Brewers new uniform

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

21 minutes ago, mjd77 said:

While I don't mind that jersey, I hate the hat for exactly the reason you just mentioned.  Everyone mistakes it for the Michigan M.  At least the Miller M they use now has a bit of style to it.  If they'd ever change it, I'd want something that is distinguishable enough that you know it's a Brewers hat.

 

That Brewers logo is about the same as the one used by the Milwaukee Braves.  This is analogous to the Mets' use of the New York Giants' logo, the Nationals' use of the Washington Senators' logo, and the Dodgers' use of a logo that is shaped the same as the one had been worn on the caps of the PCL's Los Angeles Angels.

[SFGiants58]

23 minutes ago, mjd77 said:

 

While I don't mind that jersey, I hate the hat for exactly the reason you just mentioned.  Everyone mistakes it for the Michigan M.  At least the Miller M they use now has a bit of style to it.  If they'd ever change it, I'd want something that is distinguishable enough that you know it's a Brewers hat.

 

 

Paging @BeerGuyJordan, would the Brewers' block M logo (given that it's also in a blue/yellow color scheme) potentially infringe on the Michigan M?

 

The "block M" worked for the American Association Brewers and Milwaukee Braves because it wasn't in roughly Michigan's color scheme. Put it in blue/yellow, and you've got something that's a bit too close for comfort. Heck, when I tried to bring the "block M" back for a concept, I had to mod it to make it look less like the Michigan M.

[Gothamite]

I think that the block M isn't distinctive enough to work today (not even if the Braves had stuck around).  But it could easily be modified in some way just as the Astros' H-star was, and could work then. 

[hawk36]

6 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I think that's actually a bit more confusing, actually.  

1. Seattle started the royal/yellow with the franchise

2. Milwaukee bought and continued to use it

3. Milwaukee started the navy/gold

 

Thus, I'd say navy/gold would be preferable to royal/yellow since it was created in, and for, Milwaukee not Seattle.

[Dynasty]

I'll chime in. I use to like the Brewers current identity (and in a way, I still do)... but now I realize how dated it looks. I don't want them to bring anything back, however. I want to see something fairly new... something that can last for a good while (maybe forever).

[BeerGuyJordan]

2 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Paging @BeerGuyJordan, would the Brewers' block M logo (given that it's also in a blue/yellow color scheme) potentially infringe on the Michigan M?

 

The "block M" worked for the American Association Brewers and Milwaukee Braves because it wasn't in roughly Michigan's color scheme. Put it in blue/yellow, and you've got something that's a bit too close for comfort. Heck, when I tried to bring the "block M" back for a concept, I had to mod it to make it look less like the Michigan M.

You actually wanted to page my girlfriend, I believe. I'm like a virtual chauffeur. Here she is:

 

Short answer? Not likely. There are several key reasons. Infringing on a copyright block letter has to be close (thickness, font, height, width, etc.). This does depend primarily on the scope of any Michigan marks, but still, I don't think they're close enough for an issue (I'm assuming we're comparing the 'classic' Brewers M to the simpler, lesser used Michigan M). Milwaukee's is taller and narrower. Michigan's shorter and wider. It may not seem like much, but in this business, it's often enough.

 

That's also if they were to unveil it, brand new, today. The prior use and nature of it not being a mark used for anything more than "throwback" Milwaukee merchandise, as well as the fact that it is not in primary usage, for Michigan, is also to be condisered. The two are likely content to ignore each other, or they may even have an agreement, of some sort. 

 

Could someone bring a case? Yes, but given the cirumstances, it's not one that is likely to get much traction, or even be worth the time and cost. These cases can get very expensive, very quickly.

[SFGiants58]

Thanks, BeerGuyJordan's girlfriend, and @BeerGuyJordan! It's good to know that there would be only a minuscule chance of a new Brewers "block M" infringing upon Michigan's trademark.

 

Still, I think the visual similarity of the two logos is a little too strong for the Brewers' "block M" to come back unmodified. Even if trademark law doesn't see the similarity, focus groups and fans probably would notice. I agree with @Gothamite that an H-star style modification of the "block M" would be an excellent direction for the team to take (to the point where focus groups and fans won't make the comparison). Of course, the team probably would prefer to simply reinstate the BiG, due to brand recognition/equity and popularity with the fan base. 

