ANGELCAT-IDA61

MLB changes 2018?

Recommended Posts

I had forgotten that. 

And my own side note: this adds to the long list of things I find distasteful about that man.  :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

Yep, that's a problem.  They don't outline the NOB or back numbers either.

 

301b850c21f048139ac3d136b472e409.jpg

 

The white outline is clearly not necessary and should be dropped from the wordmark and sleeve patches.  Pointless clutter. (Though again, so are the sleeve patches.)

thumb_aspx.jpgaway.jpg

Just to pile on, it bugs me that they only use the drop shadow on the home word mark. It should be on the away jersey word mark, and I think if it were on the numbers and the NOB it would make the uniforms look better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the Angel's have a lot of potential for really nice uniforms but they waste it all on trash. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, O.C.D said:

thumb_aspx.jpgaway.jpg

Just to pile on, it bugs me that they only use the drop shadow on the home word mark. It should be on the away jersey word mark, and I think if it were on the numbers and the NOB it would make the uniforms look better.

The drop shadow is grey so it's not going to show up on a grey uniform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this belongs in Unpopular Opinions, but I don't think the Angels have ever looked better.  They could use a few tweaks (ditch the drop shadow on the homes and the white on the roads), and I don't care for the red-on-red alt, but otherwise their look and their brand make perfect sense.  Not only does the red make for the perfect contrast to Dodger blue, but they've managed to own that color in the AL.  Something they'll continue to do as long as the Rangers continue their identity crisis and the Indians figure out what they're doing post-Wahoo.

Everything else the Angles have done ranges from dated (most of their stuff from the 70s and 80s), to forgettable (60s and early 90s, save for the halo caps), to only appropriate for a minor league club (the Disney redesign).  What they have now is as much a modern classic as any IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NicDB said:

Maybe this belongs in Unpopular Opinions, but I don't think the Angels have ever looked better.  They could use a few tweaks (ditch the drop shadow on the homes and the white on the roads), and I don't care for the red-on-red alt, but otherwise their look and their brand make perfect sense.  Not only does the red make for the perfect contrast to Dodger blue, but they've managed to own that color in the AL.  Something they'll continue to do as long as the Rangers continue their identity crisis and the Indians figure out what they're doing post-Wahoo.

Everything else the Angles have done ranges from dated (most of their stuff from the 70s and 80s), to forgettable (60s and early 90s, save for the halo caps), to only appropriate for a minor league club (the Disney redesign).  What they have now is as much a modern classic as any IMHO.

I agree.  There is some nitpicking to be done, particularly with the two patches with different uses of the halo-A.  Admittedly, I didn’t even realize the home jersey had a drop shadow. And that should be eliminated.  But in general I love it and they were able to distinguish themselves from other red/navy teams.

 

Most baseball drop-shadows are overkill. Texas’s uniforms improved when they dropped theirs and Milwaukee’s drop-shadow contributes to their mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Blame it all on Pete Rose, who in 1979 became the first player to wear his batting practice jersey in an All-Star Game.

 

 

(Side note: this is the only thing that I have against Pete Rose.)

No. The A's had players wearing green and gold as far back as '74 (and possibly earlier, see below), and three different colored jerseys in the '75 ASG (see below), The Indians had Dennis Eckersley and Jim Kern wearing different colors in '77. So don't blame that on Rose.

 

DhA5So2WAAEEhOG.jpg

 

1975-al-team.jpg

 

2809122943_265ecd5a1d_o.jpg

 

Furthermore, I miss the days of different colors in the ASG. Everyone is gray or white now, and that would be fine if they were all wearing the same uniforms. But since they're not, I would be fine with alternate jerseys coming back. It's an All-Star Game. I actually would hate to see them wear those American and National BP jerseys and hats for game use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First and foremost, I could not support alternates for the designated home team.  It's bad enough when the Angels and Rangers square off in red vs. blue.  I don't want to see white/green/blue vs. gray/red/blue/black or something.

 

Given that all the players wear their team uniform (as they should), I think gray vs. white works best, but if just the designated road team is allowed alts, I can deal with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cheo25 said:

No. The A's had players wearing green and gold as far back as '74 (and possibly earlier, see below), and three different colored jerseys in the '75 ASG (see below), The Indians had Dennis Eckersley and Jim Kern wearing different colors in '77. So don't blame that on Rose.

 

Those are not batting practice jerseys, however. I didn't see the original post, so I'm not commenting on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

I agree.  There is some nitpicking to be done, particularly with the two patches with different uses of the halo-A.  Admittedly, I didn’t even realize the home jersey had a drop shadow. And that should be eliminated.  But in general I love it and they were able to distinguish themselves from other red/navy teams.

