MLB 2019 Changes

[Carolingian Steamroller]

On 12/7/2018 at 1:41 PM, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

 

As a Nats fan, I'm not a big fan.  Thankfully this is just for ST, so it's hard to get too worked up about it.  But they look too much like the Twins.  And like others have said, the angle of the name really is brutal.  The block w/capitol logo isn't bad, but hot take, I don't like white panel hats at all.  Maybe I'll get a hoodie with it or something.  But overall, stick with the curly w

 

It'd probably help if the script was red like numbers. 

[Silent Wind of Doom]

One post I had in my quoted posts from the last thread:

 

On 8/28/2018 at 9:06 PM, BJ Sands said:

Sox Park is incredibly underrated. Accessible, always terrific food and beer, great parking, wide concourses, outstanding video boards, excellent sight lines and it has improved aesthetically with recent modifications. Its reputation is a victim of when it was built, how it looked in 1991, and what’s eight miles to the north. 

 

And no, the Sox will never leave the area altogether. I’d bet my life on that. They have a great lease right now and there’s zero talk of a new stadium. No, their fan base isn’t as big as the Cubs, but it’s more than enough to sustain them when they’re decent. As somebody said earlier, MLB wouldn’t let that happen. 

 

(But criticism of the Sox’s decision to build the park facing southeast is legit. If it had been built facing north, it’d have the Chicago skyline as a backdrop. Huge mistake.)

 

Does the park still completely separate the upper deck from the rest of the park?   I recall that being so in the 90's much like the old Yankee Stadium keeping the bleacher rabble separate from the rest of the park, something which was discontinued in the new park.   That's the most sizable fault I would think of with the park, although I've never had to travel there.

 

Back to "current" events.

 

On 10/2/2018 at 10:04 PM, SilverBullet1929 said:

I dunno if I wanna be this guy... but I'm gonna go ahead and do it anyways...

 

Just because beer companies have changed their branding styles since the 2000s doesn't mean the Brewers can't still use that wordmark without still successfully implying their connection to the brewing industry. 

 

There are plenty of teams with names and logos across all sports that still fit just fine even when their inspirations are long changed or outdated...

 

Nobody dodges trolleys anymore for one. 

 

I think it was less a matter of the inspiration changing and so the team must change to suit and more that the style is dated, the beer companies shying away from it being evidence of that.   Funnily enough, most beer companies are moving to simple updates of old styles, much like the navy/yellow Brewers.

 

On 10/4/2018 at 1:46 PM, RoughRiders99 said:

I would love it if the Cubs could use this throwback road jersey as their full-time road uniforms. Maybe with blue cap/red bill, a red number on the front too along with blue NOB, red number on the back. 

 

 

That blue on red just blurs too much.  It's fuzzy and dark/drab even under the bright night lights in that pic.  People had just been speaking on (and I agree) how the Mariners' wordmark looks better with the added outline in between, adding readability.  That being said, their identity is very modern and multiple outlines fits with that, whereas this one is more classic.

 

On 10/12/2018 at 4:22 PM, the admiral said:

Don't play baseball where you can't grow grass

 

I agree.  We should stop playing ball indoors.

 

On 10/22/2018 at 8:27 PM, BringBackTheVet said:

Yeah - if anything, the white outline makes it look replica and "cheap".  

 

Still not as bad as the blue buttons and unnecessary headspoon.

 

I'm getting flashbacks to the NOB looks like a beer league team vs. NNOB looks like a beer league team.

 

On 11/6/2018 at 8:54 AM, McCarthy said:

I don't really align with the true native Cincinnatians on a lot of stuff, politics especially, but the most Cincinnati thing about me is how much I love the Reds and Skyline Chili. Skyline Chili is the :censored:ing best gross food on the planet and I go there biweekly. Any attempts to knock it only serves to make me stronger and places you firmly into Basic Bitchdom. I don't make the rules. I will stan for Skyline until the day I die. 

 

It's cheese, meat, spaghetti. You can get it on a hot dog. They bring you oyster crackers! Throw it all on a baked potato and it's like if a warm blanket was a meal. Protip: Get the Chilito with spaghetti on a tomato wrap. It's a 3way, wrapped up in a tortilla, but their tomato wraps are bigger than their regular tortilla shells so you get more goop inside, but for the same price. 

 

Kentucky doesn't want us either. 

 

Yes correct, but Cincinnati's topography is far more interesting. St Louis had to build an arch so people had something to look up towards. 

