San Diego Padres 2020 Rebrand Discussion

[SFGiants58 14,242]

18 hours ago, bosrs1 said:

 

To its benefit. The only brown look that was tolerable was the immediately preceding ‘85 look. Everything ‘84 and before was varying levels of “meh” to “gouge your eyes out”...

 

Eh, 1969-71 had a good font (the serifs certainly get a bit of the Mission aesthetic down) and use of off-white/tan shades for their uniforms. 

 

The '74-'75 look, disregarding the sansabelt pants and the taco bell cap, also looked more than "tolerable."

 

 

These designs served them very well, even if the "SD" logo wasn't all that fantastic. I'd call them more "tolerable" than the '85-'90, as that had the atrocious wordmark. 

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by SFGiants58
grammar

[Gothamite 24,112]

Exactly.  Everything until they added orange was beautiful, with the exception of full-body gold (because full-body almost anything looks horrible).

 

The Padres are one of those teams that got it  right on the first try, started chipping away at their perfect look, and have been flailing around ever since trying to create something half as good as what they started with. 

[the admiral 28,770]

I was talking about the Reds, Cardinals, and Padres wearing warm grey instead of cool grey over in the Reds thread. There it is! Works great.

[Marlins93 1,006]

I definitely agree that 69-71 is the best they've ever looked.

[SilverBullet1929 3,232]

20 minutes ago, the admiral said:

I was talking about the Reds, Cardinals, and Padres wearing warm grey instead of cool grey over in the Reds thread. There it is! Works great.

What are the different greys in use currently? Like, is there an example of each grey? They've always looked mostly the same to me and any noticeable differences I've always figured was different lighting and/or camera tricks.

[FiddySicks 11,205]

The Padres original set was understated, simple, and dignified. Everything they've done since is them trying much too hard. 

 

I will say this, though. With all the love the brown is getting and the idea that they're going to get a brown alt jersey, I hope they also add a gold jersey to the new set at some point. I think a bright gold jersey with brown trim/highlights would look great in the San Diego summer sun.  

[the admiral 28,770]

1 hour ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

What are the different greys in use currently? Like, is there an example of each grey? They've always looked mostly the same to me and any noticeable differences I've always figured was different lighting and/or camera tricks.

 

Almost everyone wears the same shade of grey now, I believe, other than the D-Backs. 

[SilverBullet1929 3,232]

14 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

Almost everyone wears the same shade of grey now, I believe, other than the D-Backs. 

Ohh ok, I thought there were multiple grays currently in use.

[bosrs1 1,289]

18 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Eh, 1969-71 had a good font (the serifs certainly get a bit of the Mission aesthetic down) and use of off-white/tan shades for their uniforms. 

 

The '74-'75 look, disregarding the sansabelt pants and the taco bell cap, also looked more than "tolerable."

 

 

These designs served them very well, even if the "SD" logo wasn't all that fantastic. I'd call them more "tolerable" than the '85-'90, as that had the atrocious wordmark. 

 

 

Problem is you can’t disregard the pants for 74-75. And the Taco Bell cap is atrocious. Off white kills the ‘69’s.

[bosrs1 1,289]

1 hour ago, Bucfan56 said:

The Padres original set was understated, simple, and dignified. Everything they've done since is them trying much too hard. 

 

I will say this, though. With all the love the brown is getting and the idea that they're going to get a brown alt jersey, I hope they also add a gold jersey to the new set at some point. I think a bright gold jersey with brown trim/highlights would look great in the San Diego summer sun.  

 

No thanks. Yellow jerseys are just too loud, particularly in the summer sun. There’s no way to do them right. 

[SFGiants58 14,242]

17 minutes ago, bosrs1 said:

 

Problem is you can’t disregard the pants for 74-75. And the Taco Bell cap is atrocious. Off white kills the ‘69’s.

 

Meh, off-white is fine by me. The Giants do an excellent job with it. You can also disregard the pants for any potential revival, along with the taco bell cap (maybe). 

