MLB 2021

[MCM0313]

On 5/14/2021 at 10:30 AM, upperV03 said:

The Hillsboro Hops (High-A affiliate of the Diamondbacks that plays ~15 minutes away from the Nike HQ) have slightly updated uniforms this year that look to be on the same template that we saw on a few Royals players during Spring Training. Notable features include a perforated mesh fabric, reinforced collar that sits on top of the placket, perforated numbers, and TPU sleeve patches and swooshes:

 

Their navy pullover jersey also has a really strange collar:

 

I think it is very likely that we’ll see something similar for the new Nike MLB template. Pretty nice overall, but not excited about the prospect of that collar on the navy pullover jersey becoming a regular thing.

Nike learned quickly that nobody wanted their toilet-seat collars in the NFL; maybe these will be similarly unpopular in MLB. 

[Marlins93]

I never understood why Arizona moved away from their early 2000s look. Another victim of the silly belief that it was "too 90s" perhaps?

[The_Admiral]

The Diamondbacks were in that terrible mid-2000s trend of having two different color schemes home and away. At home, they were purple and teal. On the road, they were black, purple, and copper. Hats didn't match, logos didn't match, jersey cuts didn't match (I think they were all-vests on the road by the end). They were a mess and needed to start from scratch. 

 

What a terrible time for baseball uniform design. I loved playing MVP Baseball 2005 but even then I always had to switch lots of uniforms to throwbacks.

[O.C.D]

6 hours ago, gosioux76 said:

 

I never really saw the addition of turquoise as a blending of eras, but more to your latter point, that it was a nod to the region's native population. That, to me, is a perfectly justifiable use of the color. Plus, turquoise and sedona red pair together nicely, and would make the Diamondbacks brand more distinct that can ever be as a primarily red and black team.

 

And unlike the D-Backs inaugural and World Series uniforms, they didn't hit you over the head with the novelty color. It's far more subtle. 

 

It baffles me why turquoise isn't part of their primary set

It's reminiscent of the old Grizzlies colors, but the shade of turquoise they chose is one of the lightest colors I've ever seen an MLB team use. It's almost a high lighter color, or day glow.

 

I think if the turquoise was closer to what the Grizzlies used to use it would look better

[BBTV]

For teams that don't have any placket trim, could Nike actually make pullovers for them and the players just pick and choose if they want buttons or not?  If there's no actual design difference, wouldn't that just be like the custom tailoring that some players already do?  Or do physical buttons - even if they're in the same color as the jersey - count as part of the design?

 

If 5 guys were wearing this jersey, and the other 4 were wearing the same thing but without buttons and a slit, would it count as a difference?  Even the neck trim would be identical.

 

[The_Admiral]

I would find it pretty distracting to have a mix-and-match of buttoned and pullover jerseys, especially on a team like the Dodgers or Yankees that never wore them the first time around. I'd prefer for all 30 teams to wear the same base jersey: no vests, no pullovers.

[coco1997]

@the admiral Are you unable to receive private messages? Trying to send you one. 

[BBTV]

1 hour ago, the admiral said:

I would find it pretty distracting to have a mix-and-match of buttoned and pullover jerseys, especially on a team like the Dodgers or Yankees that never wore them the first time around. I'd prefer for all 30 teams to wear the same base jersey: no vests, no pullovers.

 

Just askin if it's within the rules.  I'd consider it similar to how some QBs have the pockets sewn into the jerseys.  It's just tailoring that doesn't change the actual look (at least on paper.)

[DCarp1231]

Pullovers need to make a comeback. All 30 teams should have at least one pullover jersey in their set.

[BBTV]

I don't think that any team's pullover looked better than the button-down it replaced or that succeeded it.

[Quillz]

I've said before that I think if baseball started off with powder blue roads and pullovers, then wearing gray on the road and button-down jerseys would be the ones that feel out of place. I've never had an issue with either, I think both look fine. But historical perception is a big deal and I think that's a major reason a lot of people don't like pullovers. In fact, I think a lot of scripts work much better on pullovers since they won't be cut in half by the button-down.

[BadSeed84]

23 hours ago, Marlins93 said:

I never understood why Arizona moved away from their early 2000s look. Another victim of the silly belief that it was "too 90s" perhaps?

 

This is so easy to say in 2021 looking back on hindsight.

