MLB Changes 2017

[Gothamite]

17 minutes ago, Michael Bolton said:

Does New Era use the same shade for the orange Astros caps as they do the Marlins?

 

No, I think the Marlins are a special case with their red/orange.  But New Era does use the same orange for the Astros, Orioles, Giants & Mets. 

[OnWis97]

4 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

The (baseball) Cardinals did a great job of dressing up Busch II after the (football) Cardinals left.  The batters eye and extra large upper deck scoreboard made it look much less sterile . . .  as did the natural grass, of course.

I made it there once, in 2001 and was pleasantly surprised.  It was my only cookie-cutter experience (until Riverfront with the outfield cut out to make room for the new place) and it was nicer than I expected. I think the red seats helped a great deal...I was so used to the sterile look of the Metrodome's blue seats.  On the other hand, I could look up over the top of the building and see the very top of the Arch.  It just made it seem like a lost opportunity to enclose it like that and miss out on a view.  I really want to go to the new ballpark.

 

I also made it to Shea in 2003 or so. To me it was a typical pile of concrete.  I enjoyed being at Shea for being at Shea.  But I knew it was not functionally great in too many ways.  I don't really recall the quality of my seats though.

 

I made it to Oakland in 2007.   Mount Davis was there (too bad) but I enjoyed the experience immensely.  It was a college football atmosphere (as opposed to the beautiful, but "place to be" Giants ballpark I'd been to a few days prior) and there was something nostalgic about going to a place like that.  I probably won't do it, but part of me will want to get out there one last time before that team's location/stadium situation has changed.  I grew up going to County Stadium a lot and I'd like one last shot at a place like that.  I wish I'd made it to Arlington Stadium.  Part of me wanted to make it to the Joe (even for the Big Ten hockey tournament) because that is the most Met Centeresque place left now.  I know the newer places are better but the old-school places are fun.

[cmm]

4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Okay, one.

 

Still, the worst sections at Shea were better than the worst sections in any of the 20-odd other ballparks I've been to.  I'm not saying it wasn't old and poorly maintained, I'm not even saying that it shouldn't have been replaced, only that it was a better ballpark than many of its peers. 

Fair enough. But to say there wasn't a bad seat in the house is a pretty big stretch. You needed a telescope to see what was happening from the upper deck.

[leopard88]

1 hour ago, OnWis97 said:

I made it there once, in 2001 and was pleasantly surprised.  It was my only cookie-cutter experience (until Riverfront with the outfield cut out to make room for the new place) and it was nicer than I expected. I think the red seats helped a great deal...I was so used to the sterile look of the Metrodome's blue seats.  On the other hand, I could look up over the top of the building and see the very top of the Arch.  It just made it seem like a lost opportunity to enclose it like that and miss out on a view.  I really want to go to the new ballpark.

 

I also made it to Shea in 2003 or so. To me it was a typical pile of concrete.  I enjoyed being at Shea for being at Shea.  But I knew it was not functionally great in too many ways.  I don't really recall the quality of my seats though.

 

I made it to Oakland in 2007.   Mount Davis was there (too bad) but I enjoyed the experience immensely.  It was a college football atmosphere (as opposed to the beautiful, but "place to be" Giants ballpark I'd been to a few days prior) and there was something nostalgic about going to a place like that.  I probably won't do it, but part of me will want to get out there one last time before that team's location/stadium situation has changed.  I grew up going to County Stadium a lot and I'd like one last shot at a place like that.  I wish I'd made it to Arlington Stadium.  Part of me wanted to make it to the Joe (even for the Big Ten hockey tournament) because that is the most Met Centeresque place left now.  I know the newer places are better but the old-school places are fun.

 

My only cookie cutter experiences were RFK and the Vet, but both for soccer.  I don't have any baseball cookie cutter experience.

 

I grew up going to Memorial Stadium which was somewhat similar to County Stadium.  The primary difference was probably that County Stadium was (to my knowledge) designed for baseball first even though the Packers played there, whereas Memorial Stadium was always intended as a multipurpose stadium.  Since it was a horseshoe, Memorial still had a lot of good seats since almost all of the seats were in foul territory.  It's biggest problem were the huge concrete pillars supporting the upper deck.  They made the steel posts in places like Fenway look like toothpicks.

