MLB 2023 Uniform/Logo Changes

[Sec19Row53]

25 minutes ago, BBTV said:

That makes it seem like you only ever see a player's profile view and never both sleeves.  While the one is facing the camera prior to the pitch, both sleeves are always visible at some point of the at bat, when while running bases, and pitching.

 

Not arguing with you coz I know you're just giving their argument, I just think that their argument is overblown, and they should have started with one sleeve for the first round, and then seen if advertisers would be willing to pay an additional premium to get the rotating sleeve.

But at bat is when there's minimal movement and optimal viewing.

[Discrim]

On 4/3/2023 at 5:24 PM, the admiral said:

I think number-sized abbreviations -- PC, HC, BC, 1B, 3B -- could be a relatively elegant solution to the Yankees' number troubles. You can mock up pretty much all those out of varsity block numbers, with only an M or FM for "[Field] Manager" proving tricky (and a standalone "M" looking pretty dopey in my imagination). I think some teams have already done it with BB for Bat Boy. As for "quality assurance" coaches and other guys who hang around a dugout without picking up a bat or glove, I dunno, maybe they go numberless, but the true on-field personnel among coaches could come up with something.

I remember a bench coach on the Cubs used to do this back in the early 2000s (I forget his name but remember he was Latino and was also the only one doing it).  Dude wore BC rather than a number, though IIRC he later switched to 80 after MLB disallowed him from wearing letters.

[gosioux76]

11 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

But how was it designed that way at a league level?  Should have been something the individual teams decided.  I obviously can't prove it, but I'm willing to bet that an advertiser wouldn't back out of a deal with the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Dodgers, et al if they said that the patch could be on only one side.  That's still a ton of exposure in huge local markets and lots of national games.

I think it's a good thing that the rules on ad placement are regulated by the league and not left up to the teams. Allowing ads on the on-field uniform is norm-breaking enough, but allowing each team to determine how they're applied could make an already bad situation worse.

 

I agree that allowing for alternative sleeves is too much, but your argument presumes that a team might opt to dial back how the patch is applied. But what if it doesn't and an overzealous team decided to take it even further? Velcroed patches so that they can swap sleeves between at-bat and on-field? Patches on BOTH sleeves?  Without some sort of regulation, it  could become the wild west for revenue-hungry teams. 

 

At least the way it is now, the league gives the team the freedom to establish market pricing for the ad patches, while it retains the ability to ensure they're applied consistently. 

[M59]

On 4/1/2023 at 12:10 AM, McCall said:

First off, how does that say they 'don't know what they're doing"? And black and orange on black isn't "bold", it's literally what the Giants have done a number of times over the last 20+ years.

 

Orange-only on a black jersey works fines. Very noticeable and legible. Similar to how the Pirates don't need a white outline on their black jerseys.

The white layer was removed from the Orioles' black jerseys for the same reason the headspoon was removed: Peter Angelos found it to be "gaudy". I was around for the botched rollout of the orange/black on black in 2000. ("Wait...we needed to tell the league about this...last MAY?") If you're going to go this route, why bother with the black trim at all? It's not like anybody can see it. 
And, with the drop-shadow, the Giants didn't TRULY do black/orange on black.

[M59]

On 4/3/2023 at 10:25 AM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

It's true that Connie Mack and Burt Shotten wore street clothes.  It's also true that Joe McCarthy (who started his Major League managerial career before the advent of uniform numbers) never wore a number.  Nor did John McGraw, who also began his career in the pre-number era.

 

And, out of the many hundreds people who have managed Major League clubs since the beginning of the 1930s, those are just about the only examples.  I believe the applicable idiom is "the exception that proves the rule".  To take the position that the managers and coaches wearing numbers is not the norm would be absurd.

 

 

 

 

 

(Wearing number 25, the same number as his father and his grandfather.)

 

 

 

There's no reason to believe that the managers who wear sweatshirts instead of jerseys would stop that slovenly practice if their jerseys had no numbers.  Solving that problem is going to take a rule.

