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

[Eastport76]

-Rays: Their current identify is absolutely boring. I don't understand why they keep this for decades. they should bring their gradient Devil Rays uniforms back. Just drop the "Devil".  The gilding ray cap is much better than lame "TB" cap. The gradient uniform is even popular with fans and it' very unique compared to others.

 

-Rangers: I hate their all current uniforms except the blue alternate. Just bring the star badge logo and Ryan-era uniforms back. But I had a unpopular opinion, please get rid of current font and bring 70s look back. I loved it.

 

-Reds: DROP BLACK. NOW.

 

-Mariners: I liked their unique teal-navy scheme, but their uniforms looks very outdated compared to others. Just update the font and cap Logo or bring the trident look back. 

 

-Phillies: A just another commonly red/blue team. Drop the red and blue and replace with a more unique scheme, maroon and azul. 

 

[Reyes47]

I hate them 

 

I hate the yellow and brown. It just looks ugly. Worst combination of colors. There’s a reason the only american sports team to incorporate brown into their jerseys is the one team named after the colors 

 

Also dislike the bright yellow and blue of the Brewers. Literally everyone is jumping on that bandwagon. Pitt, Rams and now the Brewers. Except this is the biggest offense because navy and gold fit the brewers really well. The logo looked like an old beer logo and the gold like wheat. the only reason people prefer the baseball glove logo is because of the ‘hidden’ MB. Certainly doesn’t help that the logo blends into the dark blue hat. I don’t mind the pin stripes though

[selgy]

When the Rays re-branded in 2008 they needed simplicity and a color scheme that would be easy to shop for/fill in the crowd after 2 previous uniforms that consisted of the purple/rainbow gradient, then the dark Green/Navy/Black.  

Navy in baseball is very traditional and when 3 other teams in the AL east have blue as a primary color, it helped with blending in with the fans. 

Luckily for the Rays ownership, the 2008 AL champioship team happened and the new merch sold like hotcakes int he Bay area. 

Going to the Trop and seeing the rays play on the road (I've seen them play in 17 road stadiums to date), I am seeing more Rays fans rocking the old (updated) gradient look and or light blue. 

From a merchandising and uniqueness standpoint I think the updated gradient is so unique and allows it to be worn with any hat, jeans, etc and I think (and hope) that the next Rays uniform will be based on that.  

[Dynasty]

On 11/29/2019 at 12:26 AM, Reyes47 said:

Also dislike the bright yellow and blue of the Brewers. Literally everyone is jumping on that bandwagon. Pitt, Rams and now the Brewers. Except this is the biggest offense because navy and gold fit the brewers really well. The logo looked like an old beer logo and the gold like wheat. the only reason people prefer the baseball glove logo is because of the ‘hidden’ MB. Certainly doesn’t help that the logo blends into the dark blue hat. I don’t mind the pin stripes though

 

I wouldn't call it a bandwagon. They're just bringing back colors that they have used in the past before. Blue and yellow are part of their history. It's arguable, but I think some people would agree that navy and metallic gold were trendy 2000's colors. Now that was jumping on the bandwagon.

[Reyes47]

31 minutes ago, Dolphins Dynasty said:

 

I wouldn't call it a bandwagon. They're just bringing back colors that they have used in the past before. Blue and yellow are part of their history. It's arguable, but I think some people would agree that navy and metallic gold were trendy 2000's colors. Now that was jumping on the bandwagon.

how was navy and gold trendy 2000s when plenty of teams used navy and gold before the 2000s? 

The trend is making things faux classic and bright colors. Just because it’s old doesn’t mean it wasn’t a trend or bandwagon 

Were Notre Dame, Georgia Tech and the Yankees trends from the 2000s?

[IceCap]

3 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

Were Notre Dame, Georgia Tech and the Yankees trends from the 2000s?

No, but the Brewers and Rams certainly were.

[Reyes47]

1 minute ago, Ice_Cap said:

No, but the Brewers and Rams certainly were.

Why? They’re the exact same colors 

If notre dame changed its colors to bright yellow and blue would you call that a band wagon?

[IceCap]

3 minutes ago, Reyes47 said:

Why? They’re the exact same colors 

If notre dame changed its colors to bright yellow and blue would you call that a band wagon?

Think of it like this.

