Miami Marlins 2019 Rebrand

[skip88]

3 minutes ago, joekono said:

The blue jerseys look like batting practice jerseys. I could live with the rest of the new unis although I could've lived with the 2018 uniforms, so not much to add until I see them on the field. I agree with Marlis93 and skip88, teams going back to traditional uniforms(or some form of them) are not "lazy". There's nothing wrong with what the Mets, Blue Jays, Phillies did. Someone tell me the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Tigers, Cardinals uniforms suck.

Apparently they are, although i have not seen a confirmation of that 

[joekono]

Yeah, I think I saw mention of the being batting practice jerseys but hey will probably wear the black ones most of he time anyway.

[Marlins93]

I've seen the critiques here of the 90s wordmark and I happen to disagree with them. In fact, I think it's quite nicely executed and it's always been easy on my eyes. And, no, that's not nostalgia talking. I think the overall design is much better integrated than in the current rebrand where the M looks completely detached.

 

If the Marlins were to go retro, I think they would need to do a nearly full redesign anyway in light of the name change. Obviously the cap logo and road gray wouldn't even work. They'd still mostly need to start from scratch aside from sticking to teal and a classic baseball look. Something in the spirit of the 90s with a little modernization would have been amazing and would not have looked lazy at all IMO.

 

I think for me that solid teal wordmark on the home white is stylish, bold, and quintessential Miami. This doesn't even look that dated to me (you can always pair with black cap if you think it's too much teal):

 

[Dynasty]

Disappointing. What a missed opportunity for them to improve on the last set.

 

Their primary logo consist of a clip art-esque marlin with a tacked on script (which is also generic BTW). The uniforms are underwhelming, the black-on-black blows, and they kept MARLINS limited to the alternate uniform when it should be on the home.

[SilverBullet1929]

6 hours ago, habsfan1 said:

 

In a multitude of settings, they look phenomenal.

 

In a number of baseball settings, it's going to be quite a strain to read those black-on-black names.

A Marlins marketing official was on a podcast yesterday said one of their goals was to create uniforms that weren't only for the field or the ballpark but that could work as an option for the fans to wear in multiple settings off the field. 

 

I know that sounds crazy but I know what she was trying to say and that black jersey with those glowing numbers is definitely that to a fault...

 

It's gonna look bad on the field but im gonna get a lot of compliments when I wear it to work on casual fridays, so to speak.

[SilverBullet1929]

The blue jersey being for BP was apparently said by that same Marlins marketing person though I admit I haven't heard the interview myself yet.

 

If she did say it, the reason I believe her, besides the fact that she works for the Marlins, is the lack of a sleeve patch on that jersey which definitely makes it feel different from the others. 

 

With that said, whether it gets used as just BP or not remains to be seen of course. 

[SilverBullet1929]

Anyone see what Paul Lucas said about the 2012 -18 unis? How he disliked them at first but they were starting to grow on him and now it's weird to see them go? That it doesn't feel like "good riddance" like we thought it would?

 

I feel like many of us can relate to that thought. 

[SFGiants58]

3 hours ago, joekono said:

I agree with Marlis93 and skip88, teams going back to traditional uniforms(or some form of them) are not "lazy". There's nothing wrong with what the Mets, Blue Jays, Phillies did. Someone tell me the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Tigers, Cardinals uniforms suck.

 

I’m not saying that. What I’m saying is that “just go back to it” doesn’t work for the Marlins.

 

With the Mets, Blue Jays, and Phillies, they had plenty of sustained success in their “vintage” looks and were coming off of dated designs (the Mets’ BFBS additions to their classic wordmarks and scripts, the Phillies’ 1970s kitsch, and the Blue Jays’ big step outside their aesthetic tradition (blue-centric with split lettering) that included BFBS and a shortened team script). I have absolutely nothing against traditional looks. 

 

With the Marlins, I want to see something new. Something that symbolizes a fresh start for the team as Miami’s team would be best. Forget about Huizenga’s big fire sale that killed sustained success after 1997, forget about Loria’s two fire sales/preferred color scheme, and forget about the constant legal and financial quagmires the team has had. This set comes close to capturing a new ethos, drawing from something not often seen in baseball (light, near-neon accents on a bunch of black). 

