SilverBullet1929 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Look guys... it's a devil ray and a ray of sunlight together in the same picture... see? The Tampa Bay Rays CAN be both... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverBullet1929 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 29 minutes ago, Ray Lankford said: Also, there are plenty of teams that are essentially nothing. The Dodgers aren't anything, neither are the Phillies, both Soxes, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightingGoldenDevil Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 8 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said: Look guys... it's a devil ray and a ray of sunlight together in the same picture... see? The Tampa Bay Rays CAN be both... Compromise? BLASPHEMY! Crucify him! Crucify him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 10 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said: Look guys... it's a devil ray and a ray of sunlight together in the same picture... see? The Tampa Bay Rays CAN be both... Technically I think that's a sting ray Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Put me in the camp that the Rays should be one or the other. Names bring images to mind...yes, some of the old-school names like Athletics don't really mean much of anything, but for the most part, they mean one thing. Should the Chiefs have an arrowhead on their helmet and a police badge (i.e., "police chiefs") on the sleeves? Maybe the Milwaukee Bucks can keep the deer logo but be the Milwaukee Buck$ and promote themselves as named after dear and money. People love money. Maybe the Clippers should bring back the shorts with the sails on one leg but add barber sheers to the other. I actually am not convinced any of those ideas is significantly worse than the Rays adding that ray of light. I suppose the Clippers one is. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverBullet1929 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 1 hour ago, WSU151 said: Technically I think that's a sting ray Yes but he's not very nice and his peers say he is very devilish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 The Cubs should be baby bears but also young and intrepid reporters. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 “Bring something” doesn’t mean a literal representation of your mascot - it means have a consistent identity made up comprised of a single base idea. 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. The Rays don’t have a singular concept to base an identity around, which is part of why they’ve never had an iconic image in any of their graphical packages, why thrive always had forgettable uniforms (the OGs might not be forgettable but let’s not pretend they weren’t ridiculed) and why they can’t go full-bore into any type of major campaign. It’s piss poor branding - actually, it’s a total lack of branding. "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 More sharing options...
damnyoutuesday Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 On a separate note, I don't believe the Cleveland Indians have worn anything this season other than Navy/Navy/Grey Sorry, I'm on an iPad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 21 hours ago, Gothamite said: I wouldn't even allow them that. When your regular uniform is that good, when your regular cap is that good, you shouldn’t wear anything else. Yes, and while we're at it, let's bring back the vertical arch to the names. The road hat and terrible alternate jerseys have diluted the Braves, but the NOB change is still a huge downgrade. Especially since the font they use now looks to be half the size of what they used previously. The current homes and roads almost look like knock-offs of the dynasty set from behind. That's how big of a change it was, at least to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverBullet1929 Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 By the way guys I did some research and a "Philly" IS a thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 On 4/4/2018 at 12:18 PM, OnWis97 said: Put me in the camp that the Rays should be one or the other. Names bring images to mind...yes, some of the old-school names like Athletics don't really mean much of anything, but for the most part, they mean one thing. Should the Chiefs have an arrowhead on their helmet and a police badge (i.e., "police chiefs") on the sleeves? Maybe the Milwaukee Bucks can keep the deer logo but be the Milwaukee Buck$ and promote themselves as named after dear and money. People love money. Maybe the Clippers should bring back the shorts with the sails on one leg but add barber sheers to the other. While I agree that the Rays should just pick one interpretation of the word and go with it, we should remember that the Seattle Pilots used both ship-related and airplane-related imagery in their logo. Of course, the Pilots intentionally merged two concepts that are already related, the nautical and the aeronautical. By contrast, the Rays sort of bungled their way into a merger of two disparate concepts of a fish and the sun. Compared to the example of the Pilots, the Rays' identity is a mess. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynasty Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 I like the name Rays for a baseball team. I can't see it working in any other sports league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFGiants58 Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 10 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: While I agree that the Rays should just pick one interpretation of the word and go with it, we should remember that the Seattle Pilots used both ship-related and airplane-related imagery in their logo. Of course, the Pilots intentionally merged two concepts that are already related, the nautical and the aeronautical. While that’s an OK example, it does bring up a few odd implications. It’s kind of navy dress-up: While I get the idea of appropriating the imagery (changing the colors to royal/yellow), it’s a little too close for my tastes. Besides, Seattle doesn’t have nearly the same “navy” culture as a place like San Diego, so it’s doubly ill-fitting. I’m sure if the Pilots stuck around, they might have gone for a “vintage aviation” or “generic plane” look by the time they moved to the Kingdome or when the early-1990s rolled around. MLB: Project 32 (Complete), MLB: The Defunct Saga (Complete) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverBullet1929 Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 I don't think the Rays' current identity is "a mess" at all. They're rays of sunshine based off the bright Florida sun, nothing more nothing less. Their color scheme represents the Florida sky, water, and sunshine. I actually find their identity very simple and clean if not boring. They only have a devil ray on their sleeve as a reference to their previous brand/identity. They're not trying to be both. The Athletics have an elephant on their sleeve... are they a mess of an identity because they can't decide if they're Athletics or elephants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: While I agree that the Rays should just pick one interpretation of the word and go with it, we should remember that the Seattle Pilots used both ship-related and airplane-related imagery in their logo. Yes, and that was stupid too. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matito Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 I've long thought that the Rays have, over their 20 years of existence, gathered all of the necessary pieces for a good brand, but they've never put them together. I'm no concept artist, but I think that they could build a uniform and logo set that would be fresh, cohesive, and most importantly, unique. Start with the original-era logos, but drop "Devil" from the name if you please, which leaves "Rays" with the fish logo (one of my all-time favorite logos). Use the colors of the 2008 rebrand. And use the uniform template of the current 70s fauxbacks. This combination can take something unique about each item, strip away the problematic elements (the rainbow gradient from the 1998 logos, the boring typeface from the 2008 logos, and the kitschy 70s look of the fauxback logos/color layout), and create a new look. Obviously, I'd like to see a predominantly white jersey and white pants at home, but they could easily utilize powder/Columbia blue on the road and not look ridiculous or contrived. I'd love to see someone with more talent than I mock this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Lucas Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 2 hours ago, Matito said: I'd love to see someone with more talent than I mock this up. Well I don’t have any talent, but I did come up with this about two years ago (this month): https://www.dropbox.com/s/hs9mqvn7dcrnaxc/Photo Apr 05%2C 6 43 53 PM.jpg?dl=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitesox572 Posted April 6, 2018 Share Posted April 6, 2018 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBGKon Posted April 6, 2018 Share Posted April 6, 2018 32 minutes ago, 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? You're trying way too hard, much like the hidden S in the San Jose Sharks alternate logo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.