It's unique to baseball, but it's a copy off things that have been done elsewhere.

Overall... it's gonna be okay, but there are just huge mistakes made. Hopefully they clean it up in a year or tw- Oh, God I sound like a Padres fan.

honestly we should wait and see... IMHO not EVERY team needs to look like the classic teams.... one team out of 30 can be a bit out there... wish they would have turquoise road unis like the old powder blues

This is a point I have brought up before in the past. The D'Backs are not a classic team, they are from 1998. I don't know why teams from the expansion era of baseball feel they have to look like the older teams. They don't, and shouldn't try to. It seems a bit hypocritical to me that one of the biggest complaints about the MLB is many teams look similar in terms of color and design, yet when teams try to do something different, it's said to be too different and too far from the norm.

Without saying anything about the new D'Backs look yet (I still haven't really looked at all of it in-depth yet), at least I can say this: they're pretty distinctive now. They really don't look like anyone else in baseball, and if nothing else, that's a good thing.

Here's the thing... What the Diamondbacks had before this was a completely unique color scheme that went together and fit their location. They had their own font as well. They looked modern and different. So, tell me why this had to happen to set themselves apart? They already were set apart.

Yeah okay, but i have never seen a teal snake before B)

Except that one time i was in a hurry and got caught in my zipper :wub:

How do you get the beans above the frank?

I am a chinese acrobat, i have been training since i was 2 weeks old , nothing is impossible for me

:grin:

Some people can curl their tongues. Other people...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long did it take for the Marlins to drop the orange caps? I figure the same length of time will occur before the D-Backs drop most of their lesser-worn caps. I do really like the teal/red/black "A" alternate cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just speaking of the wordmarks...would something like this using the current font have been so hard? Anything besides using D-Backs would be an improvement.

1999-home3.jpg

I never thought that looked all that bad, but I just think "Diamondbacks" is too long. Which is why the crest logo home whites they started using in 2001 was much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just speaking of the wordmarks...would something like this using the current font have been so hard? Anything besides using D-Backs would be an improvement.

1999-home3.jpg

What makes that awkward — at least to me — is that it makes Diamondbacks seem like two words. Especially with the bookended large-size D's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing I know is that except for the games they wear the throwback uniform the D-bags will look like hot garbage every night. Somewhere in downtown Phoenix there's a dumpster burning that most of this set should be tossed into and forgotten.

These make the disaster that makes the disaster that is the Cleveland Browns look good.

I do like the Padres brown and (possibly unpopular) the navy digi-camo jersey. But am I the only one who thinks the piping on the home looks like a ziploc bag (yellow and blue makes green so you know it's sealed.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As anybody with the Go Media Arsenal Vector Packs, the pattern is pretty much their diamond halftone (in the halftones Vector Package, in the 3rd pack) Vertically stretched 200% (more or less.)

I use the arsenal packs in my work too (occasionally, completely cut up and unrecognizable.) But...interesting to see them used in such a high profile manner.

When i'm not at work I can post an obvious screenshot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Get rid of the teal .Use it ONLY WITH PURPLE.Nothing else.

2.The first home white does look that bad. "DBACKS" ruins it. I love LOVE LOVE the "arizona" font.Someone needs to do that in teal and purple.NOW!

3.NO sublimations. NONE.

4.Put the friggin pants stripe all the way up and make the shirt stripe go all the way around.

5.The Yoke design isn't a problem for me.The colors they used on the other hand...

6.I friggin love the snake head logo.

with problems:2/10

If they fix these problems: a salvageable 6/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are saying this look caters to teenagers and their preferences, and I don't really think that these do that very well. I'm 15, in 10th grade (high school sophomore for you Americans), and not only do I hate these but I don't think I know anyone my age who would like these messes, especially not the few baseball fans we have in our school. If an NHL team came out with something like this with neon and sublimated snakeskin and random truncated stripes and 8 different uniforms people my age out here would flip out. This isn't pandering to younger fans, it's jumping on an already outdated trend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • IceCap locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.