MLB changes 2018?

[BBTV]

6 hours ago, Andrew_Gamer_NZP said:

 

What about replacing the front number on the away jersey with a "DC"? I don't know if this would be a good idea or not. 

 

Nah, then it says “Washington DC”, which is just a little too much. It’d be like the pirates saying PITTSBURGH, PA on theirs. It’s not done for a reason. 

[DeFrank]

2 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

I guess this might be better off in the unpopular opinions thread now but I think the Nationals have a borderline top 5 look in baseball. There are some small fixes they could make, like getting their hat situation set and fixing the piping on the road jerseys so it's uniform, but overall it's great. 

 

And I don't think DC would work on the hats because they're not the DC Nationals, they're the Washington Nationals. I do like the idea of putting it under the wordmark on the jerseys that have the wordmark.

 

What are your thoughts on the Twin City Twins? 

[Digby]

4 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

I guess this might be better off in the unpopular opinions thread now but I think the Nationals have a borderline top 5 look in baseball. There are some small fixes they could make, like getting their hat situation set and fixing the piping on the road jerseys so it's uniform, but overall it's great. 

 

And I don't think DC would work on the hats because they're not the DC Nationals, they're the Washington Nationals. I do like the idea of putting it under the wordmark on the jerseys that have the wordmark.

 

I'm inclined to agree with your first paragraph. I don't like the Walgreensy-ness of the curly W, but I like seeing them as the simple red chest logo team. The Nationals swoop-tail script is nice enough and I like it on alts, but I don't see a need for it on the primary home uniform -- there are enough teams with that look that primarily use red, and it's even not that far from the Orioles up the road.

 

Having said that -- I would prefer a DC monogram, because I feel like that grounds it locally (the age old DC vs. Washington thing at work again). But the beveled DC never worked for me, either, so I don't know. I guess curly W grew on me because of that.

[Gothamite]

I seem to be hearing this a lot.

 

We can become inured to the Walgreens W, but that doesn't magically make it a good logo.

[DeFrank]

13 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

I seem to be hearing this a lot.

 

We can become inured to the Walgreens W, but that doesn't magically make it a good logo.

 

Are there examples to you or objectively bad logos that ought to be kept around because they’re so ingrained with a team’s identity? I’m not saying the Nats are there, but ten years from now they sure could be

[OnWis97]

On 5/7/2018 at 12:51 PM, Andrew_Gamer_NZP said:

I don't mind the curly w on the hat, but I don't like it on the jersey. Would personally like if they added the nationals script to the home jersey (like the new navy alternate).

Funny; I like it on the jersey but not the hat.  (EDIT: for some reason I read "on the jersey" as the "W" in the Washington script, which is fine.  I agree that the one one the left chest is terrible.)

 

In fact...

 

I'd use the hat's from the first set and the jerseys from the second set of the below (except for the red, where I'd use "DC" and not "W").  I've never liked those wordmarks but I think the cursive wordmarks are great and it's OK if the "DC" does not match them.  The "TC" has never matched a Twins wordmark.  I personally don't think that's a problem.

 

 

On 5/5/2018 at 9:04 PM, DeFrank said:

Yeah ok not like I have finals to study for.

 

Here is what I would do in a vacuum:

 

 

 

And here is what I would do in a realistic world where the curly W has to stay:

 

 

[kroywen]

I think I might be the only person who prefers the curly W to the DC logo. Attractive and historically relevant, even if resembling Walgreens a little too much.

 

The curly W hat paired with the "Nationals" script on the home would be perfect.

[Gothamite]

2 hours ago, DeFrank said:

 

Are there examples to you or objectively bad logos that ought to be kept around because they’re so ingrained with a team’s identity? I’m not saying the Nats are there, but ten years from now they sure could be

 

Ought to be kept around? No.  

 

No objectively-bad logo ought to be kept around. It should at a minimum be tweaked to be less objectively bad.  

[WavePunter]

2 hours ago, kroywen said:

I think I might be the only person who prefers the curly W to the DC logo. Attractive and historically relevant, even if resembling Walgreens a little too much.