The Raiders have had primarily black uniforms since the 1960s, right? Obviously they didn't hop on a bandwagon. That was just the team's colours. Then the Raiders, in the following decades, built a brand on the idea of the outlaw, the rebel, the rowdy fringes of acceptable society. They built that brand and so their primarily black uniforms became associated with that brand.

 

Then come the late 1980s, when marketing and merchandising is just starting to take off, you have a variety of teams opting to add black or switch to black. Black for black's sake, as that trend became known by, began to try and share a bit of that cultural association the Raiders had cultivated with their team's brand.

So when the Jacksonville Jaguars, in the 2000s, start emphasizing black over teal? That's very much jumping on a bandwagon, even if the Raiders pioneered it decades earlier.

[Reyes47]

41 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Think of it like this.

The Raiders have had primarily black uniforms since the 1960s, right? Obviously they didn't hop on a bandwagon. That was just the team's colours. Then the Raiders, in the following decades, built a brand on the idea of the outlaw, the rebel, the rowdy fringes of acceptable society. They built that brand and so their primarily black uniforms became associated with that brand.

 

Then come the late 1980s, when marketing and merchandising is just starting to take off, you have a variety of teams opting to add black or switch to black. Black for black's sake, as that trend became known by, began to try and share a bit of that cultural association the Raiders had cultivated with their team's brand.

So when the Jacksonville Jaguars, in the 2000s, start emphasizing black over teal? That's very much jumping on a bandwagon, even if the Raiders pioneered it decades earlier.

The jags didn’t focus on black in the 2000s that was the 2010s when they made black the primary. Funnily enough i saw people call the jags colors gimmicky 

 

Regardless if navy and gold work for notre dame i don’t see why they don’t work for the brewers or rams. 

 

So if the brewers and rams always wore navy and gold like notre dame would you care? And again if notre dame changed to bright yellow and blue what would you think?

[IceCap]

1 hour ago, Reyes47 said:

So if the brewers and rams always wore navy and gold like notre dame would you care? And again if notre dame changed to bright yellow and blue what would you think?

You ask a lot of hypotheticals.

[MilSox]

4 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

Regardless if navy and gold work for notre dame i don’t see why they don’t work for the brewers or rams. 

 

So if the brewers and rams always wore navy and gold like notre dame would you care? And again if notre dame changed to bright yellow and blue what would you think?

Because they're all completely different teams with completely different histories? 

 

4 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

So if the brewers and rams always wore navy and gold like notre dame would you care? And again if notre dame changed to bright yellow and blue what would you think?

If George Carlin's character in Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back gave a trucker a beej, why didn't his character in Cars do it?

[Reyes47]

1 minute ago, NicDB said:

Because they're all completely different teams with completely different histories? 

So if the rams and brewers always wore navy and gold you would be fine with it?

All i focus on is if it looks good. Imo i think the brewers and pitt’s navy’s and gold looked better than their new uniforms (Rams were mediocre). I really don’t care if they have more history with bright blue and yellow 

If a team wore pink and green for 60 years and decided to change it to colors that make sense would you say they should change it back?

[MilSox]

Not sure I can dignify the idea that history should be tossed out of the window just because something "looks good" with a response.

But my take on the Rams and Notre Dame?  I think royal and yellow looks better on a team playing in the Southern California sun, and I think navy and gold looks better on a team that plays in the rust belt under gray fall skies.

As far as the Brewers?  Gold objectively looked bad on a road gray uniform.  So much so that the Brewers usually wore an alternate on the road for the past few seasons.  I think royal and navy pair equally well with yellow.  But their closest rival wears royal, so I think navy was the right choice.

[Bobster]

When the Brewers were founded as the Pilots in 1969 contracting the rest of their division's colors really wasn't much of a concern -

 

California Angels - navy blue, red & gold

Chicago White Sox - navy blue & white

Kansas City Royals - royal blue & gold (also in their expansion year)

Minnesota Twins - navy blue  & red

Oakland Athletics - green & gold

 

Oakland was really the only team that strayed much from traditional colors (and they were ridiculed for it until they became consistent winners)

 

Later, in 1972 when the Senators moved to Texas and became the rangers the Brewers moved to the East and we had -

 

Baltimore Orioles - black & orange 

Boston Red Sox - navy blue & red

Cleveland Indians - navy blue & red

Detroit Tigers - navy blue & white (home)/orange (road)

New York Yankees - navy blue & white

 

And while I don't think branding and having unique colors withing the division was a big thing in 1972, they fit in well.

