MLB 2023 Uniform/Logo Changes

[WSU151]

1 hour ago, Ark said:

 

They could temporarily black out the field (or do so during team introductions) and the players would glow

 

I don’t remember glow in the dark shirts being all that glowing from more than 20 feet away. 

 

I have a Columbia Fireflies hat that glows but you literally need to be within five feet of it in a pitch black room to see it.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

5 hours ago, bradsbeard said:

 Curious about this opinion (I’d say about half of the responses to my tweet at last check were similar). Is it just a distaste for a solid top over pinstripes? Lots of teams have used that look, and I’ve always kind of liked it (I miss the Cubs using their blue alts at home, though I do prefer the full pin stripe set).  Mostly I think the blue pants with the City Connect uniforms look bad, and anything else would be preferable. 

 

A few reasons:

 

1. Monochrome, especially mono navy, is awesome in my opinion. The Cubs even go the extra mile with matching and contrasting powder blue undersleeves, belts, and striped socks. Contrasting sleeves/socks with matching jerseys and pants is how a baseball uniform is designed to look and its refreshing to see a team roll with it.

 

 

 

2. If the Cubs were to go with their current pinstripes, you'd have a third shade of blue in the mix and that just wouldn't work. If they were to make the pinstripes navy or powder blue or go with white pants with a single powder blue stripe, that would be better, but now you'd be adding a second pair of white pants with no matching white jersey. Other teams have done it but unless you're the San Diego Padres, I don't like it.

 

[bradsbeard]

17 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

 

2. If the Cubs were to go with their current pinstripes, you'd have a third shade of blue in the mix and that just wouldn't work. If they were to make the pinstripes navy or powder blue or go with white pants with a single powder blue stripe, that would be better, but now you'd be adding a second pair of white pants with no matching white jersey. Other teams have done it but unless you're the San Diego Padres, I don't like it.

 

Yeah, they definitely shouldn’t use the royal blue pins with the navy.  The City Connect idea is already so discordant with the rest of the set that I wouldn’t be bothered by them adding another white pant since it’s only gonna be used with that jersey (just like the navy pants don’t go with anything else in the set now).

[coco1997]

2 hours ago, McCall said:

They don't wear the blue jerseys at home.

 

2 hours ago, MNtwins3 said:

The Cubs haven't worn the royal blue alternates with pinstripe pants for years. It's strictly a road alternate

Thanks, I didn’t realize that. I guess I must’ve just been picturing spring training games.

 

[Carolingian Steamroller]

44 minutes ago, bradsbeard said:

Yeah, they definitely shouldn’t use the royal blue pins with the navy.  The City Connect idea is already so discordant with the rest of the set that I wouldn’t be bothered by them adding another white pant since it’s only gonna be used with that jersey (just like the navy pants don’t go with anything else in the set now).

 

That goes back to my first point that having already brought in the matching navy pants, to me it would be a massive downgrade to shift to a softball top set. The monochrome navy looks really great, especially with the powder blue striping. It even works with Cubs history.

[bradsbeard]

33 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

 

That goes back to my first point that having already brought in the matching navy pants, to me it would be a massive downgrade to shift to a softball top set. The monochrome navy looks really great, especially with the powder blue striping. It even works with Cubs history.

Yeah, I just strongly dislike the dark monocrhome look. I dread Friday home games now as a Cubs fan!

[Silent Wind of Doom]

1 hour ago, coco1997 said:

Thanks, I didn’t realize that. I guess I must’ve just been picturing spring training games.

 

 

Honestly, when I think of the blue top I still picture Carlos Zambrano, so I think my perception is a ways behind.  I always picture it with pinstripes too.

[McCall]

7 hours ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

 

That goes back to my first point that having already brought in the matching navy pants, to me it would be a massive downgrade to shift to a softball top set. The monochrome navy looks really great, especially with the powder blue striping. It even works with Cubs history.

The monochrome navy looks far more softball-like than if they wore white pants.

[BBTV]

1 hour ago, McCall said:

The monochrome navy looks far more softball-like than if they wore white pants.