 

I'd never thought about Cincinnati's location or really the general location of a lot of teams beyond their state and city until I went to Kentucky to preach in unassigned territory.   When I was at a supermarket, I saw bags of peanuts with the Reds logo on it and realized "Oh!   That is the closest team, isn't it?   I'd just always imagined a demarkation line between North and South running along the northern borders of Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Arkansas with everyone between that line and Jacksonville being Braves fans.

 

And when it comes to chili, I prefer the Greek Texas sauce on three Texas Wieners with everything and cheese from Newburgh Lunch.

 

 

On 11/11/2018 at 6:44 PM, CB27 said:

The Cardinals social media accounts put this out a few days ago with the caption "You’re gonna flip! We have a big announcement coming soon…" After a little digging, the original photo is actually of Ozzie in a home white uni that has been photoshopped powder blue for the post. I have to assume this means we'll be seeing a return of powder blue for the Cards in some capacity for 2019.

 

On 11/11/2018 at 9:00 PM, mike1990 said:

Interesting that the photo was of Ozzie in the home white uni. 

 

Makes sense.   Did Ozzie do the flip on the road?  I could understand it just being a home thing since that's where the fans are mostly.   You'd have to photoshop to get both the blue and make the fun pun.

 

On 11/15/2018 at 3:17 PM, msu said:

This jersey and cap combo doesn't make sense to me with how hard they have pushed the curly W in recent years. Also, it still has the numbers that haven't fit since they dropped bevels and gold.

 

Much of the logos used for these caps have been retro logos, including both options the Braves went with.

 

On 11/15/2018 at 4:18 PM, Gothamite said:

Their last set before moving to Minneapolis was beautiful.

 

Am I the only one who just sees a treble clef in that S?   I can't tell if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

 

On 11/19/2018 at 4:14 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Powder blue uniforms as a trend were a scourge.  There was exactly one such uniform that looked good: 

 

The rest were hideous.  And use of powder blue particularly by the Cardinals was an embarassment.

 

That looks a bit thick.  Is that the size of the wordmark and outline together, or is it just that the mark is thinner now?  It just feels a little too thick, which makes it feel blobby.  Perhaps the smaller type is why I prefer the print/Kansas City/Chambliss home run variant.

 

 

That being said, I think powder blue was interesting.  I wouldn't want it on certain teams, but for teams that wore it, especially for teams that have such a history with it, I think it's fine.

 

Looking at the uniforms of the day, I think it went well with blue, red, and yellow, but don't think it would fit anyone else.  Perhaps that's why I always chafe at people suggesting Tampa Bay adopt the Tulane colors.  It feels like it should go with blue and a lighter color.  I wouldn't want to see it anywhere near the Orioles, Giants, or A's (for multiple reasons).  But, I don't actually know if that's because of the aesthetics, or because that's how it was worn in the past and I'm hardwired to accept it.

 

On 11/20/2018 at 4:38 PM, Pengin. said:

I feel like they need to thicken the outline and flatten the black elements of the logos to get the true neon lights effect. 

 

This is the first time I'd seen the Marlins logo on black.  I hadn't really thought of it as an attempt at leaning into the neon effect.  Now all I see is this:

 

 

On 11/26/2018 at 9:54 PM, Brandon9485 said:

I was born in the 80s but did not become aware of baseball until shortly after the swirly P look was put away. With that said, this look needs to come back and be the primary again. Not only would the Phillies have a shade of red (or whichever color you prefer) all to their own, the current Phils look outside the number font and sleeve numbers is so generic. The Phillies could really have a look all their own again. 

 

On 11/27/2018 at 1:20 AM, BringBackTheVet said:

Oh I don't disagree with your assessment, just that even with those flaws, it's not "awful".  It's not even "bad".  It's just that it could be so much better.

 

Yeah - I'm a fan of the 50s set.  The current one is kind of a sterilized hybrid of that set and the late '40s.  It has no character... but it's not "awful".

 

I've always been a phan of the Phillies set.   It's unique, it's full of character, and it's got about as much winning behind it as the swirly P.  Darkening the red may be a good move, although I'd keep the blue light and go for more a deep scarlet than the full burgundy.  Although I admit that the burgundy and white is a really good-looking combo.   Maybe it's just like the Pirates sleeves/vests, the Reds Red Machine/Pinstripe vests, or the Diamondbacks purple and teal/red and sand.   Two looks that look equally good and both have enough reason to be the current look.

