Milwaukee Brewers 2020 Logo/Uniforms

[MilSox]

4 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

In any case, I am totally with SFGiants; both teams (along with the Padres) have shut the door on the question of what their identities actually are.  I value that far more than I worry about the nitpicks.  And if the Astros decide to get more colorful some day, they can do so without raising identity questions.  Neither team is the Canucks, which is great.

To me, this is the important thing.  We can nitpick the particulars in all three cases (Brewers, Padres, Astros.... four if your include the Blue Jays), but at least now we have a practical idea of what each team's identity truly is.  While evolutionary tweaks might be necessary for all of them in the coming years, they all managed to address their major issues, and have thankfully put to rest any need for a full-on rebrand in the future.

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

15 hours ago, Megildur said:

I've been following this thread for awhile, figured it's about time to throw in some thoughts of my own. My reaction to the release of the Brewers' redesign was mixed. While I like the new look in general and I think it's a commendable move by the Milwaukee organization to connect with what their fans want, it feels a bit boring. Now, boring isn't necessarily bad. The D-Backs and Marlins in recent years have faced backlash when they've tried to not fit into the "traditional" look, the D-Backs with their snakeskin pattern and the Marlins with making their primary (or most-used) color black and their wonky scripts with drop shadows. With that in mind, I can see why the Brewers followed the trend that has worked recently -- basing their identity on past looks. The thing that struck me when I first saw the leaked logo via the Topps card was the similarity to the Astros logo, which was released before the 2013 season. Like the Astros, the Brewers' colors and word marks are remarkably similar to what they've had before. The Brewers former cap logo and primary logo, the BiG, which many have discussed in this thread, had slight alterations made and then smacked right in the middle of the new primary logo, as well as on the new caps. The Astros took a former cap logo of theirs and did the same, putting it in the middle of a roundel and then on caps. I made this somewhat shoddy infographic to illustrate my points.

 

 

Basically, it feels boring that the Brewers did this because the Astros already did something very similar! The roundels even look rather similar, like someone followed a template on how to take an old logo and make it "new" by adding a bevel or messing around with lines and then putting it in a couple circles. So anyways, I'm disappointed because I would've liked to see the Brewers try to be a bit more original, rather than recycling and slightly changing what they had decades ago. The new font is a step in the direction, as well as the BarleyBall, but it feels too much like they copied the Astros strategy (though hopefully not their sign-stealing strategies...) and didn't look into a proper, unique redesign.

 

And lastly, one last gripe! I wish they had consistent striping throughout the set of uniforms and found a way to either involve the royal blue more or get rid of it entirely. Oh, and powder blue throwbacks.

 

EDIT: I just realized that "2020-now" is a bit confusing since it's not actually 2020 yet...

 

Further emphasizing this by showing the Astros 1965 road wordmark vs the current set below.  I think Astros current home design was less of an adaptation of the 1965 home wordmark, and more of a created home version of the away wordmark

 

 ---> 

 

 

[FiddySicks]

14 hours ago, Lights Out said:

The Astros comparison is actually perfect. Just to add to that comparison: I remember people being really annoyed with the bevel on the Astros' star when the rebrand was first unveiled, much like how people are annoyed by the minor tweaks to the Ball in Glove now. And - potentially unpopular opinion - both teams' had their best identities in the '90s, while their current brands are bland, inoffensive "classic" looks that fail to distinguish them from the crowd.

 

I agree with you completely about the Astros. Both of their open star looks were VASTLY superior to the ClipArt Star they wear now (Although I have warmed up to their current look. Sort of). 

 

I mostly agree with your Brewers assessment too, but I'm not sure I completely agree with it. Their MB look was about as meh as I gets to me. The look before that (Or was it right after? I can't remember) was the best they've ever looked, though. 

 

The one thing I'm sad about this rebrand is that it's the end of an era for my favorite unpopular look. Metallic gold accents. That's probably my favorite touch a team can have. We still see some teams in silver, which is good, but (Other than the Royals alt), there aren't any more teams using metallic gold threads. That's sad. I also miss the D Backs copper. I really wish they would've brought that back. 

[Megildur]

8 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

I beg to differ. I'd like for the teams to look like themselves again. The Astros shouldn't have left navy and orange behind and the Brewers shouldn't have dropped yellow-gold. Would you have said the same about the Blue Jays, or have they always been "different" enough to work.

 

While this Brewers redesign carries through a lot of the hallmarks of the Astros redesign and has some similar faults, I'd argue that the Brewers were a lot more daring in their collection of logos, use of that "Milwaukee" script, and in avoiding the royal/yellow color scheme. It might not have landed with some people, but it's different.

