College Baseball Uniforms - 2019

[upperV03 5,405]

Yeah, I really like those pinstriped whites, especially with the fighting duck on the chest.

[Webfooter 862]

Oregon Softball has released their yellow jerseys.

 

[upperV03 5,405]

^Those are the best of the new softball uniforms IMO. The other combos will probably grow on me over time. Overall, though, the baseball team’s new set is much better than the softball team’s.

[MattMill 347]

The shiney glued on swoosh is a terrible look, especially on a fitted hat. No thanks Nike. 

 

It looks to only be on the green hat but everything else jersey wise. The other caps look normal.  I give it a year before it's on everything else. Bad cheap trend right there. 

[Kevin W. 1,432]

4 hours ago, Webfooter said:

Oregon Softball has released their yellow jerseys.

 

Swing and a miss because of that logo. Make it proper colors and the jersey would look so much better.

[Webfooter 862]

6 hours ago, Kevin W. said:

Swing and a miss because of that logo. Make it proper colors and the jersey would look so much better.

Oregon tends goes with black and gray logos/wordmarks on their yellow softball jerseys since they're worn almost always worn with either gray or black pants.  Also, the baseball team is using a black and yellow version of that logo on their black jersey and it looks fine.

[Kevin W. 1,432]

4 hours ago, Webfooter said:

Oregon tends goes with black and gray logos/wordmarks on their yellow softball jerseys since they're worn almost always worn with either gray or black pants.  Also, the baseball team is using a black and yellow version of that logo on their black jersey and it looks fine.

I still don't like it. It's nothing personal against Oregon, but I still don't like BFBS and I never will.

[cbb5 0]

Virginia Tech looks to have new anthracite away unis.

 

https://imgur.com/knO6j9G

 

 

[AndrewMLind 1,502]

*posts entire thread in MLB officially partners with Nike thread* 

 

Honestly, the only potential complaint I can see from baseball traditionalists are the ventilation holes on the back (but it's hardly noticeable from any distance, just like Nike's football and basketball uniforms).

[BVZ 107]

Longhorns burnt orange uniforms will feature “Texas” in a throwback style cursive script.

[razorback447 359]

12 hours ago, cbb5 said:

Virginia Tech looks to have new anthracite away unis.

 

https://imgur.com/knO6j9G

 

 

 

Yeah that is not a good look at all. 

[cajunaggie08 412]

14 hours ago, BVZ said:

Longhorns burnt orange uniforms will feature “Texas” in a throwback style cursive script.

 

Here is the Clemens era uniform that I assume the script is somewhat based off of

[Ted Cunningham 257]

So to be clear, is the implication that this script is a "throwback style" insomuch as it's a script and scripts generally are more throwback? I would argue (and this is not to pick on BVZ by any means or to call BVZ out; this just sparked a thought that I've had for a while) that this script feels decidedly not "throwback" or like a classic baseball script. And here's why:

 

When teams started using what I would now think of as classic baseball scripts from roughly the 1930s or 1940s (e.g. the Dodgers' script), teams were unaided by computers and ostensibly attempted to mimic how the word would look as though it were written. In other words, it appears that scripts were meant to look organic and unique to each team while being done in such a way as to be legible on a uniform.

Sometime in the 60s (that's a guess, based on the uniforms I'm thinking of and have seen), uniform manufacturers must have had basic patterns for each letter to allow them to put together scripts without having to fully design them from nothing, though still maintaining some semblance of that handwritten feel. Nike included this particular set of letters in one of their apparel catalogs a few years back, and a member here converted it into a font with an Oregon State-related name. (The font is now no longer available.) I took the vectors out of the pdf of the catalog to make making scripts easier:

(I made these in roughly a half hour, all in. The town name is a census-designated place in central West Virginia; I just used it because I really like script Zs. The team name is just one that had a fair few characters I feel like exemplify the standardized baseball script patterns/letters. The S, especially, is fairly ubiquitous.)

 

The Texas script (though I can't see the T) in the photo of the Clemens-era uniform looks to be similar to this kind of script. The new script looks like a computer-based brush script font. It kind of mimics a brush script, but it's a little too exact/cold and lacks a certain human touch, if that makes sense. I don't know why Texas just didn't go with the same script. I really like the uniform otherwise.

 

I don't mind modern uniforms in baseball, and I don't necessarily think traditional means good. But if a team is going to go with a script, go with a real baseball script, and not an imitation. So in that respect, I guess I'm a bit of a baseball script purist.

 

Again, this isn't to call out BVZ. That just made me think of this post that I'd not really ever written down.

[BVZ 107]

Good post and an interesting thought. Could be it’s own thread. I considered the Texas script to be “throwback style” not because it looked traditional to me in and of itself, but because it looks very similar (sans the tail) as the Clemens era uniforms from the 80’s. Agreed that it lacks a certain human element, but I’m a sucker for scripts in baseball regardless. Big fan of the Aggies new uniforms as well.