 

However, that description of the current set by BBTV made me realize something as I look at the Phillies' identity.   They were the first Brandiose team.   It looks just like a Brandiose-created identity.

 

On 11/27/2018 at 4:15 AM, Old School Fool said:

It's not totally direct nostalgia, people like me just really like weird and abstract designs and there was alot of that prior to the 90's and just those designs do sometimes evoke a nostalgic feeling even if you weren't around during that era.

 

Old logos in general actually have a fun vibe to them and that's what gets people going.

 

I find that team identities seem to fit into certain time periods that suit them best.   I think the best example of this is the Twins, whose TC insignia just exudes 60's streamlined googie aesthetics, something that the uniforms they've moved to when leaving the dome have leaned into and really the ballpark as a whole.  But that fits well with their birth and the time period that their biggest legend played.

 

The White Sox are a team with paradoxically a lot of history and a lot of non-history.

 

I'm finding a lot of the things I'm writing in this post intersect.  Powder blue is something that I think is okay if it's worn by a team that had history or has a... temporal identity that fits it.  The Mets, Twins, Dodgers*, and Astros are firmly entrenched in the early and mid 60's.  The Yankees, Red Sox, Giants*, and Tigers look out of the 40's and 50's (at home at least).  The Rangers, Mariners, Rockies, and Angels are all of the turn of the millennium.  The Diamondbacks, Marlins, and Padres look very now.  All of those looks would ill fit with a powder blue uniform.  The Cardinals and Blue Jays are in this weird situation where they are modernized versions of older looks.   The Cardinals are in a way both modern and classic.   It's design that harkens back to the first half of the previous century but has a number of additions (the yellow, the detail) that were added during that time and modern embellishments such as the serifs.  They're like the neo-classic ballpark of uniforms.  Either way, these teams look much like they did back then so throwing out a powder blue alt kinda fits.  Same for the Royals who are not far off from wearing the same uniform they did in the 70's and 80's.

 

That being said, throwbacks/fauxbacks where they change the uniform to fit the look of their old powder blues or uniforms of that era make it work better.   The Rays are a weird outlier in that they invented weird fauxbacks and powder blue is a team color as opposed to an equivalent to away gray.

 

*Yes, I know the Dodgers uniforms were essentially the same for a while in Brooklyn before moving, but while the Giants created a SF logo that fit the aesthetics of their earlier identity, the LA mark is very, very of the 60's.

 

On 11/27/2018 at 12:45 PM, SilverBullet1929 said:

Now that I see this, the other day I came across a pic of Griffey in the old royal blue and gold Mariners outfit and it just looked horrible to me in hindsight. The Seattle Mariners have completely taken over the nautical color scheme of navy and teal with silver. There is zero reason for them to ever go back to wearing royal and gold outside of appropriate throwbacks. That royal and gold color scheme has nothing to do with Seattle or the Mariners theme/identity. Leave it in the past.

 

On 11/27/2018 at 2:06 PM, Gothamite said:

Agreed.  The Mariners made a big step up when they adopted the navy, teal, and silver color scheme.  They shouldn't ever look back.

 

The Brewers, on the other hand, traded downward when they lost their bright colors in favor of something that pairs better with khakis from the Gap.  They need to change back pronto.

 

I'm not opposed to looks evolving, nor do I want every team to dress the way they did when I was 10.  We can evaluate each of them in context.

 

The Mariners are wearing a dark color, a light color, and a metallic.  They are playing under a roof where these uniforms barely see the light of the sun.   I find it funny to hear that they should stick with what they've got and never look back at royal and athletic gold while the Brewers who wear a dark color, a light color, and a metallic color and play indoors have aged, look drab, and need to go back to royal and athletic gold immediately.

 

On 11/29/2018 at 2:58 AM, CaliforniaGlowin said:

Technically Mariners have "Northwest green" which is equal parts green and blue. Charlotte Hornets teal is more blue than green.  so there is no true teal in MLB.  I don't know of any in milb either. I know of two college teams that have it though.

 

And there's one less team wearing purple in the NBA than most think because the Lakers actually wear "Forum Blue".

 

On 12/3/2018 at 10:22 PM, Anubis2051 said:

Has anyone heard any rumors or seen any merch for the London Series? The unveiled logo doesn't exactly make a great patch for the cap or jerseys.

 

 

Maybe the logo will be in team colors on the caps?   White for Yankees and red for the Sox.   Hence the black basic logo.

