MLB changes 2018?

[Gothamite]

True.  Would love to see heathered grays.  But I doubt that either the Brewers or Yankees would adopt them, so my enthusiasm is somewhat tempered.

 

besides, I’m trying to get the Brewers to stage a really unusual TBTC event, and if it happens I’d rather not have the UA logo.  

[Bill0813]

Earth Day cap to be worn by the Orioles at home on Sunday, April 22.  The jerseys will also have green accents.

[SFGiants58]

15 minutes ago, Bill81361 said:

Earth Day cap to be worn by the Orioles at home on Sunday, April 22.  The jerseys will also have green accents.

 

It's a decent enough special events cap (the Orioles seem to like doing non-standard event caps and uniforms), but this image is a bit of a revelation for me. Does anybody else think that black/kelly green would be an excellent color scheme for a Rays redesign?

11 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

When the set was announced, they said that curve was intended to suggest water. 

 

I can see that, in a "ray of sunlight reflecting on the Bay" kind of way. I've always thought it was a stylized "front tail," like the Coca-Cola script.

[coco1997]

18 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

It's a decent enough special events cap (the Orioles seem to like doing non-standard event caps and uniforms), but this image is a bit of a revelation for me. Does anybody else think that black/kelly green would be an excellent color scheme for a Rays redesign?

 

Absolutely. I'm surprised no team has used that color scheme yet. 

[monkeypower]

Their Jackie Robinson game was cancelled so it didn't see the field, but according to the article on the mothership, the Angels Jackie Robinson patch was going to be on the left sleeve instead of the right for reasons unknown, but I assume it was because they had to choose between their two(!) sleeve patches.

 

I, maybe biased, think the Angels current set is one of the best in the MLB, but there's no reason to have the haloed-A appear four times on the player. The roundel on the left sleeve is fine, but that right sleeve patch of just the regular logo is just really unnecessary. There's no need for a patch on both sleeves, especially if one is just the primary logo already featured three times in different forms on the jersey.

 

 

According to the Angels sportslogos.net page, the primary logo was added to the right sleeve in 2011 which matches up with my recollection.

[Brown1]

1 hour ago, coco1997 said:

 

Absolutely. I'm surprised no team has used that color scheme yet. 

The MLB is really lacking on the best color ever....green. Especially kelly green.

[cheo25]

Quote

I, maybe biased, think the Angels current set is one of the best in the MLB, but there's no reason to have the haloed-A appear four times on the player. 

It's too bad their Jackie Robinson game got wiped out because it would have been "awesome" (and, by awesome, I mean incredibly stupid) to see the Angels' players wearing "42" in four different places to match the four different "haloed-A" instances. What number did Jackie Robinson wear again?

 

Of course, the better question to ask is how much is MLB profiting off Jackie Robinson's memory with all of the merchandise they're selling?

[WSU151]

14 hours ago, monkeypower said:

Their Jackie Robinson game was cancelled so it didn't see the field, but according to the article on the mothership, the Angels Jackie Robinson patch was going to be on the left sleeve instead of the right for reasons unknown, but I assume it was because they had to choose between their two(!) sleeve patches.

 

I, maybe biased, think the Angels current set is one of the best in the MLB, but there's no reason to have the haloed-A appear four times on the player. The roundel on the left sleeve is fine, but that right sleeve patch of just the regular logo is just really unnecessary. There's no need for a patch on both sleeves, especially if one is just the primary logo already featured three times in different forms on the jersey.

 

 

According to the Angels sportslogos.net page, the primary logo was added to the right sleeve in 2011 which matches up with my recollection.

 

I think that jersey looks best when worn with the white pants (so, at home), and it's helped by bold white outlines. The right sleeve patch is completely unnecessary, and the left sleeve patch could be vastly improved.

 

Still wish the Angels had a navy alternate hat...maybe worn like how the Cardinals do it.  

[Digby]

16 hours ago, Bill81361 said:

Earth Day cap to be worn by the Orioles at home on Sunday, April 22.  The jerseys will also have green accents.