 

Suddenly, with the Brewers moving to the National league in 1998, having them share a color with the Chicago Cubs made this an issue for some reason, even though twenty years earlier they shared the same colors as another in-division expansion franchise and nobody cared?  I don't buy it.  I think it was more a case of the Brewers seeing an opportunity to rebrand and cash in on new colors and merchandise.

 

This all said, I am okay with the dark blue, as long as it's not a dark navy.  I would prefer royal blue, but I think the set turned out pretty well.

[Reyes47]

On 12/1/2019 at 12:39 AM, NicDB said:

But my take on the Rams and Notre Dame?  I think royal and yellow looks better on a team playing in the Southern California sun, and I think navy and gold looks better on a team that plays in the rust belt under gray fall skies.

Alright what about Pitt then? should they keep navy and gold because Pennsylvania is a rust belt state like Indiana? does the same go for Milwaukee Brewers? Let’s be real these are just changes to cash in on trends 

[MilSox]

Literally no one said teams weren't trying to cash in by changing their colors.  I just don't understand some of these arguments. Notre Dame and Navy are the most established navy and gold teams in college football.  Pitt has a history of playing both, now they're in the same conference with Notre Dame (sort of).  So it was a smart move to go back to royal and yellow.

The Brewers and Mariners play two time zones away from each other and never had a rivalry.  But I can definitely understand the desire to not look like the team 90 miles to the south.  Not sure why these teams shouldn't want to try and distinguish themselves from teams they play all the time.

[Reyes47]

1 hour ago, NicDB said:

Literally no one said teams weren't trying to cash in by changing their colors.  I just don't understand some of these arguments. Notre Dame and Navy are the most established navy and gold teams in college football.  Pitt has a history of playing both, now they're in the same conference with Notre Dame (sort of).  So it was a smart move to go back to royal and yellow.

No one thinks of Notre Dame or Navy when they think Pitt rivals. I guess FSU should change it’s colors because they play BC and Virginia or Florida or South Carolina and Georgia since they’re both red and blue. Minnesota and Wisconsin both wear red. Literally Alabama, Miss State, Texas AM and Arkansas all wear dark red and white/gray so I really don’t understand your problem with rivals wearing similar colors. 

Quote

The Brewers and Mariners play two time zones away from each other and never had a rivalry.  But I can definitely understand the desire to not look like the team 90 miles to the south.  Not sure why these teams shouldn't want to try and distinguish themselves from teams they play all the time.

Brewers looked nothing like Seattle. Seattle wears teal and navy how is that similar to navy and gold? Do the Bears and Dodgers need to change their colors?

[sportsfan7]

3 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

I guess FSU should change it’s colors because they play BC and Virginia or Florida or South Carolina and Georgia since they’re both red and blue. Minnesota and Wisconsin both wear red. Literally Alabama, Miss State, Texas AM and Arkansas all wear dark red and white/gray so I really don’t understand your problem with rivals wearing similar colors.

Minnesota wears maroon, Wisconsin wears red.

[chcarlson23]

 

3 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

No one thinks of Notre Dame or Navy when they think Pitt rivals. I guess FSU should change it’s colors because they play BC and Virginia or Florida or South Carolina and Georgia since they’re both red and blue. Minnesota and Wisconsin both wear red. Literally Alabama, Miss State, Texas AM and Arkansas all wear dark red and white/gray so I really don’t understand your problem with rivals wearing similar colors. 

Brewers looked nothing like Seattle. Seattle wears teal and navy how is that similar to navy and gold? Do the Bears and Dodgers need to change their colors?

If you said this anywhere within the border of Minnesota, you'd probably be dead... We literally say here better dead than red.

 

Miss State and Texas A&M are also maroon and not red. Also of all the other schools you list, only FSU and BC share colors. Everyone else is fairly unique in both shades and color usage. Get your colors straight...

 

And stop asking so many hypothetical questions... It's really annoying. 

[Discrim]

4 hours ago, Reyes47 said:

Brewers looked nothing like Seattle. Seattle wears teal and navy how is that similar to navy and gold?

Granted, the Brewers and Mariners didn't really look much like one another even for most of the time they both wore blue/gold...other than the Mariners' debut season, which coincided with the last season for the Brewers' pre-BiG uniforms.

 

For comparison, 1982.  Same colors, but you'd be hard pressed to mistake one for the other.