Nationals Uniforms to be Unveiled

[DEAD!]

I don't any pictures of the actual jerseys, but here's their team store:

[ltravisjr]

Not sure if this has been mentioned in this thread, but I don't like how the Nats put the old W on the caps and the W has nothing at all in common with the wordmark on the logo/jerseys.

It's been mentioned, the consensus seems to be that the old W would be cool with an older script, but it was stupid to throw it in and disrupt the rest of the theme. DC looks a lot better, and I'm sure they'll change it soon enough. Maybe if we petition...they'll be happy to listen to anyone who takes an interest in their stupid team

I had created a quick wordmark for my own uniform concept earlier. Here is what it would look like on the current away jerseys:

[Brick]

There is no alternate currently, but I think the DC will be the batting practice logo.

The explanation of "Established 1905" from the Nats blogs is that the team was called the Senators from 1901-1904, Nationals from 1905-1955 and Senators from 1956-1971. Personally I prefer "Established 1901".

No insult is meant to Montreal. The feeling in Washington is that Walter Johnson, Goose Goslin and Frank Howard belong to Washington. Rusty Staub, Gary Carter, and Tim Raines belong to Montreal.

[Survival79]

There is no alternate currently, but I think the DC will be the batting practice logo.

I'd probably buy one of those.

The explanation of "Established 1905" from the Nats blogs is that the team was called the Senators from 1901-1904, Nationals from 1905-1955 and Senators from 1956-1971. Personally I prefer "Established 1901".

No insult is meant to Montreal. The feeling in Washington is that Walter Johnson, Goose Goslin and Frank Howard belong to Washington. Rusty Staub, Gary Carter, and Tim Raines belong to Montreal.

I can follow that line of reasoning and agree that it should be "Established 1901" if they are going to take that route.

The team website still recognizes Montreal as the start of the Nationals Timeline. Should Montreal fans want to feel even more sick they should check out the Washington Nationals all-time roster.

[Blackjack76]

I think it's pretty redundant to have the "Nationals" patch on the home shirt and the "DC" patch on the road shirt (actually, DC on both wouldn't be too bad.)

Hopefully somebody wises up and switches this before they wear them.

The Nationals' patch on the home uni is an inaugural season patch or that whole "1905" crap.

[CC97]

There is no alternate currently, but I think the DC will be the batting practice logo.

The explanation of "Established 1905" from the Nats blogs is that the team was called the Senators from 1901-1904, Nationals from 1905-1955 and Senators from 1956-1971. Personally I prefer "Established 1901".

No insult is meant to Montreal. The feeling in Washington is that Walter Johnson, Goose Goslin and Frank Howard belong to Washington. Rusty Staub, Gary Carter, and Tim Raines belong to Montreal.

I'm pretty sure they were called Nationals from 1901-1955, the reason they went with that name was to differentiate themselves from the Washington Senators NL team that had folded in 1899.

[gosioux76]

Nats jerseys are now for sale on the mlbshop website:

[Survival79]

I'm pretty sure they were called Nationals from 1901-1955, the reason they went with that name was to differentiate themselves from the Washington Senators NL team that had folded in 1899.

According to one National Baseball Hall of Fame article titled Washington Baseball: Red, White and Blue:

Washington was a charter member of the American League in 1901, and four years later the team made history when they became the first major league club in the 20th century to spell out their team nickname on their uniforms. The name wasn't Senators, but rather Nationals, the nickname they officially kept until 1957. After the 1906 season, the team removed Nationals from their jerseys and went without any mention of a nickname on their uniforms for more than five decades. Not until 1959 did their uniforms display Senators, the name most commonly used by the press and fans.

The odd part is that they refer to them as the Senators during that same time period on their History of Baseball in Washington D.C. page:

Washington Statesmen (1884, American Association)

Washington Nationals (1884, Union Association)

Washington Nationals (1886-1889, National League)

Washington Statesmen (1891, American Association)

Washington Senators (1892-1899, National League)

Washington Senators (1901-1960, American League)

Washington Senators (1961-1971, American League)

[spyboy1]

There is no alternate currently, but I think the DC will be the batting practice logo.

I'd probably buy one of those.

The explanation of "Established 1905" from the Nats blogs is that the team was called the Senators from 1901-1904, Nationals from 1905-1955 and Senators from 1956-1971. Personally I prefer "Established 1901".

No insult is meant to Montreal. The feeling in Washington is that Walter Johnson, Goose Goslin and Frank Howard belong to Washington. Rusty Staub, Gary Carter, and Tim Raines belong to Montreal.

