Milwaukee Brewers 2020 Logo/Uniforms

[_DietDrPepper_]

8 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

“Inertia” is honestly the only reason I can see.  It’s not a great design, trying so hard to be matchy-matchy while having glaring inconsistencies.

 

I honestly think that the retro set allowed this one to linger way too long. Having those sales took the pressure off this one to deliver.

I think the fact it’s their best look carried it as long as it did. I think a good amount of people would agree with me on that. 
 

But if brewer fans like the throwbacks better so be it. It matters more to them than to me. Just don’t start lying and say it’s not a great design or idea.

[PhlyBoy]

3 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

More massive an upgrade than just using the navy ball in glove?

 

if not, then the “complaining” is justified. 

 

 

We're still getting a navy ball in glove logo. Yes some might prefer the previous version when they are side by side, and I'm with you in the fact that so far my instant reaction is I prefer the version that has been used the last few years,  but I fully believe that mostly everyone will still be all in on the change because it's a return to the logo that I'd argue is the most loved just logo in the entire state. It's basically the Brewers knew they were playing with house money because they know the switch will be universally loved, so they made some tweaks that I feel will go unnoticed by many and for people with a keen eye within a few months maybe a year. 

[Sodboy13]

1 hour ago, EddieJ1984 said:

I get why they did the closed in mitt and colored the part between the m and b yellow, so it appears consistent throughout everything, before it was suppose to be white in between, but you'd see it with blue inbetween or even yellow sometimes. Now it's always gonna be the same.

 

The funny thing is that they just fixed this with the navy BiG last year or the year before!

[Sodboy13]

49 minutes ago, espnboy13 said:

1) It is a way to have a refreshed retro look. The navy makes it look like 2019 and not 1982

 

I know I'm basically a senior citizen on this board, but the notion of navy as an update/upgrade from a brighter shade of blue has been a point of broad derision around here ever since teams followed the St. Louis Rams' lead en masse in the early 2000s. I am more than happy to keep that sentiment going.

[Gothamite]

41 minutes ago, BellaSpurs said:

But if brewer fans like the throwbacks better so be it. It matters more to them than to me. Just don’t start lying and say it’s not a great design or idea.

 

 

It’s not a great design. 

 

Great designs don’t have to be rotated to fit on a jersey.  Great designs don’t have multiple dropshadows (but inconsistently applied, only on some elements and not others).  And great sports designs don’t, I repeat, don’t, use Times New Roman.   

[_DietDrPepper_]

4 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

 

It’s not a great design. 

 

Great designs don’t have to be rotated to fit on a jersey.  Great designs don’t have multiple dropshadows (but inconsistently applied, only on some elements and not others).  And great sports designs don’t, I repeat, don’t, use Times New Roman.   

Agree to disagree, it may not of been perfect, but it was sure a good design and just because it wasn’t traditional and didn’t fit the lines of the Yanks, Sox and Dodgers doesn’t mean it can’t be a good design.
A good design can, and I repeat, can use many design elements such as times new Roman and drop shadows and still be good. As long as it’s used right.

[SFGiants58]

The idea behind the cap logo was good (see my adaptation for the Block M). Everything else was an over-designed mess that aged poorly. 

[Carolingian Steamroller]

The Aughts design had some decent stuff going even if it had some irritating features but it got some splintered towards the end. 

 

The Brewers seemed unable to just PICK A LANE. They had the standard metallic gold/navy home and away, plus the navy jersey with metallic gold trim. Then they added a BiG throwback. Ok now we have another navy jersey but with "Milwaukee" on the front. How about a gold jersey? Then they added the BiG design but with the Aughts scripts in navy and athletic gold. That's why they eliminated the pants stripes (a massive downgrade), so they could mix and match. 

 

An identity that can't decide on a style or color scheme needs to go.

Honestly if they'd gone back to how the uniforms were in 2000, fixed the extra drop shadow on the "Brewers" script, that would have been ok with me. At least they'd have made an actual choice. 

[itsmb8]

1 hour ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

 

Because a mitt that doesn't have a connection between the thumb and fore-finger would be be bad at its job. 

 


Even the earlier mitts had them. 

 

youre 100% wrong here, but go off

[Survival79]

[Dynasty]

The newer one is actually cleaner than the older one by design. That being said, it's still a slight downgrade because like mentioned, it originally focused more on two letters forming a ball in a glove. The new one feels more focused on looking like a ball in a glove and then two letters forming it. I can still live with it though. At least they finally picked between the M wheat and BiG; I hated how they were BOTH used equally.

 

Fun fact: The stitching in the old BiG logo is very similar to the one in the Phillies' throwback logo.

[jn8]

57 minutes ago, Survival79 said:

I don’t care what anyone says, the new version is an upgrade. Sue me

[gsn93]

The new logo will look better to me if they kept the empty space between the webbing. My eyes are focusing on the block of yellow that is there now.

