Now that the Brewers and Padres are "fixed," which MLB team is next?

[MEANS]

Rangers/Angels/Mariners/Twins/Braves/Indians/Marlins/Rays/Nationals

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

9 minutes ago, seasaltvanilla said:

The TC is a far superior logo to the M.

 

Even putting aside the TC logo's annoying illogic (in that the team did not ultimately have the name "Twin Cities Twins", which is where the TC came from), that logo looks terrible on a cap.  Whereas the M reflects the actual initial of the team's locality designation; and, furthermore, it harmonises beautifully with the home wordmark from that set.

By every conceivable measure, the M is a better cap logo.  The TC looks just fine on the sleeve.

[coco1997]

27 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

In the past few years, we have had what are, to some extent, modernisations of designs from the teams' histories.  We have seen this happen with the Mets, Orioles, Blue Jays, and Astros, and now with the Padres and Brewers.  This is truly a wonderful period.

 

The teams that most need to follow this good example are the Angels and the Twins.

 

The Angels should grasp that this is their best and most memorable design:

 

          

 

...in terms of the wordmark, the cap design, and the cap logo.

 

This is what I'm hoping the Angels will do, as well. I'd also like to see athletic gold emphasized in the Angels' next redesign. Red and gold would be a distinctive look among the rest of the league. 

[DC in Da House w/o a Doubt]

The Diamondbacks need to be "fixed".  In our lifetime I think they'll eventually do an Astros/Blue Jays/Padres/Brewers esque full time throwback to their 90's/early 00's look.

 

That's the biggest one jumping out for me.  Ideally maybe the Marlins go back to a retro inspired look eventually too, but I dont think itll be any time soon.  The current Rays I can live with, although I can see them changing in the near future.

 

Also maybe the Nats because they don't have a clear cohesive identity anymore.  Way too many jerseys and hats.  I would argue that since the time that selling jerseys became a thing, we were the first team in history where you couldn't buy the jersey that the team wore in the WS in the team store (or online for that matter).  To me, that's a problem.  Stick to a specific look and try to own it.  

[The_Admiral]

I am so stuck when it comes to the Angels.

 

CASE FOR NAVY CAPS AND UNDERSHIRTS: there's no question that it objectively looks the best; it brings the trim, scripts, names, and numbers into relief; more than any of that it allows the monogram to be clearly seen against the crown of the hat, which seems like the most critical design point of a baseball uniform

CASE AGAINST: too much navy and red as it is, makes them look like a bunch of other teams, they've been aping the Red Sox in particular from day one

 

CASE FOR RED CAPS AND UNDERSHIRTS: maximum contrast with the Dodgers, which is important

CASE AGAINST: the Big A gets lost, I dunno they already look too much like the Cardinals anyway

 

"no question that it objectively looks the best" would settle the debate with any other team, but in a photo finish I have to go with sticking to maximum red.

[Sportscenter]

Hopefully it's the Rockies. But let's be honest they won't and we'll be stuck if their disasters until hopefully maybe new owners buy the team and change them. 

[chcarlson23]

2 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Even putting aside the TC logo's annoying illogic (in that the team did not ultimately have the name "Twin Cities Twins", which is where the TC came from), that logo looks terrible on a cap.  Whereas the M reflects the actual initial of the team's locality designation; and, furthermore, it harmonises beautifully with the home wordmark from that set.

By every conceivable measure, the M is a better cap logo.  The TC looks just fine on the sleeve.

Not necessarily... The M logo has that awful little underline on it, and it has a really wacky structure to it. The way the shoulders of the M sit on each other is pretty bad. It's a little cheesy, and oddly designed. It looks like it was made for the 80's and that's where it belongs. 

 

The TC has good structure and a nice flourish on the letters to not be boring, but not be overly complex. It fits wonderfully on a hat, along with other dual-letter monograms. It's up there with the Yankees, Mets, and Dodgers. It's too good to not use as a cap logo. The management might have a few things wrong about the uniforms, but keeping the TC is not one of them. 

[coco1997]

2 hours ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

The Diamondbacks need to be "fixed".  In our lifetime I think they'll eventually do an Astros/Blue Jays/Padres/Brewers esque full time throwback to their 90's/early 00's look.

 

That's the biggest one jumping out for me.  Ideally maybe the Marlins go back to a retro inspired look eventually too, but I dont think itll be any time soon.  The current Rays I can live with, although I can see them changing in the near future.

 

Also maybe the Nats because they don't have a clear cohesive identity anymore.  Way too many jerseys and hats.  I would argue that since the time that selling jerseys became a thing, we were the first team in history where you couldn't buy the jersey that the team wore in the WS in the team store (or online for that matter).  To me, that's a problem.  Stick to a specific look and try to own it.  