 

Would I want tweaks? Sure! Team name on the home set, a few details adjusted on the cap logo, no separate primary logo, and a blue script with light red shadow on the black jersey would all be great ideas.

 

Nostalgia and modernizations of classic looks aren’t always the solution. The Marlins are a team that can really push a modern identity, and they’ve come close here. There’s more potential here than with a modern overhaul of the 1990s set.

[SilverBullet1929]

9 hours ago, patsfan5101 said:

I actually like that idea. Let me get at that 

 

EDIT 

Awesome. Don't wanna keep bugging but your edits are the closest to what's in my mind. Can you try a blue front number on the black and gray jerseys under the end of the wordmark? I have more ideas lol let me know 

[Marlins93]

5 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

With the Marlins, I want to see something new. Something that symbolizes a fresh start for the team as Miami’s team would be best. Forget about Huizenga’s big fire sale that killed sustained success after 1997, forget about Loria’s two fire sales/preferred color scheme, and forget about the constant legal and financial quagmires the team has had. This set comes close to capturing a new ethos, drawing from something not often seen in baseball (light, near-neon accents on a bunch of black). 

 

I understand this sentiment, but I feel like it's hard to refute that many Marlins fans do indeed want the teal back. That kind of tells me that they associate it much more with fond memories than the negative. They had two world championships while wearing teal, even if it had been marginalized during the second.

 

We heard all of the rhetoric about "it needs to be fresher" or "it needs to be more Miami" but I would argue that the 2012-2018 branding actually exceeded the new one in both of those areas. But those were some turbulent years and you definitely want to move onward from them, but reverting to teal is tied more closely to positive than negative memories. You make it sound like Marlins fans have no reason to be nostalgic. While they've gone through a lot of misery at points, I'd have to disagree with you there.

[SFGiants58]

45 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

 

I understand this sentiment, but I feel like it's hard to refute that many Marlins fans do indeed want the teal back. That kind of tells me that they associate it much more with fond memories than the negative. They had two world championships while wearing teal, even if it had been marginalized during the second.

 

We heard all of the rhetoric about "it needs to be fresher" or "it needs to be more Miami" but I would argue that the 2012-2018 branding actually exceeded the new one in both of those areas. But those were some turbulent years and you definitely want to move onward from them, but reverting to teal is tied more closely to positive than negative memories. You make it sound like Marlins fans have no reason to be nostalgic. While they've gone through a lot of misery at points, I'd have to disagree with you there.

 

I get the desire to appeal to team history and that many fans want the teal back (emotional connection to those two championships), but I side more with letting that part of the past slide away. The 2012-18 set was a radical departure and tried to be very "Miami," but I wouldn't say it exceeded it. The '12-'18 set was a bit of a mess with inner shadows, a slab-serif number font, and the toothpaste marlin. I'd argue that its issues were somewhat more glaring than the new set's problems. This refreshed brand tries to strike a middle ground between the "traditional baseball" and "Miami nightlife aesthetic," and is a few tweaks away from being an excellent Miami-ified look for the team. Still, I'd have tweaked the previous set to better resemble the MiMo or Art Deco aesthetic with fewer colors and less emphasis on black (or no black at all, but a dark teal as the base). That would be the perfect identity.

 

I see the reasons for going back to an update of the teal/black/silver, but I don't find them compelling enough to dissuade me from liking a more modern, radical direction for the club. Then again, I'm not the target audience.

[SilverBullet1929]

58 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

While they've gone through a lot of misery at points, I'd have to disagree with you there.

Amen to this. The joke is that there's only a few Marlins fans but you could say there wouldn't even be as many of us as there are if it wasn't for many of the wonderful moments in our relatively short history.

 

Those of us that are long time Marlins fans have a lot to be nostalgic about.

 

And all those people who have lived in South Florida over the last 25 years who say they aren't Marlins fans the majority still rave over the first season and the two world championships and the opening of Marlins Park.

 

There's a lot of people who say "I don't like the Marlins but man I remember when they won the 2003 World Series that was so much fun..." and they go off into stories about that season and that team etc etc. So yes Marlins fans have plenty of wonderful nostalgia. 

[WSU151]

1 hour ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Anyone see what Paul Lucas said about the 2012 -18 unis? How he disliked them at first but they were starting to grow on him and now it's weird to see them go? That it doesn't feel like "good riddance" like we thought it would?