[The_Admiral]

1 hour ago, jn8 said:

I don’t care what anyone says, the new version is an upgrade. Sue me

 

PLOING

HedleyLamarr quoted you in a topic: Milwaukee Brewers 2020 Logo/Uniforms
7 hours ago

[MJD7]

I honestly think the new logo is absolutely fine.
 

The line weights are more evened throughout, the ball looks more like a baseball, and the issue that has plagued the logo for decades of what color the webbing should be was solved in one swift swoop. I really don’t think the logo reads any less as an “mb” than it did before, if anything the “b” is clearer now, and the new one even does a better job at looking like a baseball glove. 
 

Like @Carolingian Steamroller said, this new logo is basically the same as before, even for a group that nitpicks everything like we do. It’s honestly hard to tell the difference at first glance. It does everything it can to retain the same spirit of the original logo, while touching it up ever so slightly. 

 

I imagine people have clamored for more than 20 years for the Ball-in-Glove logo to come back full-time, and it finally is. The Brewers have returned to the core of their identity, much like the Blue Jays and Astros before them. I feel like we should appreciate that a lot more than we currently are.

[andrewharrington]

On 11/6/2019 at 3:06 PM, Sodboy13 said:

Before. it was an "m" and a "b" cleverly put together to resemble a baseball glove. Now, it's a poorly-drawn four-fingered baseball glove. Little changes, big difference. Kinda what this board is about in the first place.

Poorly drawn? Have you seen the gross, bumpy curve along the bottom of the old one? How about the oddly off center “counter” of the B?

 

On 11/6/2019 at 6:12 PM, Gothamite said:

 

That’s my biggest problem.  Ruins the cleverness of the “mb”. 

 

On 11/6/2019 at 9:17 PM, Dolphins Dynasty said:

The newer one is actually cleaner than the older one by design. That being said, it's still a slight downgrade because like mentioned, it originally focused more on two letters forming a ball in a glove. The new one feels more focused on looking like a ball in a glove and then two letters forming it. I can still live with it though. At least they finally picked between the M wheat and BiG; I hated how they were BOTH used equally.

 

Fun fact: The stitching in the old BiG logo is very similar to the one in the Phillies' throwback logo.

The old one Indeed felt like it was trying to do both things equally well, and I think it lacked a clear hierarchy as a result. The new one is more clearly a glove first and foremost. It does take slightly more effort to discover the MB, but I think that makes it *more* clever, not less. It has enough separation to retain the purposeful and distinct forms of the letters, but now they’re really good supporting actors instead of the sidekick who’s trying to steal the spotlight from the star.

 

I also think it’s a huge aesthetic improvement. The drawing quality of the curves is night and day, as mentioned above, and I think the location of the ball works better, too, as the off-center ball made for a really ugly B and killed some of the positive/negative relationship in the old one.

 

The biggest improvement for me, though, is definitely the balance and composition. The old one is optically narrower, I think because of the taper toward the top of the thumb. The open web made the M feel almost like it was “sliding” off the B and that tiny detail gave the whole mark an unstable feeling, like it’s tilting to the right. They nailed the new one in this regard, filling out the mark by evening the thickness of the thumb, centering the ball, and giving the outer edge of the thumb just a slightly softer curve. Connecting the web actually serves a great purpose to that end, “holding” or “pulling” the M back toward the the center, which brings the stability back. It also brings some visual weight back to the web area, which does wonders for that positive/negative relationship. Looking at them side by side, especially with the squint test, the new one looks much more full, balanced, and uniform In almost every way.
 

With that said, there’s probably a nice in-between step here that would both clean up the composition and quality but retain more of the old one’s details to make both sides happy. There’s also no discernible benefit to changing the orientation of the ball seams the way they did, so that could very easily revert, as could the counter in the web. I’d honestly like to see what an ultra-simple stitch pattern that resembles a wheat stalk looks like running through the ball.

[McCall]

9 hours ago, BellaSpurs said:

I think the fact it’s their best look carried it as long as it did. I think a good amount of people would agree with me on that. 

No, they wouldn't.

[Gothamite]

If it really was their “best look”, the team wouldn’t be changing it in the middle of a run of success.  Even when this process started, the Brewers were looking at a bright future.  That’s not when you ditch your “best look”, it’s when you replace it with something you hope to associate with the coming good times. 

[McCall]

It was never their "best" look. Most "nickname-appropriate"? Sure. But you can slap a piece of barley on a bad identity and it's still a bad identity.

[SilverBullet1929]

The only problem with the new logo is that it looks like a change for the sake of making a change and it's not an improvement overall so it becomes why even bother making these changes? With that said, the majority of people won't even notice these changes so it's not really a big deal beyond these boards and "people like us."