TVIXX

MLB Changes 2017

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, coco1997 said:

 

Is this a popular opinion around here? I was under the impression that most Sox fans (myself included) dug the fauxback style jersey. The "Sox" sleeve patch doesn't fit, though. 

This fits better on the front though, because that is also what the audience will see on the field.

 

42570540-toilet-handicap-sign-and-symbol

 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WSU151 said:

hwl?set=sku%5B20905627%5D,c%5B2%5D,w%5B4

 

New Era store/Lids shows this Orioles hat as the 2017 low profile...but Fanatics/MLB store shows the low profile as unchanged. (10 points to nerds like me that know the difference.  If I posted the 2016 hat, it'd be pretty obvious.)

 

The black stitching on the white background always bugged me on mine. I hope this is not only a bad editing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Thomas said:

This fits better on the front though, because that is also what the audience will see on the field.

 

42570540-toilet-handicap-sign-and-symbol

 

;)

 

Considering the Sox are rebuilding, I'd be OK with that, as long as it gets replaced with a "WS Champions" patch in a few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, coco1997 said:

 

Is this a popular opinion around here? I was under the impression that most Sox fans (myself included) dug the fauxback style jersey. The "Sox" sleeve patch doesn't fit, though. 

I suppose it depends on one's age.It's not a bad logo;it actually looks good on black.It's better than the license plate uniforms 1982-86 that the White Sox started wearing on Sunday's a few years back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Wally1912 said:

Wow, the Red Sox are becoming the Blue Sox for Spring Training? I thought they learned from their huge blunder in 2009. 

 

C3v949UWYAAmCtf.jpg:large

 

Boston+Red+Sox+v+Los+Angeles+Angels+Anah

Nice to see the Red Sox brought back their 1970s red cap. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 8BW14 said:

Cripes I hope not. I'll be really disappointed if that's the case. Stance is now "officially" the sock of MLB, so maybe it's an option for the players who choose to wear long pants...hopefully.

From what I remember, stance is just the only logo that can be worn. Players can wear whatever they want, just needs to be unbranded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, insert name said:

Red Sox haven't had a good away uniform since 2008. 

 

grady-little-and-pedro-martinez.jpg

9494002-mookie-betts-jackie-bradley-jr-m

 

The sleeve piping and the sleeve logo make that much difference to you?  

 

I think the loss of piping is an improvement.  The Sox' sleeves are clean on every other uniform they have.  As for the logo, I don't like it as a primary, but it's a good looking logo and inoffensive at worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2017 at 10:01 AM, WSU151 said:
On 1/31/2017 at 7:37 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Who said it isn't allowed?

 

Colour-over-white on the road has been worn by the Cubs (as already noted), the Padres, the White Sox, the Rangers, and the Astros.

 

images (1).jpg  bbd324df9a1845f562fd29398d738a1a.jpg   Larry-Parrish.jpg

 

78507455.jpg

 

For me the only one of these that worked was the White Sox.  (Though I wish those collars had gone all the way around the neck.)

 

 

One more:

 

b0e52ed788fe919c54ccf0bb7040210f.jpg

 

Oh, and another one which I can't believe I forgot, since it is among my favourite uniforms of all time:

 20170204_190014.jpg 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bwburke94 said:

Returning to the red lettering in 2014 was a good move, at least.

 

What they should wear on the road forever, imho. These new blue socks are bizarre. Would rather they only use navy for hats and maybe some dugout gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

 

grady-little-and-pedro-martinez.jpg

9494002-mookie-betts-jackie-bradley-jr-m

 

The sleeve piping and the sleeve logo make that much difference to you?  

 

I think the loss of piping is an improvement.  The Sox' sleeves are clean on every other uniform they have.  As for the logo, I don't like it as a primary, but it's a good looking logo and inoffensive at worst.

It may seem small to others but to me it does make a world of a difference. Just seems more complete. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A part of me feels like that the piping on the sleeve complements the pants as well. Without it and still piping on the pants doesn't work for me. But yet the home uni works well with no sleeve piping. It just makes sense to me that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Oh, and another one which I can't believe I forgot, since it is among my favourite uniforms of all time:

 20170204_190014.jpg

 

Huh.  It's weird.  When I saw that, the dark dugout space in the background made me do a double-take because it made it look like the ref had proportions like the restaurant patron from And Now For Something Completely Different.

 

wafer-thin1.jpg

 

5 hours ago, insert name said:

It may seem small to others but to me it does make a world of a difference. Just seems more complete. 

