Milwaukee Brewers 2020 Logo/Uniforms

[Gothamite]

Well, he’s not wrong. 

 

Truth be told, I could have accepted some small changes to the logo.  

 

Just not what they gave us, which doesn’t improve the design but downgrades it. 

[itsmb8]

On 11/30/2019 at 11:19 PM, BellaSpurs said:

Why wouldn’t it be? Why have two white jerseys when one is much superior.

 

TBH, to me its more like a fauxback uniform than part of the main mix.  Everyone loves the pinstripes that they had to include it, but i think most would grow tired of it if it was the main uniform.

[MilSox]

Yea, I think they really overestimated the popularity of the pinstripes themselves.  People bought those jerseys because it had the "right" logo and the Cheers jerseys were so terrible, not because they loved pinstripes so much.

I have a good feeling the cream jerseys will emerge as the primary.  The color is incredibly popular in Milwaukee right now, as it should be.

[Gothamite]

The cream jerseys are already the primaries.  Pinstripes are the alt, and one I suspect will stay mostly in the closet. 

[-Akronite-]

On 12/1/2019 at 3:23 PM, GFB said:

Twitter thread on why the new BiG logo is a BIG downgrade

 

 

 

 

This is a great breakdown for an argument I don't agree with. Overall I think it's a fairly lateral move. I see the case made but the new one looks more like a glove to me, I prefer the baseball looking like a baseball, and it makes more sense to me to have it centered. The old version, to me, looks a little wonky and retro in comparison. Both work and I'm fine with the change, but it's nice to see WHY others feel differently.

[GFB]

2 hours ago, -Akronite- said:

 

This is a great breakdown for an argument I don't agree with. Overall I think it's a fairly lateral move. I see the case made but the new one looks more like a glove to me, I prefer the baseball looking like a baseball, and it makes more sense to me to have it centered. The old version, to me, looks a little wonky and retro in comparison. Both work and I'm fine with the change, but it's nice to see WHY others feel differently.

 

To be fair, they could have made all the other changes you enjoy but left the ball in the same position and you could have the best of both worlds. 

 

 

It seems like a pretty pointless change to me, but if you can come up with a logical reason for centering the ball then I'd love to hear it.

 

[-Akronite-]

3 hours ago, GFB said:

 

To be fair, they could have made all the other changes you enjoy but left the ball in the same position and you could have the best of both worlds. 

 

 

It seems like a pretty pointless change to me, but if you can come up with a logical reason for centering the ball then I'd love to hear it.

 

 

This also looks nice. I don't have any strong negative feelings toward any of the BiG logos. In terms of an argument for centering the ball... So that it's centered I guess? The original makes for a fairly odd looking "b," so they adjusted it. 

[Gothamite]

But in doing so, they mis-centered the ball on the logo.  It used to be balanced in the center of the logo, now it draws too much focus to the bottom.  Just as Doric columns are tapered at the top, because if they were perfectly straight they would look top-heavy.  It’s all about balance, and this breaks the perfect balance the old one had. 

 

It’s bad design.  Don’t take my word for it, just ask the Dodgers’ in-house artist:

 

 

That’s what you end up with, when the owner’s kids get to run the design process.

[CS85]

I'm just gonna straightup say it - I like the new BiG more than the old one.  It looks tighter.  Brewers overall look better.

[JayMac]

16 minutes ago, CS85 said:

I'm just gonna straightup say it - I like the new BiG more than the old one.  It looks tighter.  Brewers overall look better.

I still prefer royal blue over navy but I like the navy and gold look as well. The changes to the BiG, although unnecessary, don't bother me too much.

[dbofox]

1 hour ago, CS85 said:

I'm just gonna straightup say it - I like the new BiG more than the old one.  It looks tighter.  Brewers overall look better.

I completely agree. As a designer I get some of the quirkiness of the original but I prefer the ball centered with the traditional thread look.  As I did love the Royal and Athletic Gold look Navy is a great look. Ever since SF switched to their cream look for their home set I thought how it made too much sense for Milwaukee to have that look. I think the cream looks better with Navy than Royal.  

 

And when talking number font it's not even close how much better the new font is compared to the Times New Roman.  I know that's not the BiG discussion, but it's just such an improvement. Love nearly everything about the new set. Not sure I'm sold on the Milwaukee Tool font on the Blue jersey yet.

[gosioux76]

16 hours ago, Gothamite said:

But in doing so, they mis-centered the ball on the logo.  It used to be balanced in the center of the logo, now it draws too much focus to the bottom.  Just as Doric columns are tapered at the top, because if they were perfectly straight they would look top-heavy.  It’s all about balance, and this breaks the perfect balance the old one had. 

