colinturner95 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 On 12/18/2019 at 9:00 AM, Ark said: I don't hate it... but I still feel like it being on the sleeve would have been the much better route to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jn8 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, SFGiants58 said: Guys, just remember that UA was getting the chest logo as part of their deal. But that goes against the narrative that Nike is the big bad evil company forcing everyone to put their logo on everything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 1 hour ago, jn8 said: But that goes against the narrative that Nike is the big bad evil company forcing everyone to put their logo on everything? The same exact things were said about UA when they got the deal. It's more on MLB than on Nike. Blaming Nike for plastering their logo on something is like blaming the lion for eating the gazelle. Could the lion have skipped a meal? Probably... but if the opportunity is there... "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...
dont care Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 15 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said: The same exact things were said about UA when they got the deal. It's more on MLB than on Nike. Blaming Nike for plastering their logo on something is like blaming the lion for eating the gazelle. Could the lion have skipped a meal? Probably... but if the opportunity is there... This is more the alpha lion chasing off the cub after it let it kill a gazelle as a teaching moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfessorBigShots Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 The White Sox should have the Jordan logo like the Hornets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gosioux76 Posted December 19, 2019 Share Posted December 19, 2019 5 hours ago, WSU151 said: Because every other sales approach done by every company looking to increase sales is 100% truth...? These people are salesmen. That’s their job. Anyway, $100 million a year is really not much money in baseball land. If I were Manfred, I probably would have held out for more to put the swoosh on the jersey, though Nike had a bit of leverage with UA dropping out. You're missing the point. Clearly, he's a salesman. Nobody's arguing otherwise. But in this case, the salesman is being presented in a news story as some expert witness making the case that Swoosh somehow adds value to obnoxiously marked up product. It's like quoting the CEO of a tobacco company on the benefits of smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 2 hours ago, gosioux76 said: You're missing the point. Clearly, he's a salesman. Nobody's arguing otherwise. But in this case, the salesman is being presented in a news story as some expert witness making the case that Swoosh somehow adds value to obnoxiously marked up product. It's like quoting the CEO of a tobacco company on the benefits of smoking. He was presented as an expert witness? Nah. He’s the founder of the business that teamed with Nike to sell jerseys. Not some third party uninvested SME. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NashConcepts Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Like this with the swoosh on the side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KittSmith_95 Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 The more I see the swoosh on the front, the more I'm indifferent to it. Is it bad? Not always. Would the logo work better on the sleeve? Depends on the jersey for me. Like... the Nats jersey posted, I feel like that guy should see it on the sleeve, but then I see the Yankees one and I try to compare where the swoosh would go on the sleeve to it's placement on the front.... and I feel like the front suits it better in that case (Same goes for all pinstriped teams though in my head). In the end: Like with the NBA, I'll get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Fool Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 If someone manages to wear Dragon Ball Z themed equipment for Players Weekend then this whole thing will be completely worth it. https://kotaku.com/dragon-ball-z-uh-baseball-equipment-going-on-sale-in-1840551805 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 3 hours ago, KittSmith_95 said: The more I see the swoosh on the front, the more I'm indifferent to it. Is it bad? Not always. Would the logo work better on the sleeve? Depends on the jersey for me. Like... the Nats jersey posted, I feel like that guy should see it on the sleeve, but then I see the Yankees one and I try to compare where the swoosh would go on the sleeve to it's placement on the front.... and I feel like the front suits it better in that case (Same goes for all pinstriped teams though in my head). In the end: Like with the NBA, I'll get used to it. you’re entitled to your opinion, but this is one I will just simply never understand. I really can’t imagine any situation where any non-team logo “works” on the front of a uniform (or at all, but definitely on the front). Frankly, it’s a defeatist attitude. "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...