@SFGiants58, I’m a big fan of all the work you do designing and the amount of research that goes into your concepts. I just wanted to say that upfront and thank you for your well thought-out response.

 

My point with the Blue Jays specifically is that their redesign arguably improved upon the look they based it upon. Their word mark is clean, the logo looks amazing, etc. All improvements in my book. They took the old look and brought in a “cleaner,” somewhat more modern take of it. The redesign also brought in a brighter blue and red than what the team wore between 1997 and 2011. Those looks were rather dreary. The return to simplicity was a welcome return. 

 

With both the Astros and Brewers relying heavily upon navy in their word marks and dark roundels, their looks feel dreary. Do I think that the re-integration of orange and yellow-gold into the Astros and Brewers’ respective looks is good? Yes, but I think it’s lost in the navy-heavy identities. Over a third of MLB has navy in their primary logos and that's excessive.

 

I also applaud the daring “Milwaukee” script as well as the attempt at modernizing and bringing back several old logos. However, none of the new or updated logos feel “fresh” to me. Maybe the new Barrel Man, but that’s not even being used on the jerseys as of now!

 

8 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Again, I'd rather teams look like themselves again than continue experimenting and screwing up. We don't want another Canucks situation here. The Vancouver Canucks school of branding is one of the worst out there.

 

8 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

While that's a fair statement, I beg to differ with the old looks. It's restoring teams as they should look, not going back to ugly '90s designs (the '90s Astros are festering garbage and the Brewers '90s design is OK - despite lacking any brand equity because the team was absolute trash while they wore it). The "kids" like retro stuff in a lot of their media, why not in their sports designs? You are spot on about the other teams, except I'd argue the Rockies should be "more purple," not "brighter purple." 

The Blue Jays "look like themselves again," and it looks great! My nitpick of their look would be that it is really similar to what they've had before, but I can live with that because their update was so well done. The Astros and Brewers haven't reached their potential in my books, and their updates didn't emphasize the best parts of their previous looks, that being the bright orange and yellow-gold respectively. If they went back to their original colors, that would make them look like themselves again, but they could've then created new logos that were brighter, less heavy on the navy, and ones that would stand out and bring new fans to the team. The '90s designs of the Astros and Brewers weren't that great because the colors were all dark and didn't capture both clubs' identities well. However, their new looks are still too dark. 

 

I use brighter not necessarily to argue for a lighter shade of orange for the Astros, for example, but for more of the orange and less of the navy so that the logo feels more clean and fresh. With the Rockies, you make a good point -- more purple would improve their identity greatly, not necessarily a brighter purple. 

 

8 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

I'm not a big fan of either version, but I understand that (much like the H-Star) it has brand equity. People see it in their local market and they know what it is and what it represents. That's something even a non-fan can understand. That's a big reason why people were upset with the changes to the BiG, which are a bit more substantial that the bevels on the H-Star (they didn't even fix the H-Star's biggest problem - looking good on a white background). 

I didn't think much about the brand equity of the looks, but that's also a good point to make. The Astros and Brewers are trying to dig into their past looks to be more like what they before, but I'd argue they can accomplish that through re-using their colors from the '70s and well-timed throwbacks, instead of just recycling old logos. The throwbacks avoid the problem where fans are frustrated with the updates, though it could also make the fans clamor for their current look to be more like the throwbacks...

 

 

5 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

I am with you on the Brewers...though that was in my mind a very “classic” design.  But few looks strike me as more bland than that Astros look.  To me that was the epitome of soulless.

 

In any case, I am totally with SFGiants; both teams (along with the Padres) have shut the door on the question of what their identities actually are.  I value that far more than I worry about the nitpicks.  And if the Astros decide to get more colorful some day, they can do so without raising identity questions.  Neither team is the Canucks, which is great.

 

25 minutes ago, NicDB said:

To me, this is the important thing.  We can nitpick the particulars in all three cases (Brewers, Padres, Astros.... four if your include the Blue Jays), but at least now we have a practical idea of what each team's identity truly is.  While evolutionary tweaks might be necessary for all of them in the coming years, they all managed to address their major issues, and have thankfully put to rest any need for a full-on rebrand in the future.

I'm glad that the Brewers, Astros, and Padres have made steps to address their past looks that were obviously faulty. They each have clear identities, as both of you have said, and that's admirable and something to celebrate. However, my main problem with this new Brewers set is the same as your issue with the Astros -- they feel bland and that's what frustrates me. The Padres update and the Blue Jays don't feel bland.