I can follow that line of reasoning and agree that it should be "Established 1901" if they are going to take that route.

The team website still recognizes Montreal as the start of the Nationals Timeline.

This is a tricky, and probably unique situation.

It's hard to go with "Established in 1901" in my mind, because that franchise is now the Minnesota Twins, and to further complicate things, is an American League franchise to boot.

This Washington Nationals franchise should, in my mind, date back to the start of the Expos, 1969.

JeffB

[M59]

I'm gathering that I'm not the only one here who has seen this, but someone tell me why the Nationals are going with a "Established 1905" theme???

Seems to me that they're combining histories with the Twins, and kicking in the teeth of Expos Nation.

Perhaps for the same reason the caps don't match the wordmark really don't match the numbers? Where did they come up with those, anyway? Dallas #s in DC!?! It makes no sense, capitan!

[M59]

I think it's pretty redundant to have the "Nationals" patch on the home shirt and the "DC" patch on the road shirt (actually, DC on both wouldn't be too bad.)

Hopefully somebody wises up and switches this before they wear them.

Just like the Giants should reverse the patches from their home and road unis, to get the SF patch on the homes and the Giants patch on the roads.

[RyanB06]

BP jersey:

[JamesCraven]

What about a BP cap?

[KennyRock]

To clear up the confusion here, the team that began in 1901 in the American League was always called the Washington Senators. HOWEVER, that team had a nickname, and that nickname was the Nationals, or Nats. The name was so popular, that it found its way into the jerseys. In 1957, they put Senators back onto the jerseys until the team moved to Minnesota in 1961 to become the Twins.

That same year, an expansion team was created in Washington to replace the old Senators. The new team was also called the Senators, until they moved in 1972 and became the Texas Rangers.

In 1969, an expansion franchise was award in Montreal, named the Expos after the Montreal Exposition of the World's Fair in 1967. In 2005, the team moves to Washington, and will be called the Nationals, as we know. It will be the first time in either the AL or NL that a team will officially go by the name "Nationals" - the name had previously only been used by a Negro League team as well as a team that played in the District in the 1870's and 1880's.

[Cartabago]

Whoa, the BP is HOT. *ker-sizzle*

[pcgd]

Those are very sharp.

Now if they can only put that logo on the hats, top notch package!

I wonder if they do something like the Diamondbacks do, or did. Use an alternate batting helmet logo. I think we can all agree that the hat just does not match the rest of the uniform. They'll probably make a change in the future, at least I hope...

[Braden]

I just don't understand why they would keep that stupid W Pretzel logo. I thought with a city with such a bad baseball history that they would go for something new for the caps.

And now they clash with the uniforms... oh well.

[TruColor]

I'm sworn to secrecy (!), but the higher-ups apparently really pushed for the pretzel "W".

Nothin' could be done about it...

[BallWonk]

To clear up the confusion here, the team that began in 1901 in the American League was always called the Washington Senators.  HOWEVER, that team had a nickname, and that nickname was the Nationals, or Nats.  The name was so popular, that it found its way into the jerseys.  In 1957, they put Senators back onto the jerseys until the team moved to Minnesota in 1961 to become the Twins.

Do you have a source for this version of events? The history I've heard both in Minnesota and in DC is that the franchise officially called itself the Senators from 1901-1904, the Nationals from 1905-1950-something, and the Senators again for the last couple of years. Thus the "Established 1905" thing, referring to the Nationals name (but not counting the National Association Washington Nationals of 1872). The Baseball Hall of Fame says that the Nationals name appeared on uniforms only in 1905 and 1906, while Senators appeared only in 1959 and 1960.

DC-area cynics (and one former broadcaster) say that a change in sponsorship from National Bohemian to Senate Beer motivated the official name switch.

Anyway, point is that the conventional wisdom among Twins fans and Senators fans is that for most of its stay in Washington the team was formally called the Nationals ("Nats") but informally known as the Senators. Sort of like how the Yankees are often called the (Bronx) Bombers, but more so.

This Washington Times piece suggests that the Griffith family agrees with this history:

http://washingtontimes.com/sports/20041001-123114-2771r.htm

But just because a story appears in print doesn't necessarily mean it's the full or correct story, so I'd value any sourcing you can give for your version.

[GMac]

I'm sworn to secrecy (!), but the higher-ups apparently really pushed for the pretzel "W".

Nothin' could be done about it...

God... MLB keeps reminding why I hate them... some may call the NFL as the no fun league... but MLB is a freaking dictatorship...