Jump to content

MLB Changes 2020


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Bobster said:

Grading the offseason changes -


Milwaukee - A- : I would have gone with royal blue, but their color choices are fine, it's the change to the BiG logo that keep it from being an A+.  I especially like the not to the 1970's and 1980's home uniforms.

San Diego - B+: Mainly because of the long-overdue color change. I like the general look of the new uniforms, although the design is a bit bland.  I do like the used of sand for the road versions.
Minnesota - B- : Love the addition of the powder blue uniform, but they need to jettison the gold accents on their other sets.  Why they don't just go with an update of their 1960's uniforms, I don't know.

St. Louis - B- : The cap logo changes were minimal, but still a step in the right direction.  After as lifetime of seeing the birds on the bat the "St. Louis" uniforms just seem a bit off to me
Arizona - C+ : The second year in a row of tweaking them gets them to where they're acceptable, but purple, black & turquoise is still my preferred color scheme, preferably with pinstripes.

Cincinnati - C : Like the spring training jersey with Mr. Red, they should have removed the black from their color scheme on the regular season uniforms.  Just go back to the 1969 uniforms and call it a day.

Washington - C- : The caps would probably be better without the white panel (leave those to Toronto or Baltimore), and the new jerseys is just too generic.

Texas - D : Just not very cohesive, and the lack of a number on the front makes them look unfinished to me.  And a "Texas" team just calls out for a western font IMO.

Teams still in need of changes - Cincinnati (remove the black), Cleveland (something less generic), L.A. Angels.

Overall, I wish teams would wear their alternatives less frequently and still with their traditional uniforms 90% of the time.  The league-wide special uniforms need to be given the heave-ho.


Is this statement in regards to the change made in 2013 when they added the cream alt with "St. Louis" instead of "Cardinals" to the birds on the bat; and last off-season addition of the road powder blue version?  As far as I am aware the only offseason change the Cardinals have made this offseason is the STL. on the caps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, jp1409 said:

Can't believe they're still considering red hats/accessories with this set...



The wordmark is still wonky but what a huge difference with the blue cap instead of the red. The fact that they trotted him out to the unveiling in the red cap worries me that not only do they think it looks good but they probably think it looks better than with the blue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, simtek34 said:





The NBA Logo was moved from the front to the back in the 2014-2015 season, under adidas in preparation for Jersey Advertisements coming and for everybody to get used to having Jerry West on the back before the 2017-2018 season, when Nike took over and Jersey Ads became the new hotness in the Association. Say what you want about David Stern, but at least he respected the culture of the game in terms of uniforms. No Manufacturer Logos and no Corporate Ads.

Thanks man, oh yeah, now i remember.

Hard to, with all the changes that has taken place in the NBA these last few years.


And yes, stern was great compared to the greedy ghoul that is Adam silver 😞 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

The wordmark is still wonky but what a huge difference with the blue cap instead of the red. The fact that they trotted him out to the unveiling in the red cap worries me that not only do they think it looks good but they probably think it looks better than with the blue.

They could split the difference -- blue cap, red bill -- and it would look perfectly appropriate for that uniform. Best of both worlds. It would be another homage to their '70s-era look. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile Detroit, Yankees and 'Dodgers are out here with only a gray and a white jersey.. LOL


Although i think everyone here would not be upset with a royal blue jersey for the Dodgers, given that it is exactly the same as the white, only blue.


It would be sweet, they are in fact selling them, but the team does not use them. 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Old School Fool said:

No offense to anybody but it seems like the standard for baseball uniforms on this forum have become astronomically high and any team is unable to please at this point.

People seemed to love the Padres' uniforms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents:


ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS // B // Step in the right direction.  Cleaning up their brand is smart, but these guys just can't seem to pick a lane.  Between them and the Marlins, each team can't settle on an identity and has abandoned their original looks.  It's good to be clean, but it's bad to be so spiteful of your roots.