 

[L10nheart404]

9 minutes ago, Bucfan56 said:

That's sad. I also miss the D Backs copper. I really wish they would've brought that back. 

I absolutely loved that color scheme. I had a teddy bear back in the late 90s, that had a DBacks jacket on with the black, purple and copper logo on it. I'd love for some team to use those colors again. This hat is a must have for me 

[FiddySicks]

Back when the D Backs had their throwback nights, I picked up multiples of both the home and road versions of those caps because I had a feeling they were going to eventually be hard to come by in USA made poly. Two of my absolute favorite caps of all time. 

[SFGiants58]

3 minutes ago, Bucfan56 said:

Back when the D Backs had their throwback nights, I picked up multiples of both the home and road versions of those caps because I had a feeling they were going to eventually be hard to come by in USA made poly. Two of my absolute favorite caps of all time. 

I have the purple cap, which is one of my favorites. The Southwest look is something they really should have owned. That’s why I hope the team eventually just goes full homage to the classic team. Of course, not with that current font. It’s more of a color mismatch than the Padres’ font.

[Lights Out]

1 hour ago, NicDB said:

Are we ignoring how irritatingly similar the Brewers and Astros looked after their 1994 rebrands?

That's quite the stretch. The wordmarks looked nothing alike, the Brewers had green in their color scheme (which the road uniforms particularly emphasized) and a monogram on their caps (as opposed to a logo like the Astros had). The Astros' jerseys were plain, the Brewers' had piping on the home and road. The only similarity is that they both featured navy blue and gold, but that's like saying the Red Sox look similar to the Cardinals because they have the same basic color scheme.

[tBBP]

 

 

On 11/18/2019 at 7:31 PM, packerfan21396 said:

 

On 11/18/2019 at 6:44 PM, Andrew_Gamer_NZP said:

 

Now that I've gotten a good look at all this, for my way-after-the-fact 0.02, I'll say this: I don't hate it. In fact, overall I really like it. Because I have a bit of a different perspective than many, I can say this: the identity projected by this new brand actually does a pretty good job of marrying up with the identity, at least from my perspective, of Milwaukee, what with the cream color, somewhat artsy and yet still "vintage" type of vibe. (Side bar: Milwaukee might yet be my favorite city, from a visual standpoint, to drive through, but I have yet to actually get out and explore it for more than an hour or so.)  I think they've now found a tangible, unique identity that they can own for a long, long time now.

 

Now, the nitpicks:

 

- Others have mentioned it, and I too agree: the mismatching sleeve cuff trims are too much. If they insisted on doing this, the way it's done on the gray aways should have carried through the rest of the set (give or take the pinstripes).

 

- I do wish they hadn't gone with such a dark blue--this navy actually appears darker than their former one to me--bcuz I do wish they had found more of a medium ground. While we're on the subject of blue, if they were bent on shoehorning Royal blue into this identity, I really believe they could have effectively worked it all the way into their full identity a la the orange in the 1997-2012 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. One possible way: take this key line effect...

 

On 11/18/2019 at 6:46 PM, HereComesThax said:

 

...and apply it to the numbers--or, in the case of the navy alt tops, the key lines a la the old Carmelo-era Denver Nuggets third: 

 

 

 

That was the best shot of that road script I could find in phone, but looking at it, it looks both fresh and old at the same time. I actually like how different it is from the rest of the system. Speaking of type, this might be my favorite part:

 

On 11/19/2019 at 9:33 AM, 8BW14 said:

 

If what someone said a few pages back is true and these forma were in fact inspires by the shape of beer barrels, then this becomes one of my favorite inspirations of recent years. At least it isn't just hackneyed for hackneyed's sake like so many other letter and number forms that I've seen in recent years.

 

All in all, I give it a solid B. At the very least, they (and their fans) have some solidarity in their look now. Don't jack it up! (I am kinda curious to see what maybe a Friday night powder blue alternate set would look like...I think the San Diego Padres just upped the ante for the entire MLB with what they just pulled off for their away sets.)

 

[Carolingian Steamroller]

I kinda wish the pinstripes were the primary home and the cream uniform the alternate/fauxback. That'd ease my OCD with regards to the sleeve trim. 

[tBBP]

Ideally (& again, outsider's perspective), I'd have liked to see them make the pinstripe set be something closer to columbia blue--not quite the vibrant powder blue many remember, but something more subtle--as a callback to the era from which this reimagined identity is an obvious callback, to be worn as like a Friday night home alt or something like that. Stuff like that is best used in limited doses, to keep it fresh. If it gets worn too often or all the time, it loses luster over time.

 

But that's just me.

[Gothamite]

7 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

This is 1972...