[WavePunter 2,016]

1 hour ago, Ted Cunningham said:

So to be clear, is the implication that this script is a "throwback style" insomuch as it's a script and scripts generally are more throwback? I would argue (and this is not to pick on BVZ by any means or to call BVZ out; this just sparked a thought that I've had for a while) that this script feels decidedly not "throwback" or like a classic baseball script. And here's why:

 

When teams started using what I would now think of as classic baseball scripts from roughly the 1930s or 1940s (e.g. the Dodgers' script), teams were unaided by computers and ostensibly attempted to mimic how the word would look as though it were written. In other words, it appears that scripts were meant to look organic and unique to each team while being done in such a way as to be legible on a uniform.

Sometime in the 60s (that's a guess, based on the uniforms I'm thinking of and have seen), uniform manufacturers must have had basic patterns for each letter to allow them to put together scripts without having to fully design them from nothing, though still maintaining some semblance of that handwritten feel. Nike included this particular set of letters in one of their apparel catalogs a few years back, and a member here converted it into a font with an Oregon State-related name. (The font is now no longer available.) I took the vectors out of the pdf of the catalog to make making scripts easier:

(I made these in roughly a half hour, all in. The town name is a census-designated place in central West Virginia; I just used it because I really like script Zs. The team name is just one that had a fair few characters I feel like exemplify the standardized baseball script patterns/letters. The S, especially, is fairly ubiquitous.)

 

The Texas script (though I can't see the T) in the photo of the Clemens-era uniform looks to be similar to this kind of script. The new script looks like a computer-based brush script font. It kind of mimics a brush script, but it's a little too exact/cold and lacks a certain human touch, if that makes sense. I don't know why Texas just didn't go with the same script. I really like the uniform otherwise.

 

I don't mind modern uniforms in baseball, and I don't necessarily think traditional means good. But if a team is going to go with a script, go with a real baseball script, and not an imitation. So in that respect, I guess I'm a bit of a baseball script purist.

 

Again, this isn't to call out BVZ. That just made me think of this post that I'd not really ever written down.

Really great insight.. I like how you've really dissected the issue.. I'm just the opposite though.. the organic, "hand-written" feel almost always looks worse to me.. I prefer something a bit more "professional" looking.. I hate the Twins' squiggly-T throwback script and the Phillies' old semi-italic-P script.. they look like someone tried to make a baseball script without the proper resources.. I certainly understand the appreciation for them, but I just feel like teams at the highest level of their sport should look like they have the highest level of design and manufacturing technology..

 

Edit: adding this-

LOVE that "Fonzo" script btw!

[Ted Cunningham 257]

Agreed; the Aggies' scripts are nice. And for the same reasons I laid out above, I don't like Arizona's new script. It's a half-hearted attempt at best. We get what you're going for, Arizona, but it doesn't work the way you want it to. (At least that's how I see it.)

[Kevin W. 1,432]

On 2/3/2019 at 9:46 AM, cbb5 said:

Virginia Tech looks to have new anthracite away unis.

 

https://imgur.com/knO6j9G

 

 

 

[Botiger 90]

I really like that script for Texas.  Their previous style was boring to me.

[andrewharrington 3,279]

12 hours ago, WavePunter said:

Really great insight.. I like how you've really dissected the issue.. I'm just the opposite though.. the organic, "hand-written" feel almost always looks worse to me.. I prefer something a bit more "professional" looking.. I hate the Twins' squiggly-T throwback script and the Phillies' old semi-italic-P script.. they look like someone tried to make a baseball script without the proper resources.. I certainly understand the appreciation for them, but I just feel like teams at the highest level of their sport should look like they have the highest level of design and manufacturing technology..

 

Edit: adding this-

LOVE that "Fonzo" script btw!

 

I think the goal is to have a balance. For me, you want a script that looks like it could have been hand-cut, but removes the “flaws” that don’t serve any purpose. For example, the Dodgers’ and Braves’ examples up there are both pretty good by that measure. The size of the O in relation to the bowls of the D and G is a little off, and the right side of the G is a little heavy, but the curves and connections aren’t too bad. 

 

The Fonzo and Pounders scripts still look like baseball scripts (more than any typable font I’ve ever seen), but they’re full of weight issues from one letter to the next, clumsy connections, and bumpy curves. Those are the kinds of things you can eliminate but still retain the feel of a hand-cut baseball script. Normal script fonts don’t have the right look for baseball because there’s a major difference in writing letters with the stroke of a pen or brush versus cutting then out of an appliqué material, and you get a very stock, soulless look when you use one of those on a jersey (see Texas). Even fonts that bill themselves as “baseball scripts” like Michael Doret’s Metroscript look just slightly off when used on a jersey because they sit too close to the “pen stroke” side of the line.

 

Long story short, creating a good typable font that replicates the look and feel of real baseball scripts is exceedingly difficult, and I’m not sure anyone’s nailed it yet. They simply work better when they’re custom-made, whether they’re traditional or modern.

[kabbey520 140]

12 hours ago, Ted Cunningham said:

Agreed; the Aggies' scripts are nice. And for the same reasons I laid out above, I don't like Arizona's new script. It's a half-hearted attempt at best. We get what you're going for, Arizona, but it doesn't work the way you want it to. (At least that's how I see it.)

 

Respectfully disagree 

 

I assume you mean this one: