Jungle Jim

Cincinnati Reds: Time For A Change?

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, WavePunter said:

I've never been a fan of the old red blob chest patch with the jersey-colored-C and "REDS" inside.. Would be better imo if the C and REDS were red with no blobby patch outline

 

They tried that in the 90's and It looked odd to me. Like I was looking at a photo negative or something.

 

12 hours ago, oldschoolvikings said:

 

I'm not really sure how you'd top this;

 

PETE-ROSE-Cincinnati-Reds-1969-Majestic-Screen-Shot-2017-10-05-at-8.27.07-PM.png

 

Tony Perez's batting glove looks like it could be evidence in a murder case. 

 

These are basically my ideal Reds uniforms. The home uniforms are perfect. I'd throw Mr Redlegs on the left sleeve, but it wouldn't be a deal breaker if he's not there. On the roads I'd put the Creds on the left sleeve and Gothamite will disagree with me here, the only extra detail needed to complete the A+ would be white outlines on the text and numbers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's not appropriate to post links to concepts, the mods may remove this. I'm not sure where we stand on that but this thread seems like the perfect example of an appropriate time.

 

This is a concept I made last year:

 

Cincinnati Reds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, McCarthy said:

 

They tried that in the 90's and It looked odd to me. Like I was looking at a photo negative or something.

 

 

Tony Perez's batting glove looks like it could be evidence in a murder case. 

 

These are basically my ideal Reds uniforms. The home uniforms are perfect. I'd throw Mr Redlegs on the left sleeve, but it wouldn't be a deal breaker if he's not there. On the roads I'd put the Creds on the left sleeve and Gothamite will disagree with me here, the only extra detail needed to complete the A+ would be white outlines on the text and numbers. 

I think the Reds are the perfect example of a team that needs to ditch the outline. "Cincinatti" is such a long name, the white out line would only clutter things. The Dodgers "Los Angeles" script is proof. That look improved leaps and bounds sans white outline.

Share this post


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

If it's not appropriate to post links to concepts, the mods may remove this. I'm not sure where we stand on that but this thread seems like the perfect example of an appropriate time.

 

This is a concept I made last year:

 

Cincinnati Reds

That's really nice. The home primary is perfect.

 

I feel like the gray is a bit to "flannel" looking...I'd like to see it toned down.  I'd also like to see white outlines for comparison's sake.  But it's great, nonetheless. Red alt is great.  Not a fan of the pinstriped uniform but that's just personal preference.  I'd take this if offered and hope they don't wear the stripes too often.

Share this post


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

 

I'm not really sure how you'd top this;

 

PETE-ROSE-Cincinnati-Reds-1969-Majestic-Screen-Shot-2017-10-05-at-8.27.07-PM.png

With UA's flannel sublimation these would be a pretty good start for a rehab of the uniforms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that I'm bad at not showing off my concepts, but I have two ways the Reds can restomod the '67-'71 set. The first is a straight-up combination of those uniforms with the current set's striping (and a less-janky "Cincinnati" wordmark):

 

6NF5fWG.png

 

The second (with help from @the admiral and @MJD7, thanks guys), used a custom block font (based on UNC's font) and a "Cincinnati" wordmark that better matched the "Reds" lettering in the logo.

 

CGgHl4f.png

 

I find myself liking the second version a bit more, if only because of the font choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

I find myself liking the second version a bit more, if only because of the font choice.

I'd like to see more MLB teams start to create their own number templates instead of having so many use the same generic block option. 

Share this post


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

If it's not appropriate to post links to concepts, the mods may remove this. I'm not sure where we stand on that but this thread seems like the perfect example of an appropriate time.

 

This is a concept I made last year:

 

Cincinnati Reds

I don't like the inconsistencies of the C on white backgrounds.. Mr Redlegs has a red C on his jersey.. Home whites should match

Share this post


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

The black has to go. Save it for merchandise.

 

Red and white look so good together on the uniform. 

I agree.  The Red Wings pull off red and white perfectly.  The Reds used to and should do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, MJWalker45 said:

I'd like to see more MLB teams start to create their own number templates instead of having so many use the same generic block option. 

 

I don't know.  That can go awfully wrong.

While the Blue Jays have great custom numbers, the Brewers and Diamondbacks show the problem with that -- as does seemingly half of the NFL.  Also, the Giants' and Padres' numbers from the mid-80s were pretty bad; though the Giants' current number font, which I think is a custom one, is excellent.

Standard number fonts work for most teams.  (And I am counting McAuliffe as a standard font, even though it has now become associated with only one team.)  The ideal scenario is where only a handful of teams have custom numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

I don't know.  That can go awfully wrong.