Nothing says sustainability like manufacturing a whole new run of caps for one game.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On 4/16/2018 at 8:36 AM, SilverBullet1929 said:

 

 

Greg Gross was not the 1974 Rookie-of-the-Year.  He came in second in the National League to Bake McBride.

 

[Matito]

59 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Greg Gross was not the 1974 Rookie-of-the-Year.  He came in second in the National League to Bake McBride.

 

Somewhat related: When I was 9, I went to an event at the St. Pete Pier shortly before the 1999 season started. At the time, Frank Howard was the bench coach for the Devil Rays. There was a line to get autographs from some players, and I had a baseball that I wanted signed. When I got to Howard, however, he took the Tampa Bay Buccaneers cap off my head and signed the underside of the brim "Frank Howard, 1960 NL Rookie of the Year." To this day, I still don't understand why he did that.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

11 minutes ago, Matito said:

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Greg Gross was not the 1974 Rookie-of-the-Year.  He came in second in the National League to Bake McBride.

Somewhat related: When I was 9, I went to an event at the St. Pete Pier shortly before the 1999 season started. At the time, Frank Howard was the bench coach for the Devil Rays. There was a line to get autographs from some players, and I had a baseball that I wanted signed. When I got to Howard, however, he took the Tampa Bay Buccaneers cap off my head and signed the underside of the brim "Frank Howard, 1960 NL Rookie of the Year." To this day, I still don't understand why he did that.

 

Ah!  I think I have found the answer to both matters.  It seems that both Greg Gross's team and Frank Howard were referring to the Sporting News's Rookie-of-the-Year award, as opposed to baseball's official award, which is voted upon by the writers.

 

 

[leopard88]

19 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

It's a decent enough special events cap (the Orioles seem to like doing non-standard event caps and uniforms), but this image is a bit of a revelation for me. Does anybody else think that black/kelly green would be an excellent color scheme for a Rays redesign?

 

Black and kelly green is one of my favorite color schemes.  You would think someone would be using it.

 

[WSU151]

4 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

Black and kelly green is one of my favorite color schemes.  You would think someone would be using it.

 

 

Is that a sans-serif Eagles number font?

[TornadoGTS]

3 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

 

Is that a sans-serif Eagles number font?

 

Its Florida State's old font or "Glades Bold" by Nike catalog standards

 

[coco1997]

52 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

Black and kelly green is one of my favorite color schemes.  You would think someone would be using it.

 

I've seen the idea proposed of green as a secondary color for the White Sox. Honestly, if they *had* to add another color to replace silver, I'd probably be OK with it. 

[zigbazah]

The Blue Jays cap with the white crown is one of the finest in the league. It should be their main home cap. 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

Whew.  What a few weeks.  Still extremely busy, but catching up on the thread can now be crossed off the list.

 

On 3/30/2018 at 10:30 PM, Old School Fool said:

Oakland A's are in the new kelly green alternate for the first time tonight. Legends are wearing an exclusive version where the script and numbers are in metallic gold, and if you ask me kelly green and metallic gold is really sharp.

 

 

Look like good TATC uniforms.  Which I suppose means they have no place in the promotion.

 

On 3/31/2018 at 6:41 PM, BringBackTheVet said:

I'm a big fan of that DC cap.  Could do without the bevels, but it's a great logo, and I've never heard anyone colloquially refer to the city as anything other than DC.

 

Might be a regional things.  I've only heard people trying to be fancy or people from not the East Coast refer to it as "DC".  Then again, I also often hear the an additional direction added to differentiate.  It's either "down in Washington" or "up in Washington".

 

On 4/4/2018 at 1:43 PM, BringBackTheVet said:

Someone brought up the Phillies - they’re actually a good example of being a “thing”. Their wordmark appears pretty much the same in any context, their use of their colors is consistent in all applications (except for the ridiculous special days that MLB mandates) and when you see something of theirs you instantly know it’s for the Phillies. 