[leopard88]

11 hours ago, mjd77 said:

 

While I don't mind that jersey, I hate the hat for exactly the reason you just mentioned.  Everyone mistakes it for the Michigan M.  At least the Miller M they use now has a bit of style to it.  If they'd ever change it, I'd want something that is distinguishable enough that you know it's a Brewers hat.

 

How about using their old Wisconsin-M logo as the cap logo?

 

This is the best I could find on short notice, but I have in mind the one they used to use on jackets and such, with a more detailed map outline and single-color blue M without the outline (which I couldn't find in a 60 second search).

 

 

 

 

[AnPheitseog]

Seattle's colours are blue and green(and derivates).

 

Mariners

Seahawks

Sounders

 

All in blue and green(or shades there of).

 

Royal and yellow, as FANTASTIC of a colour scheme it is, shouldnt be what the mariners go with.

 

Brewers on the otherhand, would look fantastic.

 

Just want SOMEONE to do it.

[clr2420]

In a brewers rebrand, would love to see the barrelman logo become a more prominent part of their identity. Feel it's very underused and would work quite well as a sleeve patch, alternate logo, or something. Think it needs to be a part of a future identity!

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

royal blue and yellow is a great color scheme, that should be the answer for the Brew Crew.  Claim it now before Seattle does!!!

 

And yeah, I'd roll with an updated version of these:

 

 

Keep the ball in glove logo in the 80's where it belongs.

 

 

[JayMac]

I think I might have gotten the ball rolling On the whole Mariners/Brewers talk in regard to the blue and athletic gold combo. Both can lay claim to it, as they did in the late 70s into early 90s. But the Mariners have had a perfectly unique color scheme that, as mentioned before, fits the whole blue and green motif of the city's teams. If you want to go the whole success in a uniform route, the Mariners were terrible in the blue and athletic gold years. They have had some (very moderate) success in the current color scheme. 

[OnWis97]

9 hours ago, hawk36 said:

1. Seattle started the royal/yellow with the franchise

2. Milwaukee bought and continued to use it

3. Milwaukee started the navy/gold

 

Thus, I'd say navy/gold would be preferable to royal/yellow since it was created in, and for, Milwaukee not Seattle.

Well, that's just not true.

 

But for the sake of this discussion, I'll even concede your point.  So?  There is absolutely no indication that Seattle's going back to it.  Does that make off limits for everyone?  It's not exactly a unique color scheme (though, it is sadly becoming rare given trends toward darker colors and away from basic two-color schemes).  

 

If the Mariners want it, they should take it.  But they have a well-liked color scheme that by now defines their team/franchise much, much more than the old blue and yellow days.

 

That Milwaukee started the navy/gold scheme is neither here nor there.  They can keep it but they don't need to any more than the Astros needed to keep their two former schemes that they started. It stinks and unlike in Seattle, there's still a critical split within the fanbase.  If the Brewers re-adopted the scheme, they would be telling us all "who they are," just as the Astros did when they went back to blue and orange.  If the Mariners did?  I honestly think that would bring about confusion. Ten years from now, we'd be asking "are the Mariners ever going back to the blue and teal?"

 

Even if the Mariners did go back to that color scheme, I'd still support the Brewers doing so.  Two teams in opposite leagues?  That's a lot less coverage than the brief period of time when three NL teams (Padres, Mets, Astros) all had blue and orange.  And we have two of them in opposite leagues today.

[OnWis97]

29 minutes ago, clr2420 said:

In a brewers rebrand, would love to see the barrelman logo become a more prominent part of their identity. Feel it's very underused and would work quite well as a sleeve patch, alternate logo, or something. Think it needs to be a part of a future identity!

 

Ugh.  I think this is an unpopular opinion but I hate that logo.  I used to accuse it of being 70s, but actually, I think a minor league Milwaukee Brewers had it well before that.  So it's minor league (which is also what I think of other whimsical logos like the O's cartoon bird; I guess I am humorless).  I really would like to see them shy away from that logo.  Put it on t-shirts, I suppose.  But I really would not want to see that as a primary logo or anywhere on the uniforms.

[leopard88]

1 hour ago, leopard88 said:

 

How about using their old Wisconsin-M logo as the cap logo?

 

This is the best I could find on short notice, but I have in mind the one they used to use on jackets and such, with a more detailed map outline and single-color blue M without the outline (which I couldn't find in a 60 second search).