 

If the D-Backs ever do decide to return to their original look, I think they need to simplify the color scheme. Purple, turquoise, black and copper is just too much. Maybe drop the black and switch from copper to sand. There were too many dark, muted colors competing with one another in that identity.

 

Another possibility would be to find a middle ground between purple and Sedona red and go with a magenta type shade.  

[_DietDrPepper_]

Indians, Angels, Rangers, Mariners, Phillies, Rockies. In that order.

[McGlinchey23]

I dont know how the Angels aren’t rocking a yellow halo on their hat. That would be so perfect

[monkeypower]

6 hours ago, the admiral said:

CASE AGAINST: too much navy and red as it is, makes them look like a bunch of other teams, they've been aping the Red Sox in particular from day one

 

This has been my reason for being against the Angels switching to blue. There's already so many blue and red teams, or even just blue based teams in the MLB. Heck, the Angels would make the third navy hat and the fourth blue based team out of five in their own division if they switched.

 

I'd rather them continue to own the red on red instead of looking like discount Boston.

[shstpt1]

I kinda wish the Angels would go back to having the sleeveless jerseys with red undershirts. That look, even though some don't like the sleeveless jerseys, was a fairly good look and helped set them apart from other red teams. 

[B-Rich]

On 11/19/2019 at 8:49 PM, coco1997 said:

Agreed 100%. It’s crazy to me that the Rockies have remained almost completely unchanged over the past 25 years while the other three ‘90s expansions teams have each undergone multiple dramatic redesigns.

 

Motion seconded.

 

And please get rid of that lame uninspired "CR" Hat. 

 

[-Akronite-]

On 11/20/2019 at 2:17 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Even putting aside the TC logo's annoying illogic (in that the team did not ultimately have the name "Twin Cities Twins", which is where the TC came from), that logo looks terrible on a cap.  Whereas the M reflects the actual initial of the team's locality designation; and, furthermore, it harmonises beautifully with the home wordmark from that set.

By every conceivable measure, the M is a better cap logo.  The TC looks just fine on the sleeve.

 

You're obviously entitled to your opinion but I disagree strongly.

 

First, the TC looks great. It's a simple and unique emblem (I realize the wishbone C within it is most certainly NOT unique). It has a long history with the team and simply makes a good cap. TC for Twin Cities works well enough and is a nice quirk rather than a irksome one IMO. You don't need to say "Twin Cities Twins" because it's not a TCT logo.

 

Second, the M just doesn't work for me. It looks lower case even compared to similar script logos. I don't mind the little underline beneath it but obviously some people take issue with that as well. It just feels lazy, and not in a classic way.

 

 

 

As for the Angels, I would agree with the sentiment that the navy look is too similar to too many teams. The red on red with navy accents works well for me, but it's a bit redundant. They'd likely not go for it, but I'd suggest dropping navy entirely and taking the gold from the old halo and making that the accent color.

[PoppersPop]

I'd like to see the Rangers do something so they can settle on whether they're a RED team or a BLUE team. I don't think they need to start from scratch, but just a clean-up would work.

 

The Mariners would be cool to lean into the teal since they're the last team still using it. 

 

There's too much red and not enough contrast in the Angels' look. Gold and red would be a nice move to help differentiate them.

 

But overall, Cleveland needs to figure out what they're gonna do instead of treading water.

[MilSox]

The Rockies need to drop black and just be a purple and white team.  Maybe with silver and/or cream trim, but black does nothing for them but muddy up a look that would otherwise have them standing out. 

[coco1997]

Quick idea for a “neo-retro” Angels design using the red and gold color scheme:

 

[MilSox]

Red and gold for the Angels comes up a lot on this site.  I'm not sure if I actually like it, or I'm forcing myself to like it because I feel someone "should" have those colors.

I always felt like as long as the Red Sox don't want to wear something closer to what they did in 1975 with the red crowns, blue bill, and blue monogram; the Angels could definitely pull something like that off.

[sportsfan7]

The Twins have definitely been all over the place recently

[Tygers09]

On 11/20/2019 at 2:17 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Even putting aside the TC logo's annoying illogic (in that the team did not ultimately have the name "Twin Cities Twins", which is where the TC came from), that logo looks terrible on a cap.  Whereas the M reflects the actual initial of the team's locality designation; and, furthermore, it harmonises beautifully with the home wordmark from that set.

By every conceivable measure, the M is a better cap logo.  The TC looks just fine on the sleeve.

*sighs- oh boy...*