 

I feel like many of us can relate to that thought. 

 

The only thing I liked about the 2012-18 unis were the blue and orange colors. 

 

The rest was pretty garbage. 

[Marlins93]

15 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

I get the desire to appeal to team history and that many fans want the teal back (emotional connection to those two championships), but I side more with letting that part of the past slide away. The 2012-18 set was a radical departure and tried to be very "Miami," but I wouldn't say it exceeded it. The '12-'18 set was a bit of a mess with inner shadows, a slab-serif number font, and the toothpaste marlin. I'd argue that its issues were somewhat more glaring than the new set's problems. This refreshed brand tries to strike a middle ground between the "traditional baseball" and "Miami nightlife aesthetic," and is a few tweaks away from being an excellent Miami-ified look for the team. Still, I'd have tweaked the previous set to better resemble the MiMo or Art Deco aesthetic with fewer colors and less emphasis on black (or no black at all, but a dark teal as the base). That would be the perfect identity.

 

I see the reasons for going back to an update of the teal/black/silver, but I don't find them compelling enough to dissuade me from liking a more modern, radical direction for the club. Then again, I'm not the target audience.

I just don't understand why Marlins fans aren't allowed to be nostalgic. Is it a simply a matter of a length of time? As in because they are 1993 expansion team?

 

We can agree to disagree on whether the 2012-2018 vs. the 2019- set is better. I think they are both pretty lousy. But I admire the boldness of the former and find the excessive use of black on the latter to be pretty horrific. I am genuinely glad that some people seem to like them, though.

 

Neither of them says Miami to me because they are both too black-centric. I really want to know what motivated that decision in both iterations, because it still baffles me. Why not have a solid colored (not black) wordmark like most MLB teams?

 

I also don't see anything particularly radical about the new look aside from the black on black look. The colors are kind of unique but underutilized. The wordmark is so traditional, that it resembles what the Cardinals wear. All around I'd say the look is pretty restrained and muted. That's why I don't like it.

[SFGiants58]

3 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

I just don't understand why Marlins fans aren't allowed to be nostalgic. Is it a simply a matter of a length of time? As in because they are 1993 expansion team?

 

We can agree to disagree on whether the 2012-2018 vs. the 2019- set is better. I think they are both pretty lousy. But I admire the boldness of the former and find the excessive use of black on the latter to be pretty horrific. I am genuinely glad that some people seem to like them, though.

 

Neither of them says Miami to me because they are both too black-centric. I really want to know what motivated that decision in both iterations, because it still baffles me. Why not have a solid colored (not black) wordmark like most MLB teams?

 

I also don't see anything particularly radical about the new look aside from the black on black look. The colors are kind of unique but underutilized. The wordmark is so traditional, that it resembles what the Cardinals wear. All around I'd say the look is pretty restrained and muted. That's why I don't like it.

 

Of course you guys can be nostalgic, I’m not saying that you’re not allowed to do that at all. I just rather the team wouldn’t do that.

 

Maybe it’s me speaking as an outsider, but the black fits well with the location. I’d rather it not be a big part of their look (a dark teal, akin to the Eagles or Sharks, would be my choice), but I get why the team has emphasized throughout the Miami period.

 

I consider the current look a bit radical, if only for the color scheme’s emphases and arrangement on the uniform. Nobody does the combination of traditional cursive with drop shadows and semi-neon colors, hence why I’d regard it as radical (yet more restrained - the Art Deco/MiMo of the previous set had potential to be a bit restrained - it probably would have had better reception). 

 

Again, I’m not saying that Marlins fans aren’t allowed to be nostalgic. I’m saying that it wouldn’t be what I’d want out of the team. Then again, I’m not the target audience.

[seasaltvanilla]

17 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

I just don't understand why Marlins fans aren't allowed to be nostalgic. Is it a simply a matter of a length of time? As in because they are 1993 expansion team?

It's okay, Twins fans aren't allowed to be nostalgic either. It's always pretty much assumed that of the AL Central or RWB teams the Twins' logos and colors can be changed up on a whim

[Marlins93]

Putting the full scope of the franchise history into perspective and keeping in mind that the Marlins probably won't be a competitive team for another 2-3 seasons at least, I think nostalgia is the best way to sell the team right now. I understand that Jeter wants to leave his mark, but I think it's poor timing to announce a rebrand when you trade JT Realmuto a month later.