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, I quoted myself.

 

Here are a couple of better looking shots of the old logo.  I guess the M did have a white outline back in the day.  I think it would look better without the outline.

 

[OnWis97]

Wow...I recall that starter jacket.  I remember looking at the sports gear stores pre-internet (i.e., so high-priced articles of many teams could be found) and thinking that the Brewers had the worst one.  

 

I like the "M" in the state.  It markets to the rest of the state and looks nice on the sleeve of that jacket.  It could work on a jersey sleeve, too.  But I am not convinced it should be on the hat.  Actually it may be batting practice cap material.

[mjd77]

12 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Paging @BeerGuyJordan, would the Brewers' block M logo (given that it's also in a blue/yellow color scheme) potentially infringe on the Michigan M?

 

The "block M" worked for the American Association Brewers and Milwaukee Braves because it wasn't in roughly Michigan's color scheme. Put it in blue/yellow, and you've got something that's a bit too close for comfort. Heck, when I tried to bring the "block M" back for a concept, I had to mod it to make it look less like the Michigan M.

 

I actually don't mind the block M in your concept.  The use of the barley sprig and slight curvature at the bottom helps give it some style and IMO makes it more identifiable as a Brewers mark.  A similar treatment needs to happen for the Indians block C if they insist on keeping it around for a long time.

[Sport]

1 hour ago, OnWis97 said:

Well, that's just not true.

 

But for the sake of this discussion, I'll even concede your point.  So?  There is absolutely no indication that Seattle's going back to it.  Does that make off limits for everyone?  It's not exactly a unique color scheme (though, it is sadly becoming rare given trends toward darker colors and away from basic two-color schemes).  

 

If the Mariners want it, they should take it.  But they have a well-liked color scheme that by now defines their team/franchise much, much more than the old blue and yellow days.

 

That Milwaukee started the navy/gold scheme is neither here nor there.  They can keep it but they don't need to any more than the Astros needed to keep their two former schemes that they started. It stinks and unlike in Seattle, there's still a critical split within the fanbase.  If the Brewers re-adopted the scheme, they would be telling us all "who they are," just as the Astros did when they went back to blue and orange.  If the Mariners did?  I honestly think that would bring about confusion. Ten years from now, we'd be asking "are the Mariners ever going back to the blue and teal?"

 

 

There's a faction of Mariners fans who want the team to return to the blue and yellow (Hi, Phantomdreamer). That's what a 16 year playoff drought will do to an identity, but I think most M's fans are content with the Griffey uniforms. When I lived in Seattle I used to wear my teal billed Mariners hat all over town in an effort to visually cast my vote to anyone who might notice that that was my preferred identity. 

 

Blue and yellow just feels less right for the Mariners than it does the Brewers. Willing to admit that could be my age talking. I have 0 memory of the Mariners as a full time blue/yellow team and came up during a time when the coolest baseball player ever was wearing navy blue and teal.

[leopard88]

I think the problem with it as a cap logo (now that I am taking a closer look at the actual logo) is that the M isn't centered within the state outline.  That means one of two things would happen if it was placed on a cap, as is:

 

1.  The M would look off center if the logo was centered based on the edges of the state outline.

2.  The whole logo would look off center if it was centered based on the M.

 

Either scenario would probably drive me crazy.

 

I think it could still work if:

 

1.  The M was enlarged and essentially laid over the state outline (or at least filled out the outline more).  In that case, you could probably center the logo on the M without making it look off center.

2.  Eliminate the white outline and the star so it doesn't look as busy.

[mjd77]

13 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

I think the problem with it as a cap logo (now that I am taking a closer look at the actual logo) is that the M isn't centered within the state outline.  That means one of two things would happen if it was placed on a cap, as is:

 

1.  The M would look off center if the logo was centered based on the edges of the state outline.

2.  The whole logo would look off center if it was centered based on the M.

 

Either scenario would probably drive me crazy.

 

I think it could still work if:

 

1.  The M was enlarged and essentially laid over the state outline (or at least filled out the outline more).  In that case, you could probably center the logo on the M without making it look off center.

2.  Eliminate the white outline and the star so it doesn't look as busy.

 

When batting practice caps first came out, the Brewers had their state logo on it and IMO they looked horrible.