 

Disagree.  Matching top-bottom is a more formal / professional look - like a suit.  Doesn't translate over to all sports or with all colors, but I think with baseball it's definitely fine.  Though I thin high socks should be mandatory with a monochrome baseball uni.

[McCall]

Just now, BBTV said:

 

Disagree.  Matching top-bottom is a more formal / professional look - like a suit.  Doesn't translate over to all sports or with all colors, but I think with baseball it's definitely fine.  Though I thin high socks should be mandatory with a monochrome baseball uni.

[BBTV]

That's cool - you specifically sought out softball uniforms.  I could selectively find softball uniforms that counter your point about white pants.  Neither proves anything.

 

Put the white socks in their regular black tops / black pants and it's a perfectly professional MLB-caliber uniform.  Same with the SF Giants.  A few of the navy teams could pull it off as well.

 

It's the design that looks softball - not simply that the top and bottom match.  

 

  

[McCall]

6 minutes ago, BBTV said:

That's cool - you specifically sought out softball uniforms.  I could selectively find softball uniforms that counter your point about white pants.  Neither proves anything.

 

Put the white socks in their regular black tops / black pants and it's a perfectly professional MLB-caliber uniform.  Same with the SF Giants.  A few of the navy teams could pull it off as well.

 

It's the design that looks softball - not simply that the top and bottom match.  

 

  

It's far more common in softball than baseball than you probably think. And I agree, monochrome white and gray look good, but, much like the NFL, not with other colors. In my opinion at least. Your whole "suit" theory is ill-applied as you just automatically assume ALL monochrome is therefore good, while not taking into account different colors or the actual differences, and uses, of regular suits compared to baseball uniforms.

[GriffinM6]

I appreciate that the Cubs use contrasting socks with a monochrome uniform, but only a few players wear high socks, so it ends up looking bad for the most part. If they required every player to wear high socks like some college teams do, it would look much better. 

[BadSeed84]

 

R.I.P. Sleeve Numbers.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

58 minutes ago, McCall said:

It's far more common in softball than baseball than you probably think. And I agree, monochrome white and gray look good, but, much like the NFL, not with other colors. In my opinion at least. Your whole "suit" theory is ill-applied as you just automatically assume ALL monochrome is therefore good, while not taking into account different colors or the actual differences, and uses, of regular suits compared to baseball uniforms.

 

"Softball" refers more to beer league or rec league softball, where a dark jersey or teeshirt is worn over either generic white/grey pants or jeans/shorts.

 

Besides, monochrome, especially navy blue monochrome, is really old in major league baseball.

 

[TBGKon]

Personally, the monochrome color look in baseball is fine by me.  I do think it looks best with either the very dark (black, navy blue) or lighter colors (columbia blue, gold, green?).  The vibrant reds, royal blues, kelly greens, and that level of vibrance could work, but without accents it screams brightly.

 

Some good examples from colleges:

 

Whereas something like this seems very bold and garish.

[jp1409]

Marlins ST hat with the standalone fish looks so much better than their regular one...

 

[tBBP]

16 hours ago, infernoqueso said:

Devil Rays did this in '05 but switched to plain baselayers after that.  

 

Sidebar tangent, but I miss vests in baseball...

[BBTV]

2 hours ago, McCall said:

you just automatically assume ALL monochrome is therefore good, 

 

I explicitly said it doesn't work with all colors.  Definitely not calling for the return of the blood clot Indians unis or the all-orange Orioles.

[Carolingian Steamroller]

One detail I'd like to point out in how sports aesthetics traditionally (in the sense of most common usage over the past 150 years) align in terms of color is look at fabric type for each piece of equipment.

 

In sports where the historical aesthetic was matching shirt/pants you usually see that apparel being made of the same or similar fabric such as baseball and basketball.

 

Where you see sports that change material from one article to the next, like football and hockey, you tend to see changes in color. 

 

This is how you get a white-over-white or grey-over-grey baseball uniform verses a team color-over-white football uniform. It's not a hard and fast rule but as we've seen, it's often hard to match colors when you move from one media (like a durene jersey) to another (like stretch spandex pants).

 

Interesting enough, baseball has seen a bigger shift in the last two decades in changing fabric types from jersey to pants. I know it did cause some issues early on but its gotten much much better.