Jump to content

Minor/Independent/Collegiate League Baseball Logo/Uniform Changes


BigMac12

Recommended Posts

On 11/20/2016 at 5:12 AM, Discrimihater said:

It might just be me, but for some reason the baby in New Orleans' new logo looks like Anthony Rizzo to me.  I'm dead serious.

 

11 hours ago, The Mojo Maniac said:

Egads...you're right! :blink:

New-Orleans-Baby-Cakes-Logo-Unveiled.png

GettyImages-612437090.png

 

Interesting....here in New Orleans it's drawing comparisons to the City's current mayor:

 

mitch_landrieu.jpg

gYH2mW9.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, FinsUp1214 said:

 

And this one looks even more so like Rizzo, if you ask me:

 

IMG_5377.PNG

 

Agreed.

 

If you look at that logo, though, there are some really odd white areas (above the bat handles, below the bat handles, around the left shoulder...none of these white shapes go with anything at all in the logo).

  • Like 1

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WSU151 said:

 

Agreed.

 

If you look at that logo, though, there are some really odd white areas (above the bat handles, below the bat handles, around the left shoulder...none of these white shapes go with anything at all in the logo).

It looks like it's a while circle that the baby is coming out of/through. I can see the reasoning, but so little of it is showing, I wonder want the point is. Make it larger or remove it completely; too little shows currently that it's just distracting.

 

To throw another "this looks like" name into the ring, I thought of celebrity chef Tom Colicchio. The team name is undeniably weird, but for me the logos are more acceptable for a professional team because for a baby, it looks more like a bald adult (the full set of teeth help with this, though if shrimp have teeth, so can infants, I suppose). 

tom-colicchio-laughing.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly what it is - a white circle intended to give the logo some definition (and relieve them from having to draw legs).  But that circle is too small, and only glimpsed in part, so the effect is totally lost.

 

Out of a bad set, I think that's the worst individual logo.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, I've become desensitized.  My first reaction was, "Hey, that name isn't so bad."

 

I think that is the definition of "damning with faint praise."

  • Like 3

Most Liked Content of the Day -- February 15, 2017, August 21, 2017, August 22, 2017     /////      Proud Winner of the CCSLC Post of the Day Award -- April 8, 2008

Originator of the Upside Down Sarcasm Smilie -- November 1, 2005  🙃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

Apparently, I've become desensitized.  My first reaction was, "Hey, that name isn't so bad."

 

I think that is the definition of "damning with faint praise."

Agreed. First reaction: that's not bad, and much more focused than other recent Brandiose work. But then you see some strange design decisions and details that aren't refined to the point that a Joe Bosack or Studio Simon mark would have polished them. For example, the strange water shapes under "Dock Spiders" in the main logo are oddly off center, which is minor, but like the Rumble Ponies' boxer horse having a larger left arm when it should be smaller than the right in proper perspective, is difficult to not see once you notice. In this case, the team site shows another version of the logo when explains that water shape - it's a "DS." But still, why not make sure everything is centered and looks balanced?

 

Somewhere (perhaps earlier in this thread?) I recall the comment being made that these weird names may have some root in teams wanting a name that can fully trademark. "Baby Cakes" rather than "King Cakes," or "Dock Spiders" instead of just "Spiders." If that's the case, it might explain these choices, rightly or wrongly, as pragmatic rather than aesthetic.

 

DockSpiders.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SilverBullet1929 said:

Can someone please link me to where it says it's required for minor league teams to have logos that look like early 90's Saturday morning cartoon characters?

 

Yeah it's not required, but it also makes sense considering the target market. Every team seems to include during identity reveals how they wanted to "market to kids and families" or something similarly delivered (while it may not always be those words, it's the same idea). And the most effective way to market to kids is with cartoons and/or whimsy.

 

I'm not saying it should be the rule, but it's not something I'm shocked or appalled by either. It comes with the territory you're marketing to, and has for years.

CCSLC%20Signature_1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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