[FightingGoldenDevil]

Not directly uniform related but the Ray's stadium plan has fallen through, making relocation almost guaranteed

[TBGKon]

11 minutes ago, FightingGoldenDevil said:

Not directly uniform related but the Ray's stadium plan has fallen through, making relocation almost guaranteed

No it doesnt mean that, they still have a lease thru 2027.  Yes i know money talks, and BS walks but a lease is a lease.

 

It seems the national media doesnt even know whats going on.  ESPN said Rays ownership said no new stadium before 2024

 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25510456/tampa-bay-rays-reopen-ballpark-site-search-stadium-opening-delayed-2024 

 

....yet SI states 2027

 

https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/12/11/rays-stadium-plans-dead-mlb-rob-manfred-tropicana-field-ybor-city-tampa-bay

[FightingGoldenDevil]

12 minutes ago, AstroBull21 said:

No it doesnt mean that, they still have a lease thru 2027.  Yes i know money talks, and BS walks but a lease is a lease.

 

It seems the national media doesnt even know whats going on.  ESPN said Rays ownership said no new stadium before 2024

 

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25510456/tampa-bay-rays-reopen-ballpark-site-search-stadium-opening-delayed-2024 

 

....yet SI states 2027

 

https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/12/11/rays-stadium-plans-dead-mlb-rob-manfred-tropicana-field-ybor-city-tampa-bay

The MLB can step in and force a relocation and cover whatever penalties the Ray's would incur by breaking the lease. Ray's ownership is too incompetent to get anything done so the league might take things into their own hands 

[TBGKon]

1 minute ago, FightingGoldenDevil said:

The MLB can step in and force a relocation and cover whatever penalties the Ray's would incur by breaking the lease. Ray's ownership is too incompetent to get anything done so the league might take things into their own hands 

Really???  Show me precedence that modern era MLB has done this before in the past? I dont think the Expos/Nationals situation is the same. They wouldn't step in unless we had an NBA Donald Sterling type issue.

 

 

[SFGiants58]

39 minutes ago, FightingGoldenDevil said:

Not directly uniform related but the Ray's stadium plan has fallen through, making relocation almost guaranteed

 

Given all the public money they demanded for it, that’s good.

 

The Rays really drew the short straw, playing in the worst of the two proposed Tampa Bay stadium locations (the other would have been where Raymond James Stadium is now). Stadium for Rent is a fantastic book on the whole affair.

[FightingGoldenDevil]

12 minutes ago, AstroBull21 said:

Really???  Show me precedence that modern era MLB has done this before in the past? I dont think the Expos/Nationals situation is the same. They wouldn't step in unless we had an NBA Donald Sterling type issue.

 

 

Don't ask for modern precedence then immediately say that an example of modern precedence doesn't count. From what I've read relocation isn't off the table

[daveindc]

1 hour ago, FightingGoldenDevil said:

The MLB can step in and force a relocation and cover whatever penalties the Ray's would incur by breaking the lease. Ray's ownership is too incompetent to get anything done so the league might take things into their own hands 

 

1 hour ago, AstroBull21 said:

Really???  Show me precedence that modern era MLB has done this before in the past? I dont think the Expos/Nationals situation is the same. They wouldn't step in unless we had an NBA Donald Sterling type issue.

 

 

 

Manfred did say he's waiting on the stadium issues in Tampa and Oakland to get resolved before MLB expands, so it might be in their best interest for the Rays to just break the lease early so they can move forward. 

[okiebrave]

Not sure if this has been posted anywhere else on the board but MLB Network has revealed their 10th anniversary logo. They will have programming through the year looking back on 10 years of being a network. 

Link to article

 

 

[Matito]

17 hours ago, FightingGoldenDevil said:

Don't ask for modern precedence then immediately say that an example of modern precedence doesn't count. From what I've read relocation isn't off the table

Team ownership has gone on record (and reiterated since yesterday) that they are not considering relocation.

 

I know everyone gets off on the idea of moving the Rays and Athletics, but let's let the teams and cities deal with that issue and allow fans to keep their teams.

[Gothamite]

But the Rays don’t have an appreciable fan base. 

 

Even when they went to the World Series, even when they led the AL East from the first day of the season to the last, their attendance has been near or at the bottom of the majors.  They’ve never been able to draw well, no matter how good they are.  I can’t think of another instance where players are restored to calling out their own fans for apathy, express their frustration at having to play winning baseball before empty stands.  Put that team anywhere else and they’d lead the league.  But not in Tampa Bay. 

