MLB 2023 Uniform/Logo Changes

[The_Admiral]

The teal does look better in HD, but I cannot understate just how terrible the Marlins' current uniforms are, especially the illegible black ones, which even HD can't fix. The throwbacks are that much better in comparison.

 

The first Miami set had such wasted potential.

[FiddySicks]

4 hours ago, coco1997 said:

I wonder how much the love for Miami's teal throwbacks comes from genuine admiration for their design, and how much is nostalgia-driven in light of all the inferior uniforms the team has worn since. 

It’s probably a little bit of both, but the original Marlins set was definitely very good for what it was. They often didn’t execute it it properly, and therefore it had a sweet spot and they only really seemed to hit it for a short time. The logo from that era has always been strong, but they kind of debuted that look with too much emphasis on that teal color, and slowly dialed it back until there essentially was no teal left at all. I’d say the perfect era for that set was the 1997 World Series, or somewhere just after that. 
 

During this stretch they still had the teal pinstripes and wordmarks outlined in teal. But it was balanced with the black helmets and caps and black names and numbers. 

 

I have a sweet spot for the vests they wore in the clinching game, too. It wasn’t that long after this they swapped the colors on the word mark and just about everything went from almost too vibrant to boring and dull. Almost like a southeast version of the Rockies (who have always just exclusively been dull and boring. They never even had a “purple phase” at the beginning like the Marlins did with the teal), if you will. 
 

It’s really hard to believe just how much of the life they stripped away from that set. They even went to black pinstripes and ended up with a set that even made the White Sox yawn. Like, I mean of course everyone hated that set at the end. Just look at this boring husk of a uniform. Yikes. 
 

[CaliforniaGlowin]

Old Marlins colors yes, that font is meh for me.  Same with the Mariners font. Looks dated.

[The_Admiral]

7 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

It’s really hard to believe just how much of the life they stripped away from that set. They even went to black pinstripes and ended up with a set that even made the White Sox yawn.

 

Remember when they did Yankees Dress-Up near the end?

 

 

And yeah, the Rockies have always been so boring. Don't know how anyone has liked their stuff.

[Krudler]

I think Old Marlins colors with the teal reigned in a bit would look good with the current font.

[spartacat_12]

8 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

It’s probably a little bit of both, but the original Marlins set was definitely very good for what it was. They often didn’t execute it it properly, and therefore it had a sweet spot and they only really seemed to hit it for a short time. The logo from that era has always been strong, but they kind of debuted that look with too much emphasis on that teal color, and slowly dialed it back until there essentially was no teal left at all. I’d say the perfect era for that set was the 1997 World Series, or somewhere just after that. 
 

During this stretch they still had the teal pinstripes and wordmarks outlined in teal. But it was balanced with the black helmets and caps and black names and numbers. 

 

I have a sweet spot for the vests they wore in the clinching game, too. It wasn’t that long after this they swapped the colors on the word mark and just about everything went from almost too vibrant to boring and dull. Almost like a southeast version of the Rockies (who have always just exclusively been dull and boring. They never even had a “purple phase” at the beginning like the Marlins did with the teal), if you will. 
 

It’s really hard to believe just how much of the life they stripped away from that set. They even went to black pinstripes and ended up with a set that even made the White Sox yawn. Like, I mean of course everyone hated that set at the end. Just look at this boring husk of a uniform. Yikes. 
 

 

It's funny that the two Florida-based teal '90s expansion teams went through similar identity crises around the turn of the century.

 

 

[adsarebad]

On 3/31/2023 at 8:56 PM, cajunaggie08 said:

I remember when they debuted this look a year after the Astros did and being slightly annoyed there would be two teams fighting over the orange cap look. Little did I know just how quickly both would abandon them.

There also could have been room for both of them, Astros were orange, marlins were a different shade...... mandarin, i would say.  It was a very nice color. 

 

Same goes for their matching jersey, a shame "The Marlins Man" made it so hated, 

[adsarebad]

5 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

Remember when they did Yankees Dress-Up near the end?

 

 

And yeah, the Rockies have always been so boring. Don't know how anyone has liked their stuff.

The Rockies purple jersey is nice.