CINCINNATI REDS // C- // I don't know what the hell the Reds want.  They don't know what they want.  There's some great elements available to this brand, but they've kept in this holding pattern for awhile now.  I'm hopeful in a couple years we'll see the Reds uniforms bloom into something truly special, but for now we're still just twiddling our thumbs.


MILWAUKEE BREWERS // B+ // The biggest victory is dumping all metallic gold and embracing yellow, with Beer Barrel Man back in full throat.  The font choices are suspect, and the random one-off home uni with pinstripes makes no sense, but they're overall very improved.  People will piss up a rope about the BiG redesign and the thin stripes, but those people aren't your friends.


MINNESOTA TWINS // C- // The baby blue thing has ties to the Twins franchise, and the new patch is pretty okay, but this feels uninspired.


SAN DIEGO PADRES // A // Can't go full A+, because that brown alt is icky, but otherwise this thing is gorgeous.  The Pads have needed a soul for years now, and finally, FINALLY they're the Padres again.  Welcome back.


ST. LOUIS CARDINALS // C // Sure, whatever, fine.


TEXAS RANGERS // D- // Rangers wordmark is a forgettable 90s punt, and the powder blue is a bald money grab.  The Rangers are a red team that for whatever reason wants to be a blue team, while also being a red team, while being a blue team, or a red team, sometimes.


WASHINGTON NATIONALS // B // I'm not sure how I feel about the Nats having, what, 12 caps now, but the overall look is tidy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, jn8 said:

I’m with you here. I love powder blue road uniforms, not as a full time thing, but as an alternate. Wearing them at home is just kinda weird to me. If you want to wear powder blue at home, it needs to be done with white pants (like Kansas City), otherwise it needs to stay as a road alternate. I can sort of let it slide if it’s a one-off, single game throwback night, but if it’s a repeated thing I’m not as tolerant of it. 

Agreed. Powder blue should be a road color just like gray. It was never an identity color but was instead a neutral canvas the team's identity sat on. My question: what happens if a team adopts powder blue road uniforms and have no alternates? Does Texas, being the home team, get to dictate that the road team wear white when they host them? Whatever happened to the official rule that teams wear white at home and "some other color" on the road? Alternates have bent those rules pretty badly, but at least the home teams wore white pants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When teams gradually started bringing back powder blue over the past decade, I was wondering why it was always worn at home.  Then I wondered if we're dealing with a new approach by the teams to where the color is most-visible to fans.  Consider:  of the six teams currently wearing something powder blue in the regular season, only one (the Cards) wear it exclusively on the road; I believe four (Royals, Rays, Phillies, and Rangers) exclusively at home.  I imagine they're doing this -- even wearing the full uniform -- at home because they know the people who most want to see the teams in powder blue are, well, in the stands at home.  If a sizable group of a team's fan base is wearing powder blue merch and saying they want to see the team in that color, you might as well do so in front of those fans, rather than on the road away from the fan base.


Also, during the bulk of the last powder blue era -- the 1970s and '80s -- if you were watching your team on a local broadcast, you'd likely only see road games due to local over-the-air blackout rules (at least that's how I recall it in Wisconsin in the mid-late 1980s, where I practically never saw a Brewers home game on TV from County Stadium).  That in a way led to two things:  1. it embedded nostalgia for the powder blue and other colorful road looks of the era with a lot of younger folks watching their teams on TV -- and who are now buying the jerseys and season tickets, and  2. since now every game is on TV via cable/streaming, a team can think about using their home games to show off special looks to fans watching at home, instead of just the road games -- thus, one more reason to wear powder blues at home in front of the fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rmc523 said:


Does Tampa not wear these anymore?


Image result for tampa bay rays light blue uniform


Huh?? I don't think the original question was about powder blue...it was about total change in jerseys.


The Rays wore the powder blues last year: you can see the MLB 150 patch here:



Link to comment
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.

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.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.