Jump to content

MLB Changes 2017


TVIXX

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Beautiful and well said. Love the lines about embodying Miami Beach, evoking the art deco, and most off all acknowledging that there are building blocks for a strong identity. Forward this to the new ownership when the change happens. 

 

With that said, as a Marlins fan I've heard all the complaints about the rebrand and while I disagree with some I understand why some things aren't liked except for one thing... the number font. 

 

I see that it's unique to baseball but I don't get what's "wrong" with it. It's not like the Brewers Times New Roman font of generic boredom so can anyone fill me on the problem with it or maybe what a better font option would be? 

My issue with the number font is that it clashes with the wordmark on the front. The wordmark is rather sleek, completely sans serif, art deco in nature, while the number font is (IMO) a bit bloated and uses very prominent serifs. They look like they came from two completely separate identities.

 

I just love the font of the Marlins' wordmark so much that I'd much rather see numbers that match. I think they'd look much more cohesive, as well as being more visually attractive on their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
10 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

A few days ago my 8 year old asked me why the White Sox don't actually wear white socks and in explaining it the best I could I wondered if they could actually find a way to make white socks work for them again in a modern way. Any ideas? Can it be done? 

 

It's tricky, at least for me, because of my personal belief that (for the most part), socks, undershirts, and cap crown should match.  While there are a few exceptions to the cap part of this, such as how good the Indians look with red undershirts and socks, there's only one exception to socks matching that doesn't look super awkward, and that's Boston.  Of course, it's not perfect, but good.  Well, I think there's a solution to all of this...

 

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Absolutely it can.  If nothing else, put a thick black stripe around the top to create a visual break between the sock and pant leg.

 

I agree, but not from a standpoint of seperating the white pants from white socks.  I agree because I think that starting in the cap/shirt color at the top of the sock and transitioning makes the difference much more aesthetically pleasing.

 

Back when Stance was announced and there was all this talk about socks, I drew up what I'd thought everyone's socks should look like in this new era of foot-coverings.  I never finished the Diamondbacks and forgot about it, so I never did anything with this.  I think this solution to the White Sox will look great.  And, of course, Boston should always wear their old stripes.  Same for Baltimore.

 

HFl2Fnj.png

 

(Disclaimer.  While, yes, I said having tops of the socks match the shirt and cap works well, not every sock with a different top is meant to match the shirt and cap.)

spacer.png

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bmac said:

How likely is it the Orioles become the test child for UA? I mean, I assume they will, but I'm not sure what all UA could even do with their uniforms. Will we see a Maryland flag inspired design element?

Perhaps.  We see it already in the roundel on the sleeve, though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, kroywen said:

Exactly. At most, we'll get a Seahawks-esque design, as opposed to a full-on Oregon. Just as the Seahawks were Nike's most prominent redesign in the NFL, we might have one or two teams get the Seahawks/Bucs treatment by Under Armour. But I can't see any pro teams in any sport, especially baseball, going full Oregon.

 

The D-Backs are actually the most obvious candidate in my mind, given that they're the one team that Majestic really put its stamp on, and they're clearly willing to go along with more radical redesigns (relative to what we usually expect in MLB). Combine that with the fact that the D-Backs uniforms don't seem to have been well received by most fans, and the fact that Under Armour presumably wouldn't want to market another manufacturer's "signature design" (such as it is), and I can see the D-Backs getting overhauled again by UA.

 

I can also see the Padres as candidates for a UA overhaul, given that their identity has been so listless, ever-changing, and not well-received. Their ownership hasn't shown a proclivity for more "modern" designs - everything they've come out with so far has been relatively traditional - but I can see them as a really good candidate for a more conservative or traditional UA design.

 

Also wouldn't be surprised at updates to the Marlins, as a progression of their existing identity. They clearly have an ownership group willing to go outside the box on design (both uniforms and ballparks), and at the time of their new identity's release, it was probably the most radical rebranding in MLB since the 1980s.

 

As always, I'm sure we'll get a couple surprise teams that get overhauled, perhaps even a pre-expansion team (a la the Browns with Nike).

Under Armour was actually contracted* to create the Diamondbacks current uniforms. Majestic simply produces them.

 

 

*is that a word in the way I'm using it? The work was essentially outsourced to UA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bmac said:

Under Armour was actually contracted* to create the Diamondbacks current uniforms. Majestic simply produces them.

 

 

*is that a word in the way I'm using it? The work was essentially outsourced to UA.

Didn't realize that. Back when the uniforms were originally unveiled, I found it strange that D-Backs team president Derrick Hall had stated that their in-house design team primarily took the lead in designing the uniform (from Uni Watch), which seemed a bit unusual:

 

Quote

Who came up with all of these elements: Majestic? The team? An outside design firm? "The design was completed entirely by our in-house multimedia productions team in conjunction with MLB design services," Hall said. "We began this process more than 18 months ago and have involved our players significantly throughout, as well as some of our fans. We also relied heavily on input from MLB Authentic Collection licensees such as Majestic, Nike and New Era, but our team took the lead with strong support from the MLB design team."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

I wonder how long until hitters start complaining that it's obstructing their vision.

 

If the Pirates batters eye hasn't been a problem for players, I don't think the Astros batters eye will be a problem either. 

 

img_0690.jpg

 

Another look at the Astros batters eye.

 

 

NYCdog.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2017 at 5:32 PM, SilverBullet1929 said:

I see that it's unique to baseball but I don't get what's "wrong" with it. It's not like the Brewers Times New Roman font of generic boredom so can anyone fill me on the problem with it or maybe what a better font option would be? 

 

It doesn't match the sans-serif Futura-inspired lettering at all.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never been a fan of center fields that are walled off like that.  Feels too claustrophobic and lifeless to me.  It was the one thing that rubbed me wrong the worst about the concepts I saw, but I couldn't quite put into words why.  I think it's a combination of those two that irks me.

spacer.png

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like how fake it looks. At least in Pittsburgh, they're using real shrubs (or, if they are fake, they're well-made). Houston just looks like they installed a plywood wall and covered it with fake leaves.

3834694136_f375c335e2_o.jpg3833900697_df7864756a_o.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dolphins Dynasty said:

I don't know if I should hate this trend or not.

 

Does it involve camo?  

 

Does it involve navy?  

 

Does it involve BFBS?  

 

Does it involve roundels?  

 

It's cleared the hurdle.

Quote
"You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke."

twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry about out your bank accounts guys, I really am. 

 

IMG_2246.PNGIMG_2247.PNGIMG_2249.PNG

 

EDIT: Also, a gold button on the ACs. That's a nice touch. 

 

Screen Shot 2017-03-24 at 3.21.38 PM.png

spacer.png

On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said:
She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Need to see the whole things instead of just little blown-up crops, but first impression is that it's awesome.

 

Maybe the numbers should have been outlined in gold instead of actually being gold, but it kinda works

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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