 

And I do see where you're coming from. I suppose my point would be that I don't think a brand needs to be either backwards or forwards looking. That's why I think the best approach would have been to integrate some nostalgia (teal) but apply it to newer and exciting logos fitting of Miami without drowning everything in black.

[Mac the Knife]

10 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

Marlins now have the best black jersey in baseball. It shouldn't work but it does.

 

No, they don't.  They really, really don't.

 

3 hours ago, Dolphins Dynasty said:

Disappointing. What a missed opportunity for them to improve on the last set.

 

Anything would've been an improvement on the last set.  But this was metaphorically speaking a swing for the seats where the batter thought a fastball was coming and instead got an eephus.

 

2 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Anyone see what Paul Lucas said about the 2012 -18 unis? How he disliked them at first but they were starting to grow on him and now it's weird to see them go? That it doesn't feel like "good riddance" like we thought it would?

 

I feel like many of us can relate to that thought. 

 

Not me.  I may not be a big fan of this look, but I'll bid good riddance to that ugly **** Loria forced upon that team.

 

One thought did occur to me though... Wayne Huizenga came a gnat's eyelash away from going in a completely different direction with the branding, having the team named the "Florida Flamingos" and going with a pink/teal/black scheme right from the get-go.  Had that happened, I wonder the proverbial "What might have been..." in terms of their look in the 26 years (God, has it been that long?) since.

[SFGiants58]

12 minutes ago, seasaltvanilla said:

It's okay, Twins fans aren't allowed to be nostalgic either. It's always pretty much assumed that of the AL Central or RWB teams the Twins' logos and colors can be changed up on a whim

 

Aside from going with the 1960s color balance (navy with red only on outlines), most people here have given up on the "switch their colors" approach. Cleveland and Atlanta are far more subject to these talks, with the former being for a rebranding for MOD EDIT reasons and the latter being an attempt to "Pittsburgh-ify" Atlanta's teams under the black/red/gold banner (a foolhardy venture, given how the Braves went out of their way to leave Atlanta proper).

 

12 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

Putting the full scope of the franchise history into perspective and keeping in mind that the Marlins probably won't be a competitive team for another 2-3 seasons at least, I think nostalgia is the best way to sell the team right now. I understand that Jeter wants to leave his mark, but I think it's poor timing to announce a rebrand when you trade JT Realmuto a month later.

 

And I do see where you're coming from. I suppose my point would be that I don't think a brand needs to be either backwards or forwards looking. That's why I think the best approach would have been to integrate some nostalgia (teal) but apply it to newer and exciting logos fitting of Miami without drowning everything in black.

 

Totally. Nostalgia would work as a branding venture, especially if the team is several years away from being competitive. Maybe going with a retro-inspired new brand would be a bad idea if the new ownership group wanted to put their stamp on the team later, but it's a legitimate strategy for the time being. Heck, even wearing throwbacks on a regular basis/showcasing throwbacks to the International League Marlins and all of the Florida-era iterations of the team would work. Pick-and-choose, experiment, etc. I do agree that the full redesign timing was a ways off.

 

We simply have a different conception of the brand and what we want out of it. No biggie. 

 

Just now, Mac the Knife said:

One thought did occur to me though... Wayne Huizenga came a gnat's eyelash away from going in a completely different direction with the branding, having the team named the "Florida Flamingos" and going with a pink/teal/black scheme right from the get-go.  Had that happened, I wonder the proverbial "What might have been..." in terms of their look in the 26 years (God, has it been that long?) since.

 

I mocked up what they might have looked like circa 1997-2002:

 

 

It wouldn't deviate too much from the Marlins' 1993-2002 appearance. The team would probably have relegated black to the main color circa 2003, while using a "toothpaste" flamingo with the Art Deco-styled set. Either that or Loria would have gone full "BUT PINK IS A GIRL'S COLOUR" and dumped the name for Marlins and his beloved black/orange.

[Lucas718]

I realize these new uniforms are using red and not orange, but my eyes keep telling me they look like the Mets.