Lights Out Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 Weirdly, I don't care about the Nike logo on the front (although it would look better on the sleeve), but I'd hate to see the MLB adopt NBA-style ad patches. I know it's not a rational opinion because the Nike logo basically is an ad patch already, but that's just how I feel about it. I guess the manufacturer's logo is more acceptable because they're actually involved in designing and making the uniforms. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBoy Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 6 minutes ago, Lights Out said: Weirdly, I don't care about the Nike logo on the front (although it would look better on the sleeve), but I'd hate to see the MLB adopt NBA-style ad patches. I know it's not a rational opinion because the Nike logo basically is an ad patch already, but that's just how I feel about it. I guess the manufacturer's logo is more acceptable because they're actually involved in designing and making the uniforms. Was this brought up in the summer? https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2019/07/15/Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/MLB-patches.aspx “We’re examining the patch, but clearly we have things to work through first,” said Noah Garden, MLB executive vice president of business and sales. “I’d say it’s inevitable down the road, but certainly not immediate. This is something that requires a fairly long runway. There are lots of things to take into consideration, but I think we will get there.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 18 hours ago, WSU151 said: He was presented as an expert witness? Nah. He’s the founder of the business that teamed with Nike to sell jerseys. Not some third party uninvested SME. Of course he was. He was allowed uncritically to present his spin without any challenge or need for verification. By virtue of his position, presenting him as it does, the article at the very least suggests that he is speaking from experience or with data to back him up. Otherwise why quote him at all? But we're still allowed to call bull on his ludicrous claim. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted December 20, 2019 Share Posted December 20, 2019 3 hours ago, Lights Out said: I guess the manufacturer's logo is more acceptable because they're actually involved in designing and making the uniforms. nike has neither designed nor manufactured any major-league uniform. theres no evidence that I’ve seen that any “official supplier” has designed any major-league uniform. Neither of the redesigns since the Nike takeover involved Nike. "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...
itsmb8 Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 11 hours ago, Lights Out said: Weirdly, I don't care about the Nike logo on the front (although it would look better on the sleeve), but I'd hate to see the MLB adopt NBA-style ad patches. I know it's not a rational opinion because the Nike logo basically is an ad patch already, but that's just how I feel about it. I guess the manufacturer's logo is more acceptable because they're actually involved in designing and making the uniforms. ad patches for the NBA work because they fit really nicely between the collar and armholes, and are small enough to wear it isnt really distracting. Plus, it balances out with the Nike patch. It wouldnt really work for baseball because baseball jerseys are so much bigger that itd be like putting an ad in the middle of a sheet of paper. I just think with the swoosh its different because Nike puts the swoosh in that specific spot on EVERYTHING(the only exception being the NFL, but college teams still follow), so to see the swoosh anywhere else would look weird IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 34 minutes ago, itsmb8 said: ad patches for the NBA work because they fit really nicely between the collar and armholes, and are small enough to wear it isnt really distracting. Plus, it balances out with the Nike patch. It wouldnt really work for baseball because baseball jerseys are so much bigger that itd be like putting an ad in the middle of a sheet of paper. I just think with the swoosh its different because Nike puts the swoosh in that specific spot on EVERYTHING, so to see the swoosh anywhere else would look weird IMO. Ad patches do not work in the NBA because there's already tons of commercial breaks on every game and ads all over every arena. Selling out space on the jerseys is excessive and crass. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 Good. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlins93 Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 I wish they would change it back to California Angels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 On 12/18/2019 at 5:17 PM, itsmb8 said: Personally, I think the swoosh makes MLB look like it's legit now. Think of soccer and college sports, 99% of the top clubs/programs have uniforms supplied by either Nike or Under Armour (in soccer's case, Adidas too). People naturally judge you based off what you wear, and in the sports world, by what apparel company makes your uniforms. Now I know most of you are ages 55 and over and dont care, but A TON of people under 40 do care, at least to an extent. Plus, its that much more money that Major League Baseball will make, which is a plus in its own right. it'smasturbate ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.