Sign in to follow this  
NDwas

new look for the nats

Recommended Posts

Actually, I don't even like the "Nats" nickname for the jerseys. I don't think I've ever heard the Mets referred to as the Metropolitans, but I have heard the Washington team called the Nationals. Spell out the full name, or put it on an alt.

That's because the Mets are not the "Metropolitans," and never have been. They're just simply "Mets."

From the Mets' team Web site:

March 6, 1961 - The New York Metropolitan Baseball Club Inc., formally receives a certificate of membership from National League President Warren Giles. The Mets' name was judged by club owner Joan Payson as the one that best met five basic criteria:

1) It met public and press acceptance;

2) It was closely related to the team's corporate name (Metropolitan Baseball Club, Inc);

3) It was descriptive of the metropolitan area;

4) It had a brevity that delighted copy readers everywhere;

5) It had historical background referring to the Metropolitans of the 19th century American Association. Other names considered included Rebels, Skyliners, NYBs, Burros (for the five boroughs), Continentals, Avengers... as well as Jets and Islanders, names that would eventually find their way onto the New York sports scene.

May 8, 1961 - New York's National League club announces that the team nickname will be "Mets," a natural shortening of the corporate name ("New York Metropolitan Baseball Club, Inc.")

So while it is true that the team was never the Metropolitans, the name was derived from it.

And for the record, WFAN late-night host Steve Sommers does refer to them as the Metropolitans, so :P .

so does marty brennaman, I think he calls them the metropolitans whenever he announces the score when the reds and mets are playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
March 6, 1961 - The New York Metropolitan Baseball Club Inc., formally receives a certificate of membership from National League President Warren Giles. The Mets' name was judged by club owner Joan Payson as the one that best met five basic criteria:

1) It met public and press acceptance;

2) It was closely related to the team's corporate name (Metropolitan Baseball Club, Inc);

3) It was descriptive of the metropolitan area;

4) It had a brevity that delighted copy readers everywhere;

5) It had historical background referring to the Metropolitans of the 19th century American Association. Other names considered included Rebels, Skyliners, NYBs, Burros (for the five boroughs), Continentals, Avengers... as well as Jets and Islanders, names that would eventually find their way onto the New York sports scene.

May 8, 1961 - New York's National League club announces that the team nickname will be "Mets," a natural shortening of the corporate name ("New York Metropolitan Baseball Club, Inc.")

Interesting choices of names. Imagine the New York Yankees and the New York Rebels meeting in the World Series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like the concept and the colors but i dont know if i really like the "nats" on the uniforms

I agree with this opinion...

Just being curious... why "established 1905"? I never understood this date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i personally don't think they're that bad

4fad5340.jpg

c and c PLEASE

Cripes - this thread has been hijacked, rehijacked, indulged P.I.L.L., brought back on course and hijacked a 3rd time. (BTW, me gusta los Burros de Neuvo Iorque. HEE HAW!)

IATD, about your concept:

A. LOGO: The "DC" atop the Capitol looks out of place. And buying into the "1905" myth is hokey. At the very best, this team was established in 1969 as the Expos.

B. CAP: Throwing my log on the fire [here goes...]: The team is named the WASHINGTON Nationals. Not the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Nationals. The cap logo should be a "W", accordingly. It doesn't have to be the "pretzel"/script W they have now, but it should be a "W". The Reds wear a "C" for Cincinnati, not an "O" for Ohio; the Mariners wear an "S" for Seattle, etc. So it should be for the Washington Nationals.

C. JERSEYS: The "NATS" wordmark is not working. For starters, it's too sparse. Teams with 4 letters in their name generally don't use the wordmark (Reds, Cubs) or incorporatd a logo into it (Jays... which looks weird to begin with). The Devil Rays are an exception, but anything's better than those toxic gradient rainbow nightmares.

Also, the "NATS" wordmark font does not come close to matching the wordmark you used for "NATIONALS". Look at the "N" (lowercase v. uppercase) and the "A" (triangular v. square with rounded corners) especially.

D. WORDMARK: The font is a little futuristic. Washington is the nation's capital, and should exude a style more befitting a nation's capital. Something serifed, something more presidential. Not the vibe I get from this font style.

I like the italicized numbers, and the navy cap at home. And the primary will look great without the "DC" on top. These could like nice, but need some work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this