Minor/Independent/Collegiate League Baseball Logo/Uniform Changes

[tBBP]

Norwich has a significant Colonial and Revolutionary War history and is known for its harbor formed by the convergence of three rivers, which has long been associated with the shipping industry. But my bet is the new name will have something to do with Norwhich’s nickname, the Rose of New England, which, given that the team is working with Brandiose to develop the new identity, seems to lend itself to a logo with some sort of anthropomorphized flower swinging a thorn like a baseball bat.

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

Booooo.

 

1 hour ago, SportsLogos.Net News said:

There are 160 affiliated Minor League Baseball teams, and as of right now, 136 of them have unique, locally appropriate nicknames, which is the fun and morally correct stupid and cheesy thing to do.

 

Fixed that for you.

 

This change is particularly unfortunate because the Connecticut Tigers are an example of how a minor league team should be named and should be outfitted.  They look just like their parent club, and even feature a letter logo in the style of the parent club.

 

 

 

 

 

Not only do these guys look like professional ballplayers, but any observer could tell at a glance what organistation the team is affiliated with.  To dump this classic identity and look for some goofy local kitch is criminal.

[rams80]

15 minutes ago, Buc said:

 

 

 

 

/Checks Norwich's wikipedia page.

 

Quote

Costa Dillon (1953–) filmmaker, creator of Attack of the Killer Tomatoes.

 

.....

 

[Dynasty]

I sure can't wait for another adjective-noun name, with a logo that consists of an anthropomorphic object, grinding it's teeth with it's circular eyes close together.

[CaliforniaGlowin]

I disagree.  Having the same name as the parent club is boring and lazy to me.  Having a unique branding with a local connection is great if done correctly.  

[rams80]

5 minutes ago, CaliforniaGlowin said:

I disagree.  Having the same name as the parent club is boring and lazy to me.  Having a unique branding with a local connection is great if done correctly.  

 

And yet they rolled with Brandiose.

[MilSox]

10 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Booooo.

 

 

Fixed that for you.

 

This change is particularly unfortunate because the Connecticut Tigers are an example of how a minor league team should be named and should be outfitted.  They look just like their parent club, and even feature a letter logo in the style of the parent club.

 

 

 

 

 

Not only do these guys look like professional ballplayers, but any observer could tell at a glance what organistation the team is affiliated with.  To dump this classic identity and look for some goofy local kitch is criminal.

I think there's a little more nuance to these things. Some minor league cities offer themselves up to some truly great, time-tested identities (Buffalo Bisons, San Antonio Missions, Toledo Mud Hens, etc.).  But others are just better off adopting the parent club's identity or some sort of spin off.

The great thing about the Connecticut Tigers uniforms is that they don't actually say Tigers.  You can call them whatever you want and they can still look like this.

That said... another f-ing Brandiose rebrand?  I really wish they would stick with the Tigers identity.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

7 minutes ago, NicDB said:

I think there's a little more nuance to these things. Some minor league cities offer themselves up to some truly great, time-tested identities (Buffalo Bisons, San Antonio Missions, Toledo Mud Hens, etc.)

 

You are right about that; I shouldn't have oversimplified. I agree with all the examples you cited; and I would throw the Durham Bulls and the Indianapolis Indians into that set.  But that's about it.  The way I see it, the teams we mentioned count as exceptions; for the vast majority of minor league teams, being named after the parent club is the right move.

 

Furthermore, even a team with a unique nickname can look like its parent club.  When the Buffalo Bisons were affilliated with the White Sox, their uniforms looked like the White Sox.  When they were affilliated with the Indians, their uniforms looked like the Indians.

 

 

     

 

 

Now that they are affilliated with the Blue Jays, they have done specialty days in which they wore Jays-themed uniforms, which should be their regular look.

 

 

     

 

 

 

The Connecticut Tigers had both the name and the look.  And they are throwing it away for what will likely be some trendy crap. 
 

 

36 minutes ago, NicDB said:

The great thing about the Connecticut Tigers uniforms is that they don't actually say Tigers.  You can call them whatever you want and they can still look like this.

 

That is true for the home uniform; even a change of nickname would not necessitate a change of home uniform. 

But their road uniform says "Tigers", in a script that is the same as the parent club's "Detroit".  Of course, this could be changed to spell out any new nickname, and the look would remain intact.

 

 

 

 

Anyway, at least I can console myself with the Syracuse Mets' change in the right direction.

 

 

[panthers_2012]

1 hour ago, rams80 said:

 

/Checks Norwich's wikipedia page.

 

 

.....

 

Yes to the killer tomatoes!!!

[Brian in Boston]

Norwich Nine

The modern City of Norwich, Connecticut has its roots in the 1659 settlement of Norwichtown, a village founded upon a plot of land "nine miles square". It was within this nine square mile plot that the community's original 35 settlers - including the Reverend James Fitch, Thomas Leffingwell, and Major John Mason - laid out the Norwichtown Green and established the first center of the community.

Norwich Nine not only pays homage to the size of that original plot of land, but has an old-time sound to it that fits with the long history of Connecticut and New England. It conjures up images of ballplayers taking to the diamond in pillbox caps, collared lace-up or shield-front jerseys, baggy pants, and knee-high stockings.    