 

I hate relocation, but at some point baseball has to have a serious conversation about whether it was a mistake to expand to Tampa Bay at all. Now seems like a pretty good time.

[Olmec]

I've said since moving to the bay area that if they actually played in Tampa I'd be a season ticket holder. I can't be the only one that hates making the trip to St. Pete for a baseball game...or am I? 

[Gothamite]

People who know the market far better than I aren’t sure that they could even bring in average-level attendance in a Tampa stadium.  

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/can-the-rays-ever-achieve-league-average-attendance/

 

And he’s a Rays fan, putting the best possible spin on his research. 

[beachperroAZ]

On 11/29/2018 at 4:05 PM, Bucfan56 said:

 

I still can’t figure out why they ditched this as the home cap. They brought it back a few years ago which was a great move, but they pair it specifically with the teal alt, I believe.

 

This was a GREAT look. 

 

 

I worked in Seattle summer of 2014 and every time my shop got a shipment of these caps in, they absolutey flew off of the shelf. I remember trying to find one for @McCarthy and they were sold out just about everywhere. 

To this day I can't believe the M's mucked up this look.  They had it perfect the first time and then they went into full navy drab mode.  The blue hat with the teal bill really gives the home look a balance.  I would be in favor of them bringing this back, plus throw in the teal hat/navy brim in every now and then.  It is time for the M's to embrace the northwest green as they would look unique in all of baseball instead of being a dime a dozen navy teams.  I would love to see the M's use the northwest green jerseys on the road too every so often and not restrict it to just home games. 

[crashcarson15]

Let's limit discussion in this thread to the aesthetics of the 2019 MLB season, not relocation possibilities for the future.

[baymenxpac]

curious: searched through the  thread, but i couldn't find the answer:

 

is there a league-wide update coming to the spring training gear this year (other than the hats all presumably moving back to diamond era fabric)? i know the nats, and obviously the marlins, have new ST looks, but just curious if everyone is getting new hat/jersey designs?

[WSU151]

2 hours ago, baymenxpac said:

curious: searched through the  thread, but i couldn't find the answer:

 

is there a league-wide update coming to the spring training gear this year (other than the hats all presumably moving back to diamond era fabric)? i know the nats, and obviously the marlins, have new ST looks, but just curious if everyone is getting new hat/jersey designs?

 

Pretty sure we’ll get a bunch of new hat logos with the return to Diamond Era...my guess is a lot of throwback/fauxback logos in ST, coinciding with league anniversary. The A’s were thinking about that vintage-looking elephant hat. 

 

Probably not many changes in the jerseys. 

[marlinfan]

I can’t believe MLBN has been around 10 years. Time flies. It probably didn’t draw viewers but it was fun watching old games in the offseason.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

8 hours ago, marlinfan said:

I can’t believe MLBN has been around 10 years. Time flies. It probably didn’t draw viewers but it was fun watching old games in the offseason.

 

If only the MLB Network would actually show old games! I don't think it has shown one for many months. There are certainly no games programmed on that channel for the next two weeks.

 

Another culprit here is ESPN Classic, which shows a non-stop parade of college football and college basketball games. A glance at the schedule reveals that it is showing Rose Bowls today; but the programming usually consists of ordinary regular-season match-ups of no particular import. In the baseball off-season that channel should be showing baseball every damn day — and not just World Series games or games in which something historic happened, but ordinary regular-season games.

 

Let us also realise that the MLB Network has access to the staggering array of films that Major League Baseball has produced over the decades, ranging from the World Series films and All-Star Game films dating back at least to the 1940s, to the yearly wrap-up films that every team produces, to the special features on individual players such as Mickey Mantle, Nolan Ryan, George Brett, etc.

 

What has long distinguished baseball fans from fans of other sports is baseball fans' love of history. Have today's baseball fans lost that quality? I can report that, even though I no longer follow baeeball (apart from the uniforms), I still have a great interest in baseball history. I read books on the topic, and I am constantly watching and listening to old games on YouTube.

 

Alas, in the era of YouTube, the lack of appropriate historical baseball programming on ESPN Classic and the MLB Network matters less, as a fan can find old games by the hundreds online. Still, I cannot understand why neither of these channels programs baseball in the winter, a strategy which would exploit the defining characteristic of baseball fans, attracting to these channels' advertisers viewers who have plenty of money to spend.