 

It’s bad design.  Don’t take my word for it, just ask the Dodgers’ in-house artist:

 

 

That’s what you end up with, when the owner’s kids get to run the design process.

 

I see where you're coming from, but I've got to tell you - I never noticed, until just now, that the ball was previously centered to the logo and not to the "b." And now that i see it, i actually think it looks off in the original. All I see now is one logo with a wonky looking "b" and the new logo with a much cleaner, more balanced "b." I don't see the ball for its placement in the whole; I see the ball for its placement within that single letter.

 

Chalk it up to a matter of preference, I suppose. I'm not a designer, so I'm not the guy to judge what's "good design" vs. "bad design," but the relocation of the ball in this logo is just fine by me. 

[Gothamite]

29 minutes ago, gosioux76 said:

I see where you're coming from, but I've got to tell you - I never noticed, until just now, that the ball was previously centered to the logo and not to the "b." And now that i see it, i actually think it looks off in the original. All I see now is one logo with a wonky looking "b" and the new logo with a much cleaner, more balanced "b."

 

So what do you think about this strange angle, where the balanced "b" suddenly becomes unbalanced for no reason?

 

 

If balancing the blue area around the ball was important, then why this strange angle here?  Why does it suddenly narrow on the top?

I really want to like this design, but it's just not good.

[gosioux76]

6 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

So what do you think about this strange angle, where the balanced "b" suddenly becomes unbalanced for no reason?

 

 

If balancing the blue area around the ball was important, then why this strange angle here?  Why does it suddenly narrow on the top?

I really want to like this design, but it's just not good.

 

Maybe this is the moment where I hand in my logo critic card for good, because I never noticed any strange angle, and now that I see it, I don't really care. 

 

Not saying you shouldn't care, of course. You're a Brewers die-hard, so I can appreciate your struggles with this change. But as an observer without a dog in the fight, it feels like we're going out of our way to find reasons to dislike this. 

[Gothamite]

 

Quote

But as an observer without a dog in the fight, it feels like we're going out of our way to find reasons to dislike this. 

 

I respect that, but the reality is exactly the opposite.  I desperately want to like this, since we’re stuck with it, but it violates basic design principles. 

 

And it’s ironic, considering I didn’t particularly want them to bring back the ball in glove, and it’s never been my favorite Brewers logo. Not even at the time.  But if we’re going to bring it back, bring it back.  Don’t let the owner’s kids re-design and ruin it. 

[-Akronite-]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

 

So what do you think about this strange angle, where the balanced "b" suddenly becomes unbalanced for no reason?

 

 

If balancing the blue area around the ball was important, then why this strange angle here?  Why does it suddenly narrow on the top?

I really want to like this design, but it's just not good.

 

The circle doesn't do enough for me to understand what you're referencing. What's the weird angle I'm supposed to see?

 

Also, how is the ball centered on the old logo? Left to right or top to bottom? I'm not seeing that either in comparison.

[Gothamite]

The ball used to be closer to the center of the whole logo.  Now it’s way too low, and as the only white left pulls focus too far downward. 

 

The weird angle is when people complain about the circular strike of the “b” not having been of consistent thickness all around, but don’t mind that it’s still not of consistent thickness all around.  Which is fine, but just don’t pretend that was a problem that needed fixing. 

[OnWis97]

Is my opinion that the more obvious looking stitching is an improvement over the elongated "s" an unpopular one?  To me that's the best part of the updated logo.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

On 12/4/2019 at 1:43 PM, Gothamite said:

The weird angle is when people complain about the circular strike of the “b” not having been of consistent thickness all around, but don’t mind that it’s still not of consistent thickness all around.

 

It sure looks to me like the circular part of the b is now of a consistent thickness all around.  Even with your circle I don't see any difference.  Maybe I would if I took out a ruler and measured it; but that's not how we experience logos.  If it looks good to the naked eye, it's right, even if unnaturally close examination would reveal a flaw.

The more I look at this update of the ball-in-glove logo, the more satisfying it becomes, and the more out-of-kilter the old one feels.  The centred ball, the more realstic stitching on the ball, and the straightening of the lines separating the fingers in the m, all of these constitute significant improvements.

[kroywen]

I actually think the new ball-in-glove logo is a huge upgrade. I never noticed how off-kilter the ball in the old logo looked, but centering it within the "b" is a significant upgrade. Also prefer the cleaner, crisper look of the webbing.

 

If it weren't for the completely unnecessary, and rather ugly, serifs on the wordmark, that also wind up throwing off how the workmark is centered on the jersey, this would be an almost perfect rebrand. The wordmark really drags down the entire set though. And I loathe the trend toward serifs on the names-on-back of jerseys. Hated it on the Padres, Astros, and now Brewers.

 

Kill the serifs and this is a really good rebrand.