 

 

On 4/5/2018 at 2:46 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Also, no matter what interpretation you graft onto it, "Rays" is just a stupid name.  It's great for a bowling team made up of four guys named "Ray".  But for a Major League Baseball team it is ridiculous.  If only there had been some charismatic historical personage called "Tampa Bay Ray", à la Buffalo Bill, maybe a pool shark or something.

 

One of my favorite images on here was someone making their avatar a black roundel with orange text for the Tampa Bay Rays, Ray Romano's picture in the center.  I know I'd saved it, but I can't for the life of me find it right now.

 

On 4/6/2018 at 2:18 PM, Whitesox572 said:

I am ashamed to admit this.  I may have missed this for YEARS and just had an epiphany, I think.  In the current RAYS wordmark, is the curvy bottom part of the "R" supposed to be one of the fins of a devil ray?

 

 

On 4/10/2018 at 10:38 AM, FinsUp1214 said:

That may be the most overrated throwback ever. It was garbage in 1979 and it’s garbage now. 

 

There are some sets that are so ugly they’re kind of cool, but this isn’t one of them.

 

I don't know if it's the most overrated.  I think the Philly maroon and powders, the White Sox winning ugly, and almost anything the Angels wore prior to the 90's are more overrated.

 

On 4/11/2018 at 1:47 AM, DeFrank said:

Am I the only one who finds the Nats new alternate to look completely minor league. It doesn’t look like a real baseball uniform to me. I really don’t like it. In any case, I’d theyre going to have a navy alternate, have it say washington and wear it on the road.

 

The problem is that the home uniforms all have multiple plack piping, a look that makes them unique and is pretty... well... pretty.  This uniform drops all the piping, making it look more like a t-shirt or a knockoff.

 

On 4/11/2018 at 6:17 AM, WSU151 said:

I don't know of another city that would have supported the prior ownership or the current ownership. 

 

New York might support the current, but yeah.  They're somehow still getting screwed from the ownership grave by Loria.

 

On 4/11/2018 at 9:05 AM, Bucfan56 said:

I’m cool with the script but I wish it didn’t look so crooked and I HATE HATE AYCHE EH TEE EEE the fact that the script and number colors are reversed. That looks AWFUL. That works some times for some teams, but NOT in this case. 

 

Was going through the Getty images while updating the Wikipedia uniform images, and was shocked to find out that I'd somehow completely missed that the Diamondback's have had weird Caucasian flesh-colored numbers on the front of their away grays.  Was it always like that?  It looks hideous.

 

On 4/16/2018 at 8:15 AM, SilverBullet1929 said:

The Rays identity is that of rays of sunshine. They only wear the devil ray animal on their sleeve as a nod to their previous identity. They're not trying to be both. We've already gone over this. Are the A's trying to be elephants because they wear an elephant sleeve patch? It's the same thing. 

 

Well, they were never officially the elephants, but the mascot comes from an insult by John McGraw (who always seems to be an integral part of stories from these days) towards the team and given their ballpark situation and performance I think they just might be secure in both identities right now.

 

On 4/16/2018 at 2:14 PM, BJ Sands said:

Under Armour's MLB deal isn't starting until 2020.

 

On 4/16/2018 at 3:04 PM, Gothamite said:

Great news.  Maybe it can get pushed back another year.  And another after that.  And....

 

Problem is this was a quiet year because everyone was going to wait a year to rebrand.  Every year we continue waiting is a year the Padres and Rays remain the same or somehow tweak things to make them worse like San Diego did last time.

[Cosmic]

20 hours ago, Digby said:

Nothing says sustainability like manufacturing a whole new run of caps for one game.

They can just reuse them next year for St. Patrick's Day. Close the loop.

[leopard88]

3 hours ago, Silent Wind of Doom said:

Might be a regional things.  I've only heard people trying to be fancy or people from not the East Coast refer to it as "DC".  Then again, I also often hear the an additional direction added to differentiate.  It's either "down in Washington" or "up in Washington".

 

I'm in Baltimore and I hear "DC" used relatively frequently . . . and not by people who seem to be trying to be fancy.