While the Blue Jays have great custom numbers, the Brewers and Diamondbacks show the problem with that -- as does seemingly half of the NFL.  Also, the Giants' and Padres' numbers from the mid-80s were pretty bad; though the Giants' current number font, which I think is a custom one, is excellent.

Standard number fonts work for most teams.  (And I am counting McAuliffe as a standard font, even though it has now become associated with only one team.)  The ideal scenario is where only a handful of teams have custom numbers.

I'm with you.  Standard block numbers look good.  And if it were up to me, most teams would use that font.  I like some basic variations like the 2000s Vikings or the Champion font.  But then maybe just a few good-looking fonts scattered throughout the leagues.  Those should have "staying power" so nothing gimicky like the inaugural Wild font or that scribbled Lightning font. The Bears, Red Sox, Angels, and probably a few more I am forgetting, work well and add some variety.  But I think there are way more bad fonts than good ones including the aforementioned Brewers and D-Backs, the much-loved UCLA football font of the past (yeah, I think that), the Ravens, the KG-Timberwolves and many more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Though the Giants' current number font, which I think is a custom one, is excellent.

 

I’ve thought it was custom for the Giants, but Bill Henderson has gone on record as saying that it’s probably an MLB Properties-designed block font. The Brewers considered it for their retro alternates (I’m glad they went with a historically-accurate one instead) and the Royals wanted to implement it 2012.

 

6386081691_601ef8d92b_o.png

I’ve always liked the font for the Giants, but using it in single-color format really exposes its flaws (i.e., the top bar of the five and the low four). Block Standard works so well because it looks good in one-layer, two-layer, three-layer, and one-layer bold formats.

 

But still, custom block fonts are fantastic and should be more commonplace (just look at Bill Henderson’s chapter on them, and you’ll see what I mean).

Share this post


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

I think the Reds are the perfect example of a team that needs to ditch the outline. "Cincinatti" is such a long name, the white out line would only clutter things. The Dodgers "Los Angeles" script is proof. That look improved leaps and bounds sans white outline.

 

This is one of those things that's been debated here endlessly and I don't think there's a right or wrong stance. This one really comes down to personal preference. And mine is the opposite of yours. 

 

1. I think red is too bright to sit on gray without a buffer. Los Angeles' works better with gray because blue is a tad darker than red and gray is the same family as blue so there's not a lot of the visual vibration happening when gray butts up against the Dodger blue that you get with red.  

 

2. The only way I'll tolerate the road uniforms without white outlines is if white is completely absent from the rest of the uniforms. It's another reason the LOS ANGELES without the outline looks okay - because they don't have white anywhere else on the uniform (cap logo excluded). 

 

3. I don't buy the it's too long a word to use an outline defense. CINCINNATI is 10 letters and three of them are i's which means the space it takes up isn't really that long when you think about it. WASHINGTON, PITTSBURGH, and SAN FRANCISCO are all just as long or longer and the debate that those teams names are too long for an outlines never comes up. We only ever talk about the Reds in this regard.

 

If this is "cluttered" then anyone using an outline anywhere is "cluttered".

100_5399.jpg

 

The white elevating the red letters off of the gray background adds a touch of detail that you don't get without it. I think it's a much sharper look with them than without. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pro-white outline (or any colour outline on scripts and numbers) in the vast majority of cases, provided the team has more colours in the brand to work with. Just plain non-outlined scripts and numbers make me think of cheap rec league/beer league screen printing (see Dallas Stars). That white outlined "Cincinnati" is such a good look.

 

To me, this outlined script and number,

 

ff_1669183_full.jpg&w=340

looks infinitely better than this.

 

bal-13-blackwhite-1-675x3801.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that Orioles jersey looks bad because we're used to outlines on the white and grey uniforms. 

 

Not sure about wanting too many different kinds of numbers in baseball. I'd say at least half the teams in the majors should have regular block or varsity block (though the Mariners and Rays should both have custom or at least non-standard numbers). I wouldn't want an NFL situation where you have teams making tiny changes to make their numbers proprietary -- the Cardinals and 2006 Vikings come to mind here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t mind what they have outside the font choice but the Reds could become the only team with red pinstripes. All white with red word marks is already done. The Reds could have a unique set compared to the other 29 teams. 

 

I know the white pinstripe cap falls into the Love or hate category, but I’d like to see it as a Sunday cap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn’t look like change is on the agenda as they just unveiled a new minor league identity that clones the current look.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Use only a solid red cap. 

 

2) Keep the current font but eliminate the black drop shadow. 

 

3) Change the striping to a thinner version of the BRM era uniforms. 

 

The end. 

Share this post


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

Doesn’t look like change is on the agenda as they just unveiled a new minor league identity that clones the current look.

 

 

nice that they put the coonskin hat on Mr Red.

AC0873-00000001-1.jpg?itok=lopzOVW4

 

 

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.