 

Those 1972 sleeves only work because the neck balances them out.  The new one looks unfinished, it desperately needs either neck or placket piping. 

[itsmb8]

29 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Those 1972 sleeves only work because the neck balances them out.  The new one looks unfinished, it desperately needs either neck or placket piping. 

if they brought back that neck piping I guarantee EVERYONE would be complaining about how the two are uneven.  

 

Speaking of which, im starting to get really pissed off at this site because a lot of these complaints are just NPFNPS aka nit-pick for nit-pick's sake.  

 

The home creams are honestly best as-is.  

[Gothamite]

13 minutes ago, itsmb8 said:

Speaking of which, im starting to get really pissed off at this site because a lot of these complaints are just NPFNPS aka nit-pick for nit-pick's sake.  

 

If you honestly think that, then this really might not be the place for you.  Details are important here.  Hell, details are all we talk about here. 

[McGlinchey23]

The Navy/Yellow color combo is gonna be a no from me dawg

 

[McCall]

1 minute ago, McGlinchey23 said:

The Navy/Yellow color combo is gonna be a no from me dawg

 

And somehow, we'll find a way to carry on. Dawg.

[L10nheart404]

58 minutes ago, itsmb8 said:

if they brought back that neck piping I guarantee EVERYONE would be complaining about how the two are uneven.  

 

Speaking of which, im starting to get really pissed off at this site because a lot of these complaints are just NPFNPS aka nit-pick for nit-pick's sake.  

 

The home creams are honestly best as-is.  

That's honestly my take. I actually think these are very tasteful and can't find anything to complain about... But as soon as I get on this site, I see the weirdest little nitpicks that have nothing to do with the overall presentation. 

[L10nheart404]

16 hours ago, Gothamite said:

 

If you honestly think that, then this really might not be the place for you.  Details are important here.  Hell, details are all we talk about here. 

It's not so much the details. It's the fact that people are crapping on a beautiful uniform because one little thing doesn't fit their personal preference. It's ok because we're all entitled to our opinions. But c'mon. If anyone really thinks this is a bad uniform set, you're just a hard person to please

[MN Wilkings]

4 hours ago, Buc said:

 

 

 

 

Now that I've gotten a good look at all this, for my way-after-the-fact 0.02, I'll say this: I don't hate it. In fact, overall I really like it. Because I have a bit of a different perspective than many, I can say this: the identity projected by this new brand actually does a pretty good job of marrying up with the identity, at least from my perspective, of Milwaukee, what with the cream color, somewhat artsy and yet still "vintage" type of vibe. (Side bar: Milwaukee might yet be my favorite city, from a visual standpoint, to drive through, but I have yet to actually get out and explore it for more than an hour or so.)  I think they've now found a tangible, unique identity that they can own for a long, long time now.

 

Now, the nitpicks:

 

- Others have mentioned it, and I too agree: the mismatching sleeve cuff trims are too much. If they insisted on doing this, the way it's done on the gray aways should have carried through the rest of the set (give or take the pinstripes).

 

- I do wish they hadn't gone with such a dark blue--this navy actually appears darker than their former one to me--bcuz I do wish they had found more of a medium ground. While we're on the subject of blue, if they were bent on shoehorning Royal blue into this identity, I really believe they could have effectively worked it all the way into their full identity a la the orange in the 1997-2012 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. One possible way: take this key line effect...

 

 

...and apply it to the numbers--or, in the case of the navy alt tops, the key lines a la the old Carmelo-era Denver Nuggets third: 

 

 

 

That was the best shot of that road script I could find in phone, but looking at it, it looks both fresh and old at the same time. I actually like how different it is from the rest of the system. Speaking of type, this might be my favorite part:

 

 

If what someone said a few pages back is true and these forma were in fact inspires by the shape of beer barrels, then this becomes one of my favorite inspirations of recent years. At least it isn't just hackneyed for hackneyed's sake like so many other letter and number forms that I've seen in recent years.

 

All in all, I give it a solid B. At the very least, they (and their fans) have some solidarity in their look now. Don't jack it up! (I am kinda curious to see what maybe a Friday night powder blue alternate set would look like...I think the San Diego Padres just upped the ante for the entire MLB with what they just pulled off for their away sets.)

 

The first thing I thought of with the Milwaukee script was Milwaukee Tools. I had to look up theirs logo since I wasn’t very familiar with it. Both scripts don’t have loops on the l and k. And both have two flat portions on the tops on the e’s. I realize there are many differences, but I can see now why I thought of Milwaukee Tools right away. 

[zigbazah]

I'd rather have no neck piping than uneven piping.