 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

3 hours ago, TheRealCoachCarter said:

When it comes to the New Era hat logo or things like this (company brands on basketball jerseys) or other things coming down the road...it's marketing dollars and it has to be accepted. It's strange to hear people fuss about NE, when people don't really complain about Nike or Adidas. Is it because you feel those brands have brought something to the table? This is the same thing. It will be seen in the same light...status quo...a non-topic really. As a college coach for many years, you'd hear your players happy about Nike or Adidas uni's, but if the uniform budget wasn't there in a certain year and you went a lesser route (even looking sharp)...then the players were disappointed because THAT NAME/LOGO wasn't somewhere on the uniform. A baseball player will feel that way about the NE. 

 

Here's the differences.  Nike is one brush stroke, and it is very slight.  Adidas usually brands their apparel with a striped pattern that is part of a design, and even if they do include the entire logo, it's still very simplistic.  The New Era logo is on another level of complexity.  

 

It's also large.  And primary above this, is the comparitive size, the percentage of coverage, if you will.  If it were on a jersey somewhere, that would be one thing.  But the cap is so small and the logo is so large.  It's nearly 20% the size of the logo on the front!  

 

And then you've got the fact that it's monochromatic.  This is one thing for the Yankees, Mets, Athletics, Giants, or Dodgers.  They've got monochromatic logos.  But then you've got the Boston Red Sox.  Do you make it red, to match the main color of the logo, and the primary color of the franchise?  Or do you make it white to match the outline that's designed to be the color that looks best against the background navy?  Either one you pick, it's not going to look right.  This is something that may not be noticeable if there was a small swoosh on the side, but not that big flag.

 

And, as was said before, it's the fact that baseball caps have been special in their cleanness.

 

The description you gave me of the college kids.  It saddens me that they'd be so petty and materialistic.  Those stripes, that swoosh, the interlocking U and A.  That's not the logo that should matter.  The gold V, the interlocking S and C, the O... THAT'S THE LOGO THAT MATTERS.  Be proud of the team you're on, not the company that's using you for advertising space.

[ltjets21]

Only two multi-purpose stadiums I've been to are Shea and The Coliseum. Say what you want about Shea, but it was a ballpark. A nice day at Shea was unlike any other. Beautiful grass, blue skies, pretty decent views, it certainly had character. I wish the Mets would have just heavily renovated Shea instead. Probably was not possible or worth the money, I like citi but I don't like all the seats in the outfield. Pepsi Porch is fine but usually, all the upper deck seats in left field second and third decks are empty. I went to an A's game on a chilly summer night. Sure the concourses are dark and dingy but for its cheap prices, not an awful place to watch a ballgame.

[WSU151]

Oakland Coliseum was a decent park before Mount Davis, right?

 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

Do we know yet if there are plans to renovate and remove the excess seating if the Raiders deal does go through?  I know they just hit a roadblock.

[SilverBullet1929]

10 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

Oakland Coliseum was a decent park before Mount Davis, right?

 

Wow I had no clue this ever was this way. I always figured it was the same monstrosity that it is now. Amazing.

[hawk36]

On 2/27/2017 at 3:35 PM, TVIXX said:

Miami Marlins have a new primary conformed by @ColorWerx (black part is white)

https://mobile.twitter.com/ColorWerx/status/834383921903239168

Every time I see this I think it would be a great look IF they removed the marlin icon. Just me?

[Gothamite]

No.  Not just you.  

 

I rather like the M.  The fish is the problem. 

[Gothamite]

13 minutes ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

Do we know yet if there are plans to renovate and remove the excess seating if the Raiders deal does go through?  I know they just hit a roadblock.

 

No.  The A's want a new ballpark, I don't see any scenario where they spend hundreds of millions of dollars to renovate the old one. 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

Just now, Gothamite said:

No.  The A's want a new ballpark, I don't see any scenario where they spend hundreds of millions of dollars to renovate the old one. 

 

The Raiders just left (or were about to before things got complicated) because a stadium deal was impossible.  They just gonna let that fester while they wait forever rather than make it nice enough to alleviate the need to leave?

[TheRealCoachCarter]

49 minutes ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

 

The description you gave me of the college kids.  It saddens me that they'd be so petty and materialistic.  Those stripes, that swoosh, the interlocking U and A.  That's not the logo that should matter.  The gold V, the interlocking S and C, the O... THAT'S THE LOGO THAT MATTERS.  Be proud of the team you're on, not the company that's using you for advertising space.