 

The curly W hat paired with the "Nationals" script on the home would be perfect.

I love the Curly-W, and agree on the script jersey

 

2 hours ago, Gothamite said:

I seem to be hearing this a lot.

 

We can become inured to the Walgreens W, but that doesn't magically make it a good logo.

We don't seem to disagree often, but this is one of those rare times.. I love it and think it's a terrific logo.. I agree that it's not the strongest left-chest logo, but I think there are other weaknesses with those jerseys as well; but as a cap and primary logo, I think it's great.. Pair it with that script home jersey, and the entire identity suddenly feels upgraded and the logo magically seems stronger.. At least imo

[Ark]

[kroywen]

2 hours ago, WavePunter said:

We don't seem to disagree often, but this is one of those rare times.. I love it and think it's a terrific logo.. I agree that it's not the strongest left-chest logo, but I think there are other weaknesses with those jerseys as well; but as a cap and primary logo, I think it's great.. Pair it with that script home jersey, and the entire identity suddenly feels upgraded and the logo magically seems stronger.. At least imo

 

This is the main problem with the curly W right now. It is fine - actually, I'd say it's great - as a cap logo. It fails as a chest logo, as would most cap logos. A chest logo needs to be strong and bold - that's why the Yankees and (up until this year) the Tigers used different versions of their logo on their chest. The Yankees' slim interlocking NY would fail as a chest logo because it doesn't have nearly enough presence to stand up against the pinstripe background. Likewise, the Tigers' changes the offseason were a downgrade, since the old chest logo had more presence. And the White Sox have a very bold, intricate logo on their chest, with the three interlocking letters having a ton of 'presence.'

 

The curly W is just kind of there on the chest right now. It doesn't stand out, it doesn't capture your attention, it's arguably overshadowed by the (misplaced) numbers on the left chest. But as a cap logo? I think it works really well.

[WavePunter]

28 minutes ago, kroywen said:

 

This is the main problem with the curly W right now. It is fine - actually, I'd say it's great - as a cap logo. It fails as a chest logo, as would most cap logos. A chest logo needs to be strong and bold - that's why the Yankees and (up until this year) the Tigers used different versions of their logo on their chest. The Yankees' slim interlocking NY would fail as a chest logo because it doesn't have nearly enough presence to stand up against the pinstripe background. Likewise, the Tigers' changes the offseason were a downgrade, since the old chest logo had more presence. And the White Sox have a very bold, intricate logo on their chest, with the three interlocking letters having a ton of 'presence.'

 

The curly W is just kind of there on the chest right now. It doesn't stand out, it doesn't capture your attention, it's arguably overshadowed by the (misplaced) numbers on the left chest. But as a cap logo? I think it works really well.

I agree.. I think it also has to do with the way the logo was designed.. It looks best as a white logo on a dark background.. It gets muddled in color, which only adds to its issues.. That's why the home jersey should be the script, and if they insist on putting the W on a jersey, the red alt is the least offensive option.. 

[Gothamite]

2 hours ago, Ark said:

 

That never worked as an M.  It works even less as a W.

[Ark]

21 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

That never worked as an M.  It works even less as a W.

 

What are you talking about? The Expos logo is iconic. 

[zigbazah]

While I much prefer the DC monogram in a vacuum, an objection I can understand is that there are several clubs with Cs on their caps. The curly W, for its faults, is probably more distinguishable in terms of branding, as much as I hate admitting that. However I still see no reason why the Nats shouldn't switch to their script on the home uniform. 

[Gothamite]

20 minutes ago, Ark said:

What are you talking about? The Expos logo is iconic. 

 

That doesn’t mean it looks even vaguely like an M. 

[JayMac]

46 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

That never worked as an M.  It works even less as a W.

I get that it's supposed to be an M but I could hardly ever make it out. 

[Gothamite]

Unlike a lot of other “hidden letter” logos, even knowing the secret doesn’t help.  

[Ark]

You really can't see an M?

 

This is a great transfer of the Expos logo into script

 

[JayMac]

2 minutes ago, Ark said:

You really can't see an M?

 

I can see the M but my eyes are always drawn to what looks to me as ELB.