 

I fully see the difference... I just think it's better the way it is now.

 

1 hour ago, phutmasterflex said:

A part of me feels like that the piping on the sleeve complements the pants as well. Without it and still piping on the pants doesn't work for me. But yet the home uni works well with no sleeve piping. It just makes sense to me that way. 

 

Perhaps it's a matter of the home having plack piping?  I wish the team would get over their fear of letters running over plack piping.  They keep the Red and Sox far apart to avoid it and then totally keep it off the aways.  I've always found the navy alts have a pajama-like quality because of that.  I'd rather see that than see sleeve piping, but I think it works as it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jp1409 said:

 

The black stitching on the white background always bugged me on mine. I hope this is not only a bad editing.

If this is true, it's one step forward but two steps back due to the NE flag logo on the side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing with "mismatched" cap monograms / jersey wordmarks that I think some people don't get.

 

It's very similar to mismatched front numbers / wordmarks.  There generally needs to be a featured stylistic element.  That can be a fancy script, wordmark in a custom font, or some other design element that's designed to draw the eye and be the focal point.

 

If you want to emphasize your wordmark, then you complement it with plain numbers and a relatively-plain cap monogram.  Dodgers are a perfect current example of this.

 

Alternatively, you could go with a cohesive look from top-to-bottom where the entire uniform represents the brand - kind of like the Texas Rangers, where cap, wordmark, and numbers all go together.

 

If you use different styled elements on the same uniform, you have a situation where none of them are the focal point.  The viewer's eye doesn't know what to do and it dilutes the whole thing.  The Brewers kinda suffer from this, since they have styled numbers that don't go with their fancy wordmark and a cap that I guess technically goes with the wordmark but maybe not obviously.

 

As for the other examples of mismatches posted - The Yankees works perfectly because in the case of their homes, it's a cohesive look (the mismatched NYs are irrelevant in this respect) and in the case of the roads, the cap is the focal point and the plain-block jersey wordmark doesn't detract from it.  The Tigers are just a byproduct of tradition, and I'd probably have them go back to plain-block text on the road.

 

The Blue Jays are a unique case where these rules don't really apply, but sometimes what "works" simply works for intangible reasons.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

 

 

 

Perhaps it's a matter of the home having plack piping?  I wish the team would get over their fear of letters running over plack piping.  They keep the Red and Sox far apart to avoid it and then totally keep it off the aways.  I've always found the navy alts have a pajama-like quality because of that.  I'd rather see that than see sleeve piping, but I think it works as it is.

You know what, that may be it. There is a certain proper balance with that for the home set but nowhere else for the blue or gray jerseys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Here's the thing with "mismatched" cap monograms / jersey wordmarks that I think some people don't get.

 

It's very similar to mismatched front numbers / wordmarks.  There generally needs to be a featured stylistic element.  That can be a fancy script, wordmark in a custom font, or some other design element that's designed to draw the eye and be the focal point.

 

If you want to emphasize your wordmark, then you complement it with plain numbers and a relatively-plain cap monogram.  Dodgers are a perfect current example of this.

 

Alternatively, you could go with a cohesive look from top-to-bottom where the entire uniform represents the brand - kind of like the Texas Rangers, where cap, wordmark, and numbers all go together.

 

If you use different styled elements on the same uniform, you have a situation where none of them are the focal point.  The viewer's eye doesn't know what to do and it dilutes the whole thing.  The Brewers kinda suffer from this, since they have styled numbers that don't go with their fancy wordmark and a cap that I guess technically goes with the wordmark but maybe not obviously.

 

As for the other examples of mismatches posted - The Yankees works perfectly because in the case of their homes, it's a cohesive look (the mismatched NYs are irrelevant in this respect) and in the case of the roads, the cap is the focal point and the plain-block jersey wordmark doesn't detract from it.  The Tigers are just a byproduct of tradition, and I'd probably have them go back to plain-block text on the road.

 

The Blue Jays are a unique case where these rules don't really apply, but sometimes what "works" simply works for intangible reasons.

 

 

 

The Rangers' hat logo is a different T than the T in the wordmark.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

The Rangers' hat logo is a different T than the T in the wordmark.  

 

Never noticed that.  I think it still meets my criteria though.  Similar to the Yankees mismatched NYs, it's close enough that at a glance it's a cohesive look, and your eye really doesn't focus on one or the other since they're so similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, sirthaddaeus said:

does anyone know if the Spring Training designs are on the insides of the this years caps like last years?

 

The caps don't have the ST designs in the cap this year as they did last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.