Both shades of purple.

[The_Admiral]

1 hour ago, adsarebad said:

The Rockies purple jersey is nice.

Both shades of purple.

 

Yeah, I like their shade of purple. They should try using it.

[jp1409]

What have the Phillies dropped to keep wearing their red alts?

[philly97flyer]

2 minutes ago, jp1409 said:

What have the Phillies dropped to keep wearing their red alts?

Probably the cream day game alts if I had to guess. No way they’re getting rid of thr powder blues, which are really popular

[BBTV]

3 minutes ago, jp1409 said:

What have the Phillies dropped to keep wearing their red alts?

 

Just now, philly97flyer said:

Probably the cream day game alts if I had to guess. No way they’re getting rid of thr powder blues, which are really popular

 

I don't get it - I swear I read before the season that they were dropping the reds.

 

Ain't no way they're dropping either of the other two, so I guess they're keeping all 5 and telling Nike to suck it.

 

The cream jersey has been a staple since '08, and they sell a ton of blue caps.  The powders are obviously popular . The red serves absolutely no purpose - they don't sell any, and it doesn't serve to add another hat to sell lie the cream does.

[McCall]

4 hours ago, adsarebad said:

There also could have been room for both of them, Astros were orange, marlins were a different shade...... mandarin, i would say.  It was a very nice color. 

 

Same goes for their matching jersey, a shame "The Marlins Man" made it so hated, 

The hats were literally the exact same orange hats made by New Era. The oranges only differentiated in print, where the Astros use pantone 173 (which is darker than their uniform orange) and the Marlins used Warm Red, which they called "red-orange", and also different than the stock orange of the hats (pantone 172). And Miami never called it "Mandarin".

[The_Admiral]

I liked the Marlins' BP hats that had both the pinkish red-orange and more of a true orange together. And I still maintain that they missed the boat in dropping green:

 

 

There it is alongside the red-orange, yellow, and blue they launched with, and the other orange they added in later. It would have been very Loria/Samson Marlins for them to say that they were transcending the concept of binary "team colors" and creating a work of art instead. And then after that, they probably would have called people stupid for not getting it and bragged about how much taxpayer money they stole.

[Marlins93]

On 4/1/2023 at 11:22 PM, coco1997 said:

I wonder how much the love for Miami's teal throwbacks comes from genuine admiration for their design, and how much is nostalgia-driven in light of all the inferior uniforms the team has worn since. 

 

I can't speak for all Marlins fans, of course, but I genuinely feel that the design aesthetics are incredible. The design is very fitting for the South Florida market and breathes much-needed life into MLB logos uniforms, which are oversaturated with variations of red and blue.

 

Some don't like the Florida Marlins wordmark, but I love it. I'm glad that it doesn't have the same kind of old timey cursive script that most teams have. It's kind of a modern take on that tradition. And it's more elegantly executed that the AI-generated, oddly-tilted script that the jerseys of the most recent rebrand have. 

 

The teal flat-out works, even 30 years later, and is a much-needed addition to the league's rather narrow color palette.  The teal wordmark pops beautifully and the black front numbers are a nice complementary balance. 

 

I am also sold on the teal caps working, too. I used to think that if the Marlins were to bring back some rendition of the "teal look," they'd need to do so with the black caps that became primary in 1996, but now I'm convinced that teal hats are the way to go.

 

Tell me this isn't gorgeous:

 

[Marlins93]

22 hours ago, the admiral said:

The teal does look better in HD, but I cannot understate just how terrible the Marlins' current uniforms are, especially the illegible black ones, which even HD can't fix. The throwbacks are that much better in comparison.

 

The first Miami set had such wasted potential.

 

I've railed over the rebrand (2019 to the present) since its introduction, and I still feel that it is bottom three in all of MLB. If you look around the park, most fans are either wearing the City Connects or old school teal. I don't think that the rebrand ever really caught on or was warmly embraced by the fanbase. Now that Jeter is gone, hopefully it can be scrapped.