[DCarp1231]

Please get a name that can be shortened to Con-Air so they can get Nicolas Cage to throw out the inaugural first pitch

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

7 minutes ago, Brian in Boston said:

Norwich Nine

The modern City of Norwich, Connecticut has its roots in the 1659 settlement of Norwichtown, a village founded upon a plot of land "nine miles square". It was within this nine square mile plot that the community's original 35 settlers - including the Reverend James Fitch, Thomas Leffingwell, and Major John Mason - laid out the Norwichtown Green and established the first center of the community.

Norwich Nine not only pays homage to the size of that original plot of land, but has an old-time sound to it that fits with the long history of Connecticut and New England. It conjures up images of ballplayers taking to the diamond in pillbox caps, collared lace-up or shield-front jerseys, baggy pants, and knee-high stockings.    

 

Wow, notwithstanding my stated preference for using the parent club's nickname, I really like this idea.  I especially like the idea of using collared jerseys and pillbox caps.  

[MilSox]

54 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

You are right about that; I shouldn't have oversimplified. I agree with all the examples you cited; and I would throw the Durham Bulls and the Indianapolis Indians into that set.  But that's about it.  The way I see it, the teams we mentioned count as exceptions; for the vast majority of minor league teams, being named after the parent club is the right move.

I would toss a few more in there.. the Tacoma Rainiers, Spokane Indians, Eugene Emeralds, and even some new-ish ones like the Everett Aqua Sox and Hillsboro Hops (man... the Pacific Northwest kills it with baseball identities!).  But I think we're on the same page for the most part.  
 

56 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

You are right about that; I shouldn't have oversimplified. I agree with all the examples you cited; and I would throw the Durham Bulls and the Indianapolis Indians into that set.  But that's about it.  The way I see it, the teams we mentioned count as exceptions; for the vast majority of minor league teams, being named after the parent club is the right move.

 

Furthermore, even a team with a unique nickname can look like its parent club.  When the Buffalo Bisons were affilliated with the White Sox, their uniforms looked like the White Sox.  When they were affilliated with the Indians, their uniforms looked like the Indians.

 

 

     

 

 

Now that they are affilliated with the Blue Jays, they have done specialty days in which they wore Jays-themed uniforms, which should be their regular look.

 

 

     

 

 

 

The Connecticut Tigers had both the name and the look.  And they are throwing it away for what will likely be some trendy crap. 

 

This was a pretty standard practice up until the 1990s.  Before affiliated farm clubs became standard for MiLB (1960s or so), there was a certain level of prestige associated with having a look based on a big league club because it showed your players had a direct path to the majors that most teams didn't. In fact, the Milwaukee Braves hats were exactly what the American Association's Brewers wore in their last few years of existence as the Braves top farm club.

Frankly, I think it's about time for the pendulum to swing back the other way with this.  I'll gladly take another Syracuse Mets situation over another Brandiose abomination.

[SFGiants58]

I wouldn’t mind reviving the “Connecticut Colonials” name that one of the groups vying for the Expos proposed. Certain steps would have to be taken to avoid a Patriots rip-off, but I’m sure it could work.

[Maroon]

3 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Booooo.

 

 

Fixed that for you.

 

This change is particularly unfortunate because the Connecticut Tigers are an example of how a minor league team should be named and should be outfitted.  They look just like their parent club, and even feature a letter logo in the style of the parent club.

 

 

 

 

 

Not only do these guys look like professional ballplayers, but any observer could tell at a glance what organistation the team is affiliated with.  To dump this classic identity and look for some goofy local kitch is criminal.

I also like the modification of the Cardinals brand for their AA and high A affiliates in Springfield and Palm Beach (but let's be honest, I'm posting this for the sake of Luke Voit as a Springfield Cardinal with a huge knife).

 

EDIT: And honestly, Springfield is full of St. Louis Cardinals fans, so it would make no sense to detach from a brand identity that is incredibly popular in the local market.

[DCarp1231]

34 minutes ago, Maroon said:

I also like the modification of the Cardinals brand for their AA and high A affiliates in Springfield and Palm Beach (but let's be honest, I'm posting this for the sake of Luke Voit as a Springfield Cardinal with a huge knife).

I really like what they’ve done with the Memphis Redbirds 

 

[NashConcepts]

1 hour ago, DNAsports said:

I really like what they’ve done with the Memphis Redbirds 

 

The Conneticut Cats (with that same rhetoric)?

[buzzcut]

4 hours ago, rams80 said:

 

/Checks Norwich's wikipedia page.

 

 

.....

 

Given that Brandlose is involved, Norwich Killer Tomatoes is almost too perfect to use.

[MJWalker45]

San Antonio has changed their Chanclas jerseys from white with blue sleeves to blue with pink sleeves. They also have home, away and alternate Chanclas caps this year.

[rams80]

2 hours ago, buzzcut said:

Given that Brandlose is involved, Norwich Killer Tomatoes is almost too perfect to use.

 

IP's too expensive.

 

They'll roll with some made up bull two-word term for tomatoes.