Ferdinand Cesarano Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 22 minutes ago, tp49 said: You forgot the two cities that also make up Nassau County, Long Beach and Glen Cove. Ah! I thought that Long Beach was part of the Town of Hempstead and that Glen Cove was part of the Town of Oyster Bay. Thanks for the correction, which taught me something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaJolla Archon Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 3 hours ago, FRIAR_BOLT_619 said: When these first came out, I was not a fan. These really have grown on me and they are beautiful and unique but still classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1insaneguy Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 I agree, it took me a while, but I'm really liking the fact that the Padres have embraced the gold and brown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L10nheart404 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 On 7/30/2020 at 10:28 PM, LaJolla Archon said: When these first came out, I was not a fan. These really have grown on me and they are beautiful and unique but still classic That brown, gold and "sand" color scheme is so complimentary, and works so well for a city like San Diego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitesox572 Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 20 hours ago, FRIAR_BOLT_619 said: I saw these last night "in person", well, on tv, on the game on FS1. Everyone's allowed to have an opinion here, correct? I dislike them quite a bit. I won't say I hate them, but they are not good. It's probably for all the reasons the brown got removed way back in '92. They are just, yuck. Putrid. I still think the Padres nailed it in 2016. That one and done is my biggest uni disappoint in the past ten years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1insaneguy Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 The yellow and blue uniforms they had in 2016 weren't bad at all, they just didn't really seem to fit the Padres in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 I'm really not a fan of road pinstripes, but I gotta say those look really good. I'm glad they resisted the temptation of adding a front number. "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...
-Akronite- Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 I love the embrace of brown and gold. Not sure if I'm sold on the sand or the pinstripes, but overall it's a unique identity that I much prefer to their years of generic mediocrity. Also that matte Nats helmet looks great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_DietDrPepper_ Posted July 31, 2020 Share Posted July 31, 2020 55 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said: I'm really not a fan of road pinstripes, but I gotta say those look really good. I'm glad they resisted the temptation of adding a front number. Actually I think that's what this sets missing for me, I think it needs front numbers. It also needs to be promoted to the primary road uniform but that's less a critique of the uniform and more of the Padres Follow the NFA, and My Baseball League here: https://ahsports.boardhost.com/index.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridleylash Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 "Los Angeles Angels" is a silly name. "California Angels" doesn't work when you have other teams in NorCal (A's and Giants) and SoCal (Dodgers and Padres). "Anaheim Angels" is the clear choice, being the name the franchise won their sole World Series title under in 2002, but Moreno is desperately trying to pretend like the people of LA care deeply about his team sitting in Orange County. Instead of owning a smaller slice of the market he's uncontested in, he's trying to pull a Spanos and be the eternal B-tier to the Dodgers; which is silly, because the Ducks are proving there's more than enough people in Orange County to support an Anaheim-embracing club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand Cesarano Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 9 hours ago, Ridleylash said: "Los Angeles Angels" is a silly name. "California Angels" doesn't work when you have other teams in NorCal (A's and Giants) and SoCal (Dodgers and Padres). "Anaheim Angels" is the clear choice, being the name the franchise won their sole World Series title under in 2002, but Moreno is desperately trying to pretend like the people of LA care deeply about his team sitting in Orange County. Instead of owning a smaller slice of the market he's uncontested in, he's trying to pull a Spanos and be the eternal B-tier to the Dodgers; which is silly, because the Ducks are proving there's more than enough people in Orange County to support an Anaheim-embracing club. Los Angeles Angels is indeed a goofy name. But Anaheim is worse, for the simple reason that Anaheim is nowhere. I realise that it now has a population comparable to Pittsburgh and St. Louis. But the difference is that Pittsburgh and St. Louis are major cities, while Anaheim is a place near a major city. In Pittsburgh or St. Louis, there are lots of things to do; in Anaheim there is one thing to do. Anaheim is a name that belongs in the minor leagues, alongside the names with which it is teamed in the famous recurring Mel Blanc bit from the Jack Benny show: "Anaheim, Azusa, and Cuc...amonga". It has no business standing alongside New York, Philadelphia, Chicago — or Pittsburgh and St. Louis; it is simply not worthy of a major league. The Rams knew this. Even the LA Kiss of the Arena Football League knew this! And the Angels knew this, as well, until the city bribed the team to include its name in the team's name. That mistake was rectified as soon as possible under the new ownership. The best name is California Angels. And please note that being the California Angels does not imply that it's the only team in the state. If two teams can have the exact same geographical marker without either one claiming to be the only team in that geographical area, then one team can certainly have a city name while the other has a state name. California Angels is the name that flows nicest, and that makes the most sense. Also, it's the name of the team when it had its most beautiful look. And the name has historical weight, as it is the name under which the team won its first titles (two of those times falling heartbreakingly short of the pennant that Gene Mauch would never win). It is the name of the team of Nolan Ryan, Frank Tanana, Don Baylor, Reggie Jackson, and Rod Carew. California Angels is by far the superior choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 Los Angeles Angels is perfect, now that they’ve stopped pretending that Anaheim isn’t part of the LA metroplex. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimalCookie Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 On 7/30/2020 at 7:01 PM, FRIAR_BOLT_619 said: Those would be better without pinstripes, but it's still really nice. Hopefully this leads other teams into using more unique colors (be it powder blue, sand, the dark gray that the Diamondbacks have, or anything else) for their aways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 "Los Angeles Angels" is a fine name and finding out their nickname en español is "Serafines" to evade the "The The Angels Angels" problem we joke about makes me like it even more. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFGiants58 Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 Up with Anaheim, down with LA. MLB: Project 32 (Complete), MLB: The Defunct Saga (Complete) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coco1997 Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 How about the Orange County Angels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 I think the Padres mostly nailed it. Definitely better than they've looked in years. I would, however, remove the trimming OR the pinstripes. Still not sold on the combination of the two. Pinstripes on the home, trim on the (all-sand) road. Pinstripes on both. Trim on both. Any way would be fine. Also, the giant wordmark on the home annoys me a bit, but not enough to downgrade the overall design. https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 44 minutes ago, McCall said: I think the Padres mostly nailed it. Definitely better than they've looked in years. I would, however, remove the trimming OR the pinstripes. Still not sold on the combination of the two. Pinstripes on the home, trim on the (all-sand) road. Pinstripes on both. Trim on both. Any way would be fine. Also, the giant wordmark on the home annoys me a bit, but not enough to downgrade the overall design. That's totally right, and was my original criticism of the uniform. Stripes should be unbroken and non-terminated. You can't have both. This still falls in the category of 'looks good', but that is still a mistake that I hope they correct someday. The only exception that I can think of is the old v-neck jerseys that had trim on the neck, but that was necessary since it wouldn't have been possible (and wouldn't have looked good) to continue the stripes there. Even then, you didn't see (that I can recall) cuff trim stopping the flow of the pinstripes. "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...
joekono Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 On 7/26/2020 at 8:44 PM, CaliforniaGlowin said: From middle up, it's what the Marlins alts should have been. Just saw these highlights on TV. Love the blue pants! Exactly what I thought. The "Rangers" should be the darker blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joekono Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 13 hours ago, Magic Dynasty said: Those would be better without pinstripes, but it's still really nice. Hopefully this leads other teams into using more unique colors (be it powder blue, sand, the dark gray that the Diamondbacks have, or anything else) for their aways. I the pinstripes serve two purposes on the Padres road unis. First, continuity and second, maybe they did hear the complaints about the "urine" colored road uniforms and the pinstripes deviate from that look. Although it is a better "tan" than the 2004 unis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.