 

15 minutes ago, bosrs1 said:

 

No thanks. Yellow jerseys are just too loud, particularly in the summer sun. There’s no way to do them right. 

 

Hehe, no.

 

 

Gold can look fantastic. 

 

Also, can we reflect on how the 1985-2003 "Padres" wordmark looks like hot garbage?

 

 

The faint outlines, drop shadow, and the letters' construction is pretty ugly. I'll take the '69-'71 wordmarks over this mess any day.

[bosrs1 1,289]

4 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

Meh, off-white is fine by me. The Giants do an excellent job with it. You can also disregard the pants for any potential revival, along with the taco bell cap (maybe). 

 

 

Hehe, no.

 

 

Gold can look fantastic. 

 

Also, can we reflect on how the 1985-2003 "Padres" wordmark looks like hot garbage?

 

 

The faint outlines, drop shadow, and the letters' construction is pretty ugly. I'll take the '69-'71 wordmarks over this mess any day.

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m a child of the ‘80’s and drop shadows are a must for me. 

[hawk36 3,353]

39 minutes ago, bosrs1 said:

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m a child of the ‘80’s and drop shadows are a must for me. 

In the design industry, the drop shadow and double outlines (like unnecessary use of black), are commonly known as a clear sign the design itself is flawed. Not always, but more often than not that holds true. 

[IceCap 22,334]

1 hour ago, bosrs1 said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m a child of the ‘80’s and drop shadows are a must for me. 

Drop shadow is fine. An outline is fine. Both are not fine

 

 

[FiddySicks 11,205]

2 hours ago, bosrs1 said:

 

No thanks. Yellow jerseys are just too loud, particularly in the summer sun. There’s no way to do them right. 

 

This is a very interesting take.

 

 

I mean, it's wrong, but still very interesting.  

[bosrs1 1,289]

1 hour ago, hawk36 said:

In the design industry, the drop shadow and double outlines (like unnecessary use of black), are commonly known as a clear sign the design itself is flawed. Not always, but more often than not that holds true. 

 

Currently yes, but tastes change.

[IceCap 22,334]

2 hours ago, bosrs1 said:

Problem is you can’t disregard the pants for 74-75. And the Taco Bell cap is atrocious.

Sure you can. What rule exists that says they have to bring the pants and front-panelled cap back if they want to reference the 75-75 scripts and jersey piping? Sure, they'd strive to be as accurate as possible for throwback night, but I don't see why a new uniform wouldn't be free to pick and choose the best elements available to them.

 

2 hours ago, bosrs1 said:

Off white kills the ‘69’s.

I disagree. I'm getting sick of people saying that we need more powder blue road uniforms, or that the only solution to baseball's "boring" uniform setup is for everyone to swear softball tops. Allowing variation within the white at home/grey on the road dynamic would help a great deal. admiral mentioned some teams that could benefit from a warmer shade of grey, and I think a few teams could make more cream/off white shades at home work too.

[the admiral 28,770]

Who else do you have in mind for cream at home? I only really like it for the Giants. It feels like the Lakers in yellow at home, where anyone else doing it cheapens it. A lot to be said for crisp whites on the baseball field. Cardinals could pull it off, maybe, but they're fine as they are.

[IceCap 22,334]

2 minutes ago, the admiral said:

Who else do you have in mind for cream at home? I only really like it for the Giants. It feels like the Lakers in yellow at home, where anyone else doing it cheapens it. A lot to be said for crisp whites on the baseball field. Cardinals could pull it off, maybe, but they're fine as they are.

The Padres' off-white from '69 isn't cream, but it skews in that direction. I think it works.

The Cardinals could make it work, but I wouldn't go with them for the reasons you mentioned. I would say the Pirates and Orioles should probably go with cream. The Orioles because it would really bring everything together with their park and the Pirates because I think cream would work well with the athletic gold and black.

[the admiral 28,770]

I was thinking about the Pirates maybe being able to swing it. Hard no on the Orioles with the other orange/black already doing off-white. Black/white/orange is very striking.

 

The Twins, if they went back to pinstripes, maybe, but there's another one where real white looks good.