Oh. it would be nice to think that the "buy in" were that easy for most kids...some yes, but they live in a society where they have been taught that Nike, Adidas, Under Armor rule...not Bike or Eastbay, etc despite what cool creativity we may be able to put to those items. Don't get me wrong, you can overwhelm most and get them flipped over to your thinking, but there's a reason USC and the Lakers aren't sporting Eastbay brand gear prior to their embroidery being put on it.

[Gothamite]

1 hour ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

The Raiders just left (or were about to before things got complicated) because a stadium deal was impossible.  They just gonna let that fester while they wait forever rather than make it nice enough to alleviate the need to leave?

 

The problems with the Coliseum can't and won't  be fixed with cosmetic changes.  It needs a total teardown.

[hawk36]

26 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

The problems with the Coliseum can't and won't  be fixed with cosmetic changes.  It needs a total teardown.

It's sad to me that they can't renovate. I've gone to Wrigley Field because of the stadium not the Cubs. I want to go to Fenway because of the stadium not the Red Sox. That kind of thing won't happen for long since nothing is being saved anymore.

 

I saw a great plan to renovate San Diego Stadium to its mid-Century modern 1960s era look/feel.

- Open back up the closed end to reveal the mountains to the east

- Re-plant palm trees all around the exterior of the stadium

- Remove 30,000 or so seats to give the remaining 40,000 seats ample leg room

 

That deal fell on dead ears but I would have loved to see it happen to preserve history in a very new and exciting way.  

[TVIXX]

If this picture shows only the primary logo then the rockies and Brewers changed to their cap logos

[Silent Wind of Doom]

3 hours ago, TheRealCoachCarter said:

Oh. it would be nice to think that the "buy in" were that easy for most kids...some yes, but they live in a society where they have been taught that Nike, Adidas, Under Armor rule...not Bike or Eastbay, etc despite what cool creativity we may be able to put to those items. Don't get me wrong, you can overwhelm most and get them flipped over to your thinking, but there's a reason USC and the Lakers aren't sporting Eastbay brand gear prior to their embroidery being put on it.

 

The point is they shouldn't care about Bike or Eastbay either.  The pinstripes, black and gold, forum blue, and the spoked B were around long before logos were being splattered on uniforms.  They'll be around through whatever brand takes over as the new hotness, whoever switches in, whoever dies to obscurity.  That's what matters, not the brand name.  

 

5 minutes ago, TVIXX said:

If this picture shows only the primary logo then the rockies and Brewers changed to their cap logos

 

With as many times I've seen the league shown by a mixture of primary and cap logos, I don't know if I put stock in it.  MLB Pipeline usually consistent on this?

[JTernup]

11 hours ago, TheRealCoachCarter said:

When it comes to the New Era hat logo or things like this (company brands on basketball jerseys) or other things coming down the road...it's marketing dollars and it has to be accepted. It's strange to hear people fuss about NE, when people don't really complain about Nike or Adidas. Is it because you feel those brands have brought something to the table? This is the same thing. It will be seen in the same light...status quo...a non-topic really. As a college coach for many years, you'd hear your players happy about Nike or Adidas uni's, but if the uniform budget wasn't there in a certain year and you went a lesser route (even looking sharp)...then the players were disappointed because THAT NAME/LOGO wasn't somewhere on the uniform. A baseball player will feel that way about the NE. 

No, not at all. New Era is THE hat brand, I absolutely love NE hats. The problem is that NE's logo is a 1"x1" logo on a hat, jersey sponsorships are the same size on a MUCH larger garment. I also think that you are discounting the quality that you see in Nike/Adidas vs. say Russel Athletic. Kids love certain brands but there IS a legitimate reason for some of it.

[FiddySicks]

11 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

No, I think the Marlins are a special case with their red/orange.  But New Era does use the same orange for the Astros, Orioles, Giants & Mets. 

 

Actually, I don't think this is right. The colors in the style guide may be different, but I'm almost 100% sure New Era uses the same shade of orange material for both caps. 

 

Source: I own both caps. 

 

 

Actually, now that I look at it, ALL of the caps I have that use orange are the same shade. I'm pretty sure New Era only provides one shade of the MUSA poly in orange. It's the same case with red (Minus the D Backs).