But yes Purple and teal were trendy 90s colors, by the mid 2000s most stuff in GENERAL was washing itself from those colors.

I worked at a movie theater and the railings to all the theaters were purple, they would repaint them all black by the late 2000s and replace other purple (and some real) aspects with a dark red.

[Bmac]

I'll never understand why anyone would want all 30 teams to look the same. The goal should be to have 30 well-designed brands that are unique and timeless.

 

This means some teams wearing "non-traditional" jersey cuts—be that pullovers, vests, etc.

 

The Yankees should never deviate from the classic pinstriped home uniforms. But the Athletics should embrace their unique brand and wear the yellow vests and pants as the road uniform full time. The Cardinals should never ditch the birds-on-bat mark. But the Astros should incorporate the rainbow guts design into their uniforms somehow. Perhaps a team like Toronto should wear pullovers full time.

 

Give me 30 unique visual identities, not 30 sets of white jerseys with the team nickname in script and gray jerseys with the city name in arched block.

[Marlins93]

1 hour ago, EddieJ1984 said:

 

This is so easy to say in 2021 looking back on hindsight.

But yes Purple and teal were trendy 90s colors, by the mid 2000s most stuff in GENERAL was washing itself from those colors.

I worked at a movie theater and the railings to all the theaters were purple, they would repaint them all black by the late 2000s and replace other purple (and some real) aspects with a dark red.

 

Well, I for one never subscribed to the belief that anything that the Marlins, Rays, Rockies, or Diamondbacks during their early years were wearing was "too 90s.,  at least in a negative sense. There was definitely a shift away from bold, unique colors like purple, lime green, and teal during the mid-2000s, but I think that was regrettable even in the moment it was occurring. 

 

The Rays had the weakest inaugural identity by far, mostly due to the gradient and wordmark, but their transition to the drab forest green look in the 00s was still disappointing. 

 

The 00s is undoubtedly my least favorite decade for MLB uniforms.

[MJWalker45]

18 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

Just askin if it's within the rules.  I'd consider it similar to how some QBs have the pockets sewn into the jerseys.  It's just tailoring that doesn't change the actual look (at least on paper.)

I think the rule would be all players wear the same design, all buttons or no buttons.  I think some players may request Nike just stitch the buttons on  a pullover that gives the impression it's a button down shirt.  

[BadSeed84]

2 hours ago, Marlins93 said:

 

Well, I for one never subscribed to the belief that anything that the Marlins, Rays, Rockies, or Diamondbacks during their early years were wearing was "too 90s.,  at least in a negative sense. There was definitely a shift away from bold, unique colors like purple, lime green, and teal during the mid-2000s, but I think that was regrettable even in the moment it was occurring. 

 

The Rays had the weakest inaugural identity by far, mostly due to the gradient and wordmark, but their transition to the drab forest green look in the 00s was still disappointing. 

 

The 00s is undoubtedly my least favorite decade for MLB uniforms.

 

I agree with you, especially compared to say the NBA and others, the MLB teams that did use purple and/or teal did it mostly good.

But almost every new decade see's teams trying to move away from what was once popular. The Rockies being the only team to have stuck with their look.
 

Alot of teams just now are moving away from the darkening (blue to navy mostly) trend of the late 90s/2000s with the Rams, Sabres now finally back to a nice blue.  Sadly the Brewers held onto their navy with their new look which is fantastic, but would be perfect if they went back to royal blue.

[Discrim]

On 4/26/2021 at 12:03 PM, Gothamite said:

 

The fetishism knows no bounds. 

 

Pretty soon they'll start issuing rank stripes/insignia to players based on seniority with the club.

And now I'm imagining Anthony Rizzo on deck, ordering the batboy to bring him his wartime epaulettes

[Marlins93]

Is anybody here talking about the New Era "Local Market" cap fiasco? They are quite literally the worst fashion cap concepts ever made and they are getting skewered on social media for it.

 

 

[jp1409]

2 minutes ago, Marlins93 said:

Is anybody here talking about the New Era "Local Market" cap fiasco? They are quite literally the worst fashion cap concepts ever made and they are getting skewered on social media for it.

 

 

 

Not even worth taking a dump in. As much as I loved New Era back in the days, I think time has come to consider the possibility of dropping them altogether. The current quality of their products is putrid, availability is definitely an issue and their fashion/spring training hats are laughable at best.

[Cujo]

My thoughts on all 30 of these hats