 

Most baseball drop-shadows are overkill. Texas’s uniforms improved when they dropped theirs and Milwaukee’s drop-shadow contributes to their mess.


I will give credit where it's due.  This is one of the better executed and least intrusive drop shadows I've ever seen.  But it does date this as something that was designed in the early 2000s, and it's not like the overall design would be losing something without it.  If anything, losing the dropshadow would make the Angels even more timeless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Those are not batting practice jerseys, however. I didn't see the original post, so I'm not commenting on that.

 

The original post was:

 

On 7/18/2018 at 1:47 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Blame it all on Pete Rose, who in 1979 became the first player to wear his batting practice jersey in an All-Star Game.

Image result for 1979 all star game pete rose

 

(Side note: this is the only thing that I have against Pete Rose.)

 

 

Rose might be the first person to wear a BP jersey in an All-Star Game, but it was a continuation of the alternate-jersey trend, not the beginning of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cheo25 said:

No. The A's had players wearing green and gold as far back as '74 (and possibly earlier, see below), and three different colored jerseys in the '75 ASG (see below), The Indians had Dennis Eckersley and Jim Kern wearing different colors in '77. So don't blame that on Rose.

 

DhA5So2WAAEEhOG.jpg

 

 

If you look closely in the picture, front row, far right, you'll see Carlton Fisk in the rare plaid Red Sox leisure suit uniform.? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ray Lankford said:

The drop shadow is grey so it's not going to show up on a grey uniform.

Angels_Mockup_Home.jpgAngels_Mockup_Away2.jpg

Something like this is what I was imagining. It still works better on the white, but I feel like there is a way to do it on the grey and still have the same balance that the white one does

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you HAD to keep the dropshadow, the white outline would be the way to go. But it's not like the dropshadow adds anything to the look. If anything, it's just unnecessary clutter.

 

Better to just remove all dropshadows and white outlines from the picture altogether. The design is more than capable of standing for itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Angels kinda look like trash. It’s not trash in the sense that they’re the Buccaneers of baseball or anything, but trash in the sense that they’re SO CLOSE to looking awesome, but ruin it by using all the wrong/too many details. The excess patches, weird drop shadows, the fact that that script is so inflexible that they can’t/won’t change the color for their red alt jersey, and that they patently refuse to use navy blue more (other than weird random dumb occasions, like on the bill of their BP cap) all bog that set down to the point that it just adds to how utterly forgettable the Angels are as an organization. I LOVED the Angels set when it first came out, but it absolutely has not aged well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, O.C.D said:

Angels_Mockup_Home.jpgAngels_Mockup_Away2.jpg

 

 

 

Nope, that’s even worse.  Pointless clutter is pointless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bill81361 said:

If you look closely in the picture, front row, far right, you'll see Carlton Fisk in the rare plaid Red Sox leisure suit uniform.? 

 

If memory serves me (and I was alive then), it was supposed to be a road alternate, but all of the uniforms except Fisk's were trashed during the $.10 Beer Night riot in Cleveland. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2018 at 12:38 PM, Gothamite said:

 

That would be half-true.

 

It also fails to address the ballooning costs of the public bonds put up the by the county.  Bonds that will eventually cost the taxpayer $2.4 billion.

 

And considering that the Marlins get to count its rent payments as part of their "contribution" to the stadium's cost, it is indeed to spin this as anything less than a terrible deal. 

"Half true" like you say or not, it's still true. The bonds are whats caused most of the issues, but the amount of high profile events the ballpark and other sporting events will bring in are what they are hoping will pay off the bonds.

In other words, they borrowed money against future earnings on that bed tax to pay for the stadium.

Just because it'll cost them more in the long run doesn't mean they are using and swindling.

 

They pretty much used the Bonds as an Amscott Payday advance service and have to pay more in the long run. But it's still being paid from the same place- Tourist Hotel Bed Taxes, not any other special funds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/15/2018 at 11:45 PM, marlinfan said:

 

 

I really believe the franchise would have benefitted tremendously from Jorge Mas purchasing the team. He would have been the first true Miami majority owner. Someone that people could trust from a well-respected family with backgrounds people could identify with. It will be hard for Jeter to shed the NY carpetbagger coming down to Florida to tell us how everything up north was better look. 

 

 

 

 

I guess Wayne Huizinga (screw that guy) and Mickey Arison aren't true Miami Owners.

Huizinga did alot for this community on the field and off it for decades and well after the left the sports industry. Arison pretty much was born and raised here from what I gather.

 

Besides, Jorge Mas would have been a terrible option as owner- for many reasons. Most of which have come about after he threw his hat in the ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.