MLB Changes 2020

[SFGiants58]

1, 5, 8 - death to the realistic bird logos.

[TheBigFiz21]

3 hours ago, DNAsports said:

 

5 as a primary, 8 for the hat, and 4 as an alternate. Not an easy decision, but it's good to work with IMO.

[-Akronite-]

4 hours ago, DNAsports said:

 

 

Surprised but not at all disappointed to see the varying opinions on this.

 

The ornithological bird looks great and should remain PART of their identity but not the primary IMO. So I'm going 7, 8, 11. They don't need to combine the birds with a script or a roundel and none of the other cartoon birds work IMO (though I could see the appeal of some). 

[Lights Out]

6, 7, 11

[cheo25]

1, 5, 8

[Gothamite]

9 hours ago, DNAsports said:

 

 

2 is the best logo they've ever had, so we have to start there.   I'd add 5 as a primary when you need words, and then 8 to round out our set.  But only 8 if they give him a "B" on his cap.

[Gothamite]

On 4/4/2020 at 12:49 PM, McCall said:

 

Every time that movie gets mentioned I feel obligated to bring up that the filmmakers really wanted their hometown Brewers as the road team, but were forced by MLB to feature the Mariners instead.  Seems the Mariners were really struggling and baseball thought they could use the exposure.

 

[DCarp1231]

2 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

2 is the best logo they've ever had, so we have to start there.   I'd add 5 as a primary when you need words, and then 8 to round out our set.  But only 8 if they give him a "B" on his cap.

Not that it really matters, but my cousin decided to get 2 tattooed on his leg. Safe to say he likes that one the most as well.

[JayMac]

6 and 11 are the least favorite of mine. Some bad baseball played in those caps and during the tenure of that logo. Plus, I hated the added tan color, especially to the bird.

[WSU151]

Watching 1995 Angels/Orioles on ESPN; Angels looked so good, Orioles looked above average. Wish we had HD back then. 

[BBTV]

51 minutes ago, WSU151 said:

Watching 1995 Angels/Orioles on ESPN; Angels looked so good, Orioles looked above average. Wish we had HD back then. 

 

Something about Orioles in black script never worked for me.  I think the Giants should be primarily black with orange trim, and the Orioles primarily orange with black trim.

 

I also wasn't a fan of the placket piping with that script.  It was kinda oversized, so didn't really need any additional trim.

[BadSeed84]

The best, birds lookin backwards cause he knows he ain't makin it far in the postseason.

But seriously, I do like this logo, and this bird alot. It's more serious but still kinda simple, kinda cartoonish looking, they would screw it up by trying to make it too realistic looking with this.

[chcarlson23]

On 4/3/2020 at 3:56 PM, Ted Cunningham said:

I kind of like it that way. Even if the numbers and letters differ in shape, the same double stroke on both would almost make the individual elements feel lost (for lack of a better way to describe it). The simple numbers are distinct from the script. Kind of like the Dodgers' numbers being red. And I know there are likely examples to the contrary that also work, but that's my gut reaction: it's easier to read/distinguish the separate parts.

The double stroke on both the numbers and the script would have looked much more professional. The plain block number on the front there looks like a high school baseball team from the middle of nowhere decided on the cheap route, and didn't pay for an extra stroke. The Dodgers number works, because everything doesn't have an outline. Usually the only time it works to not have an outline on some kind of lettering or numbering, is the NOB. That can be plain, with the numbers then usually having an outline.

 

If the Mariners had a double outline on the numbers, this set would have felt more complete...

[Bill0813]

On 4/6/2020 at 7:23 AM, DNAsports said:

 

Easy eliminations 3, 6, 7 (upside down apostrophe), 10 (Disney bird), 12
Round 2, eliminating some cartoon birds so 2, 4, and 9 (crazy bird) are gone
11 was their best realistic bird but doesn't fit with the final 3
1 is their best, 5, 8  

[Marlins93]

On 4/6/2020 at 5:58 PM, JayMac said:

6 and 11 are the least favorite of mine. Some bad baseball played in those caps and during the tenure of that logo. Plus, I hated the added tan color, especially to the bird.

They surely had some bad baseball years while wearing the "realistic bird" but they also had two playful teams (including the powerhouse 97 roster), plus Ripken's 2131. As mentioned already, that logo seems to nicely coincide with the opening of Camden Yards and fits that park's aesthetic.

 

#7 is a much stronger case for the "bad baseball" association. That correlates with the 2005-2011 stretch when the team was atrocious. They won the WC in 2012, the first season they reverted back to the cartoon bird and cast the O's logo to the sideline. The "realistic" bird was apparently still in play during that stretch but I gather that it wasn't as dominant as it was during the 90s.

[Bill0813]

23 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

They surely had some bad baseball years while wearing the "realistic bird" but they also had two playful teams (including the powerhouse 97 roster), plus Ripken's 2131. As mentioned already, that logo seems to nicely coincide with the opening of Camden Yards and fits that park's aesthetic.

 

#7 is a much stronger case for the "bad baseball" association. That correlates with the 2005-2011 stretch when the team was atrocious. They won the WC in 2012, the first season they reverted back to the cartoon bird and cast the O's logo to the sideline. The "realistic" bird was apparently still in play during that stretch but I gather that it wasn't as dominant as it was during the 90s.

#7 is still on the Friday night cap.  The return of the cartoon bird brought success 2012-16, but it also was worn in 2018-19, two of the worst seasons since the move to Baltimore in '54.

[ptay]

Wait, this graphic is missing the '89-'97 bird, made famous by Cal's 2131 game.

[JonBoy]

Yeah, it's missing quite a few, especially the full birds from the '50s and '60s.  Also wonder why they didn't have the most recent bird

 

I've thought this bird, but in the style of those first full bird logos that were just black and orange would be a good modern logo.

[Gothamite]

19 hours ago, EddieJ1984 said:

The best, birds lookin backwards cause he knows he ain't makin it far in the postseason.

But seriously, I do like this logo, and this bird alot. It's more serious but still kinda simple, kinda cartoonish looking, they would screw it up by trying to make it too realistic looking with this.

 

 

I think that one was a victim of improving embroidery technology.  But just because you can do something, that doesn't mean that you should.

 

This was a great-looking bird logo.  Detailed, but not too complicated.

 

[Gothamite]

15 minutes ago, JonBoy said:

Yeah, it's missing quite a few, especially the full birds from the '50s and '60s.  Also wonder why they didn't have the most recent bird

 

I've thought this bird, but in the style of those first full bird logos that were just black and orange would be a good modern logo.

 

 

That was a great-looking logo.