Angels previous logo

[FiddySicks]

i was just looking at the logos that the Angels most recently ditched, with the light blue and wings, and i just realized it. i love those logos. all of them. from the script to the alternates. i hate the angels new unis with all that red. and i think that A is the most boring logo in baseball today. the old ones had so much potential. you could have made about a million uniform combinations with those logos. what do you think?

[Ludachrisc23]

as an angels fan i disagree... what we have now is a classy, traditional logo that seems to be timeless... the disney jerseys and logos werent awful, but c'mon... periwinkle?!?

[LMU]

I agree 100%. I'm a completely die-hard Angels fan, and I love the current look. The old look was just so minor league, with the sleeveless pinstriped unis and the disney-esque scheme.

[The_Admiral]

Yeah periwinkle wasn't the best. I liked Anaheim on the greys though

[DEAD!]

I didn't mind the colours, but the logo was just too, um, Disney.

[cward]

I totally agree, guys. Also an Angels fan, I am so glad they updated. When I was younger I didnt mind the cartoony ones as much, but now looking back, they are way below the new ones. I love the red update as well as the more professional look. The halo A is by far the best logo in baseball.

[FiddySicks]

ok ok maybee the old logo wasnt great but it did have potential. i justt wish the angels would have kept some blue in their unis. maybee a dark blue alternate hat, kind of like the BP hats. and sry guys, i like red but the only team that can successfully pull off the mostly red look is the cardinals

[sc49erfan15]

ok ok maybee the old logo wasnt great but it did have potential. i justt wish the angels would have kept some blue in their unis. maybee a dark blue alternate hat, kind of like the BP hats. and sry guys, i like red but the only team that can successfully pull off the mostly red look is the cardinals

What color are the Phillies supposed to wear?

[Discrim]

there's this one team in Cincinnati. i hear they're called...um, i dunno...the Reds

the Phils tried blue in the 40s and again when they started wearing the current stuff (i know there was a blue hat briefly). it's not possible for em to go mostly blue.

[KennyRock]

The Phils have three things that still have blue:

Their BP cap, the cap and brim are red, but the "P" is blue.

Their BP jersey, which has blue shapes down the sides.

And their alternate cap, which has a "P" withn a blue star in it and a blue brim.

But, like Discrim said, blue's mostly gone for the Phils. Navy/midnight blue would have been the one color that could have fit with the Angels' jerseys, but I think I like the red and white look for them.

[STL FANATIC]

I never mistake the Phils or the Reds for the Cardinals, but I always mistake the Angels for the Cards (I'm talking about a quick glance at a SportsCenter highlight). In that regard, I do wish the Angels had a little more blue or something.

[FiddySicks]

there's this one team in Cincinnati. i hear they're called...um, i dunno...the Reds

the Phils tried blue in the 40s and again when they started wearing the current stuff (i know there was a blue hat briefly). it's not possible for em to go mostly blue.

yeah but even the reds have all that black in their unis. and i dont really like the phillies uniforms. i think the only all red that looks really good is STL

[marlinfan]

The unis the Angels had in the early to mid nineties IMO are one best uniforms I have ever seen. Very classic looking unis for an expansion team. They should have kept them period.

[sc49erfan15]

The unis the Angels had in the early to mid nineties IMO are one best uniforms I have ever seen. Very classic looking unis for an expansion team. They should have kept them period.

Expansion team?

[FiddySicks]

The unis the Angels had in the early to mid nineties IMO are one best uniforms I have ever seen. Very classic looking unis for an expansion team. They should have kept them period.

yeah i liked the "California" Angels better myself. im from the bay area and there is sort of a rivaly between the two sides of the state, north, giants A's, vs south, padres and dodgers."Anaheim" Angels more represents a southern cal team where "California" didnt, because it represented the whole state. its sort of strange but Ironchefshark knows what im talking about. ask him.

[IronChefShark]

yeah i liked the "California" Angels better myself. im from the bay area and there is sort of a rivaly between the two sides of the state, north, giants A's, vs south, padres and dodgers."Anaheim" Angels more represents a southern cal team where "California" didnt, because it represented the whole state. its sort of strange but Ironchefshark knows what im talking about. ask him.

dammit, I hate when n00bs attempt to put words in my mouth.....

i know what youre talking about and I COMPLETELY disagree with you

the angels should have NEVER called themselves "California" to begin with. When they changed thier name to "Anaheim" it was a well justified asthetic correction. Its stupid to name yourself after the state when there are FOUR OTHER TEAMS in the state. This has nothing to do with tradition, nothing to do with "what sounds better", this is about what is right.

"California Angels" is wrong. "Anaheim Angels" is right

and thats all Im saying on this matter. How anyone can prefer the "California Angels" moniker is just.......

[Mac the Knife]

"California Angels" is wrong. "Anaheim Angels" is right

So by that logic we should also have the...

Arlington Rangers

Denver Rockies

East Rutherford Giants

East Rutherford Jets

East Rutherford Nets

Foxboro Patriots

Indianapolis Pacers

Mecklenburg County Panthers

Miami Marlins

Minneapolis (or is it St.Paul?) Timberwolves

Minneapolis Twins

Oakland Warriors

Phoenix Diamondbacks

St. Paul Wild

Salt Lake City Jazz

Tempe Cardinals

Wake County Hurricanes

Some of these I actually like now that I see the list, but to me there'll never be anything wrong with 'California Angels.'

[IronChefShark]

its a whole different story when there is only one team in the state. with two teams its still marginally wrong (the marlins should become Miami Marlins, but I admit, Dallas or Arlington Rangers sounds dumb)

but when there are FIVE teams in the state, yeah thats wrong. Theres something terribly unjust if someone doesnt have a problem with the Angels calling themselves "California".

it has nothing to do with personal preference, it has to do with whats right.

now, lets not start on this tired debate again, because there should be nothing to debate here. "California Angels" is wrong.

[Puckguy14]

Yeah the California moniker didn't make sense since there's five MLB teams in California and two in the AL. Anaheim fits better to me, and the city and fans appriciate it. I mean look at the way that city is fighting the ownership to prevent them from going to Los Angeles. There is no protocol or ruling that it says that but it just makes sense. Texas and Colorado seem ok to me. Texas while it has the Astros as well in that state, since the Rangers are the lone team in the AL. Ahh the bickering.

As for the Angels Disney logo. The winged A wasn't bad if its done correctly. Maybe as an alternate with an update. Anyways. Periwinkle didn't seem right. Besides, wasn't it a hybrid of powder blue and hint of lavender?

[chakfu]

I was just thinking about the city vs state name thing, and how I think some cities resound more with the whole state....maybe it's just conditioning, but when I lived in Indianapolis it felt representative of the whole state, hence Indiana Pacers, but living in Cleveland, I don't feel much representation with the rest of Ohio - so Ohio Browns wouldn't make sense. It probably depends whether a city has an instate rival - Cleveland vs Cincinnati makes "Ohio" teams not make sense - all though a Columbus team might have that going for it....