 

19 hours ago, FiddySicks said:

It’s probably a little bit of both, but the original Marlins set was definitely very good for what it was. They often didn’t execute it it properly, and therefore it had a sweet spot and they only really seemed to hit it for a short time. The logo from that era has always been strong, but they kind of debuted that look with too much emphasis on that teal color, and slowly dialed it back until there essentially was no teal left at all. I’d say the perfect era for that set was the 1997 World Series, or somewhere just after that. 
 

During this stretch they still had the teal pinstripes and wordmarks outlined in teal. But it was balanced with the black helmets and caps and black names and numbers. 
 

 

 

I used to think that 1996-2002 was the best era for the team's uniforms, but the teal throwback hats worn on Friday and during the 25th anniversary celebration in 2018 have reassured me that's the best look for the franchise. Back in 1993 they might have looked a bit dorky due to materials, sizing, and MLB fashion trends, but they look very much at home now in 2023.

 

7 hours ago, adsarebad said:

There also could have been room for both of them, Astros were orange, marlins were a different shade...... mandarin, i would say.  It was a very nice color. 

 

Same goes for their matching jersey, a shame "The Marlins Man" made it so hated, 

 

Fans didn't turn on orange because of Marlins Man. It was a reviled decision from the very beginning. The entire fanbase collectively dry heaved the moment the 2012 uniforms were unveiled. It's so strange that they made orange, the color of all of those empty seats in the old football stadium, a major part of their new identity. It's very telling that the orange hats were hardly worn, even if they technically remained part of the official uniform set.

[CaliforniaGlowin]

Maybe they're bringing the teal back partially to test the response?

[SailorOfSilence102]

The thing I really do find so utterly bizzare about the De-teal-ifcation of the Florida Marlins jerseys, is that I don't really think they were like the original Devil Ray's or Diamondbacks, where they both were fairly out there and retreated before gaining love in retrospect. Sure teal isn't a traditional color, but even the original set used it super tastefully, and the jersey designs themselves and wordmarks weren't like...anything that weird. I get why black became the predominant color, that's not really rare especially around then, but the complete lack of teal by the end is just crazy.

[Sport]

On 3/30/2023 at 10:42 AM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

F no!  There aren't enough curse words available to sufficiently condemn this idea.  Shame on the Yankees, of all teams, for advancing such an anti-historical proposition.  It's one more reason to be glad that I retired upon the introduction of the abomination of interleague play after the 1996 season.  The only current aspect of Major League Baseball that I follow is the uniforms; so this absurd idea (along with the unsightly practice of players not showing any sock) still has the power to irk me. 

 

The article mentions that "Very few players want higher numbers typically associated with NFL offensive tackles, hockey defensemen[,] or back-of-the-roster scrubs." So the obvious solution presents itself: give those undesireable numbers to the manager and the coaching staff. Problem solved.

 

It's definitely true that the Yankees have retired too damn many numbers.  Therefore the onus to remedy the problem that they themselves caused must be on them, not on all of Major League Baseball by means of an offensive practice that spits in the eye of history.

 

Historically speaking - Connie Mack wore a suit, Joe McCarthy never wore a number, Burt Shotton wore slacks and a handsome satin Dodgers jacket. The Yankees went overboard with the number retiring (Would anyone have made a fuss if they never retired Paul O'Neill's #21?), but historically there's been a lot of managers who weren't numbered so I fail to see how this would be "spitting in the eye of history". 

 

Most of the time these days managers look like this. What would look sloppier? The hoodie or wearing the actual uniform top without a number? 

 

I can't remember the last time I saw the Reds David Bell in his actual uniform top. I doubt he even bothers to put it on before he puts on his red hoodie. 

[BBTV]

This looks ridiculous.  He's not a player/coach.  Hell - a manager isn't even really a coach.  There's no reason for a manager to wear a uniform - top or bottom.  Seriously - what's the point of a manager putting stirrups and baseball pants on, when the most action he's going to do during the game is make a pitching change?  It's a ridiculous tradition born from the days of player/coaches and there's no reason to continue it.

 

It's not the hill I'm going to die on, but I have no issue with teams pulling the numbers back from their coaches, and not requiring managers to wear a uniform.  Base coaches - maybe.  They're full-time on-field personnel, so I can understand that - but they don't need numbers.