Jump to content

MLB 2021


SportsLogos.Net News
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Arizona's Sedona red and the old Astros' brick red don't count?

 

I would argue no! The DBacks' red is much closer perceptually to the Red Sox/Angels red than it is to, say, the dark red of the hockey team they share a state with.

 

One thing I've liked about Cleveland's recent turn toward the block C cap is that, without a white outline, it does make the hat feel darker as-is. But you might as well formalize that in the color scheme, particularly so that carries over in other elements of the design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, MG3 said:

They should change to the Cleveland Rocks.  Ready-made theme song, and a nod to the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame.

 

Having a team called the "Rockies" and another team called the "Rocks" in the same league, especially when the former team are often called the "Rox" for short, would certainly lead to lots of confusion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, coco1997 said:

 

Having a team called the "Rockies" and another team called the "Rocks" in the same league, especially when the former team are often called the "Rox" for short, would certainly lead to lots of confusion. 

They could differentiate by adding a color to their names... the White Rox or the Red Rox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

They could differentiate by adding a color to their names... the White Rox or the Red Rox.

I was waiting for someone to make precisely this argument. I can't pin down the exact reasoning but I think there's much more differentiation between "White Sox" and "Red Sox" than there is between "Rocks" and "Rockies." It has something to do with the latter two being morphological derivations of exactly the same word. When you introduce the color element, there's an extra layer of distinction. I find that even the "Reds" and "Red Sox" are more distinct sounding.

 

Having teams named "Rockies" and "Rocks" both in MLB would be awkward and bizarre. I can't imagine it getting any traction as far as the Cleveland renaming goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2020 at 4:15 PM, Ark said:

 

I totally agree. They essentially function as the Cleveland Baseball Team but unlike Washington there is nothing unique or interesting about their current identity in any way.

 

Cleveland Spiders would be great using the eight legs theme.

Cleveland has always been my second team behind the Cubs since they are in the AL and I think its time to move on to a new name, logo and maybe colors.  I am in favor of the Spiders.  Going logoless as the Cleveland Indians is bland and sucks.  It has a Washington football team feel.  Its not that hard, just get it done Dolan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worth noting: new Mets owner Steve Cohen asked Mets fans on Twitter: "I would love to hear your ideas to make YOUR Mets experience better.

 

At least one fan requested, among other ideas, for the Mets to bring back the black jerseys.  Cohen's reply: "All reasonable thoughts"

 

And despite how they're perceived on this forum, there has been growing fan & player support in recent years for the Mets to bring them back. As long as it's just an occasional alternate (and none of the extra drop shadows on every other jersey) then I'm all for it.  Nothing wrong with nostalgia + increased sales revenue.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait for 10 years from now: "The Mets wear the black jerseys way too often and should just be orange and blue".

 

Which hat was/is more popular...the black with blue, or the all black? I think I liked the all-black (one color hats appeal to me more than two-tones), but the blue-brimmed hat wasn't awful. 

 

I'd also be ok with Steve bringing the racing stripes back for mid-week day games. 

 

A black alternate using the 1987 New York cursive script might be kinda cool, too. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In MLB The Show what I did in my franchise season was have a retro Saturday each month and alternated between the 80s racing stripes and the late 90s/early 2000's black. I think as long as you don't overuse them, you can run with both to cash in on some nostalgia for both the fans that want to relive 86 and the younger fans with fond memories of the 99 and 2000 runs.

 

As for the Indians, I'm not as fond as the color change idea as some of you are. This board has a little too much of a knack for #UFUS, or Unique for Unique's Sake. Sure there's a few navy and red teams in the AL. But Cleveland's had it for a much longer time than the other teams who ran with it. When they change their name they shouldn't be forced to change colors just because the Minnesota Twins came along and took the same colors they were using. And the color combo works! Even with a name change they aren't going to flush away all the history the franchise has, so I don't think it's a good idea to use that as an excuse to go off the board with colors. You want purple? Have the Rockies finally make that overdue change instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WSU151 said:

A black alternate using the 1987 New York cursive script might be kinda cool, too. 

 

 

While I don't know if I'd like to see that as an on-field option, that's a pretty good suggestion that I'm surprised hasn't been done yet.

 

I'm not a fan of scripts when it's two words "new" "york", but there was something cool about that one - as opposed to the version with the tail, which was a total disaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

While I don't know if I'd like to see that as an on-field option, that's a pretty good suggestion that I'm surprised hasn't been done yet.

 

I'm not a fan of scripts when it's two words "new" "york", but there was something cool about that one - as opposed to the version with the tail, which was a total disaster.

 

Looking a what cap coloration, I think that you would need a drop-shadow or there is not enough contrast (and for consistency purposes, you would need to add a drop shadow to the jersey script as well).

 

Could this work/be acceptable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, logo-maker said:

 

Looking a what cap coloration, I think that you would need a drop-shadow or there is not enough contrast (and for consistency purposes, you would need to add a drop shadow to the jersey script as well).

 

Could this work/be acceptable?

 

I would expect it to be colored like their other black ones were - blue script, white outline, orange shadow.  They could also do a gray script with blue outline and orange shadow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gothamite said:

Ugh.

 

Let a bad idea lie dead long enough, and somebody will be nostalgic for it.  We saw that with the 80s, and now we’ll see it with those hideous black Mets uniforms.  

 

you can go back on my posts and see i have long railed against the black uniforms. but truthfully, it was never really about the all black alternate jersey/hat. it was the way black overtook the entire look, particularly how the hybrid hat completely pushed the blue hat out of the rotation, how the black dropshadow muddled the graphics, and how the black socks/sleeves/socks muted their entire look.

 

i was a teenager during the '99 and 2000 runs, so the black uniforms have a certain nostalgic appeal to me. the biggest thing is that if they want to bring back the black then do it on friday nights at home only.

 

i would also recommend the uni gets a few tweaks:

 

-all black hat gets a blue brim

-keep the regular skyline patch (not the black version of it) on the sleeve

- and re-work or just ditch the piping.

-wear blue sleeves/socks/accessories with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gothamite said:

Ugh.

 

Let a bad idea lie dead long enough, and somebody will be nostalgic for it.  We saw that with the 80s, and now we’ll see it with those hideous black Mets uniforms.  

I agree. I detest those black Mets' uniforms and I'm shocked to see fans clamoring to bring them back. I really don't understand the inclination. Is it because fans think they look sharp or because they carry Mike Piazza nostalgia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2020 at 10:09 PM, Gothamite said:

I actually think the NCAA has the right approach; it’s a matter of intellectual property.  A people have the right to determine their own representation and own their own symbols. In the case of the Seminoles, the University was able to come to an agreement with the three tribes to license the name.  And they pay for it. When you have a generic name like Cleveland does, you need to license it from the representatives of the largest possible number of people. So again, we’re back to the NCAI, unless there’s another entity I’m not aware of that should be in the conversation.

 

What if "Indians" is too vague to be intellectual property? What if not every proper noun in the English language can be someone's intellectual property?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CS85 locked this topic
  • CS85 unlocked this topic
  • CS85 locked and unlocked this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.