 

 

 

No.  And the same goes for Williams, Posada, and Pettitte.  I'd go further and say that the Yankees should never have retired the numbers of Billy Martin (who, all told, brought the Yankees more shame than glory) and Roger Maris.  Even the Scooter (whom I adore) is a borderline case.  (Though note that two very deservedly retired Yankee numbers belong to managers: Stengel's 37 and Torre's 6.)

 

The Yankees f-ed up a good thing.  They — and only they — should be responsible for remedying the problem that they themselves created, by putting some numbers back into circulation, instead of attacking a venerable tradition of nearly a century.

Re: the Yankee$...let 'em wear triple digit numbers. Serves 'em right.

[M59]

15 hours ago, fortunat1 said:

Found some more photos of the Orioles CC merchandise. Not sure why the second one is grey, but it's probably just for merchandise, so I wouldn't think too hard about it. Not sure if the font is a nod to the short-lived home jersey from the 60's or some other distinct block font, but as @bowld pointed out, this whole identity is going to be heavily inspired by Charles Village.

 

There aren't enough synonyms for "awful" to describe that...thing. 

[CaliforniaGlowin]

One man's is another man's

[BadSeed84]

They should be called the Sesame Street Orioles

[aawagner011]

MLB the Show has the Braves City Connects in the game starting this Friday.

 

 

This is our first look at the batting helmet. It shows a blue bill, just like the cap. That isn’t unusual, but it does deviate from the Braves throwbacks which always had blue bills on the caps but white bills on the helmets. You can see how they were inspired by the bell shaped white panel from the helmet. I’d have preferred a standard white panel cap but it isn’t a deal breaker.

 

 

 

There’s a mistake in the video as it shows the cap (as well as the helmet) with “the A.” It looks like that has been fixed based on this photo. The game doesn’t seem to use the bell shaped white panel, though. These little differences make me wonder if the cap originally was intended to use “the A” logo and was changed.

 

 

We will get our first on field look at them this Saturday, so long as the weather cooperates. Rain is in the forecast.

[BBTV]

OMG.  It’s not just that there’s so much white space, but it’s “off white” (or just a different material, but either way it stands out way more than it needs to.)
 

 

 

[TrueYankee26]

OUCH

[WestCoastBias]

Why do they have to be so ridiculously sized. Not even regular patches are that large right?

[ltjets21]

37 minutes ago, BBTV said:

OMG.  It’s not just that there’s so much white space, but it’s “off white” (or just a different material, but either way it stands out way more than it needs to.)
 

 

 

I really thought my Mets wouldn't do this with all of Cohens money. This is a catastrophe.

[BBTV]

Also is it just me or does that model have bosoms? 

[Bmac]

On 4/4/2023 at 6:16 PM, fortunat1 said:

Found some more photos of the Orioles CC merchandise. Not sure why the second one is grey, but it's probably just for merchandise, so I wouldn't think too hard about it. Not sure if the font is a nod to the short-lived home jersey from the 60's or some other distinct block font, but as @bowld pointed out, this whole identity is going to be heavily inspired by Charles Village.

 

 

There's a line of fashion hats popping up that are the same style:

 

 

More here.

 

[McCall]

2 hours ago, BBTV said:

OMG.  It’s not just that there’s so much white space, but it’s “off white” (or just a different material, but either way it stands out way more than it needs to.)
 

 

 

The actual logo of the sponsor is only taking up like 30% or less of the giant square. Basically, you're just gonna see a void in the pinstripes outlined in red.

[bowld]

Mets in the lead for worst advertising patch and its not close

[tp49]

Considering the current state of the Mets it's the most appropriate jersey sponsor ever.  

 

The bigger question is what would Tank have to say about this one. 

[dont care]

3 hours ago, tp49 said:

Considering the current state of the Mets it's the most appropriate jersey sponsor ever.  

 

The bigger question is what would Tank have to say about this one. 

“ITS THE ABSOLUTE WORST”

[leopard88]

13 hours ago, Bmac said:

 

There's a line of fashion hats popping up that are the same style:

 

 

More here.

 

 

Thank God . . . as in "Thank God this won't be the Orioles City Connect theme!"

 

Slight off topic . . .  from that angle, that M looks a lot like the UnderArmour Maryland M.