minnesota

[HatCityEnforcer]

The twins have had there jerseys for almost twenty.

Liar

1987. its been 18.

No lies.

Funny how I remember the Twins only wearing only their 'M' caps back in oh...2001.

Funny how someone born in 1991 is protesting this. The "M" logo is older than you are.

Hard though it may be to grasp the concept of things occurring before you were here, the Twins changed their look in 1987. Here's a pic from that season. Note the hat.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

What the hell are we arguing about here?

The initial statement is correct, the Twins have had the same jerseys since 1987 (alts notwithstanding). The "M" hat appeared for the first time the same year.

If we are debating about the change in the hat - yes, the Twins re-added the "TC" hat in, I believe 2001, but that certainly can't be considered "changing the jersey," let alone, changing the uniform. For all practical purposes, the Twins have had the same uni since 1987.

Bottom line: leafs13 - you're a dope.

Moose

The Twins brought the TC hat back in 2001 for the team's 40 anniversary of the move from Washington to Minneapolis-St. Paul.

The fans loved it and the team decided to keep the TC hat as the home hat and make it the helmet emblem (kinda like what the D-Backs did with the Snake-D logo...that was on the batting helmets first, then became the road hat)...

The ONLY change to the jersey the Twins have made was adding names to the home jerseys in 1996....before that, the homes didn't have names on the back....once again, that's about as much of a change as the Cubbies taking the names off their home set this season.

The design and wordmarks have remained consistant since 1987.

Bringing in a new hat or adding names to the back isn't "changing the jersey" by any stretch...anyone claiming it is has about as much of a clue as a bowl of potato salad.

[Jigga]

They put KNICKS on the front of the NY Knickerbockers' uniforms.

So WOLVES on the front looks sharp.

See also:

SuperSONICS

Trail BLAZERS

Only the Wolves uniforms need to change. The font is horrible. Sports teams should have a locker room feel, not a mall.

also, dallas and cleveland have worn jerseys that said Mavs and Cavs, respectively...

i see no problem with WOLVES.

Just because someone does it does not make it right...

[Gothamite]

Agreed. Shame on you, Devil Rays and Blue Jays.

[tommytimp]

And the CUBS! Everyone knows they're The Chicago National League Ball Club.

And it's "Scrabble Brand Crossword Game by Selchow and Richter," not "Scrabble."

[Candyc0ded]

The Vikes need to go back to the 60's and bring back the good old PURPLE PANTS. It's not even an old trend. SO many teams nowadays are adding colored pants or bringing colored pants back to their uniform schemes. The Vikes have good uni's it's just there's one thing missing-------------THE PURPLE PANTS.

You can get a look at the old ones here:

http://www.athlegraphic.com/FFP/1960s/1962.htm

Also possibly adding an all purple jersey too, but as a once a season alternate.

[Joshawaggie]

Also possibly adding an all purple jersey too, but as a once a season alternate.

assuming you mean purple jerseys and purple pants, that would never, EVER happen again. Thats the whole reason why they dont have purple pants anymore, after that game against the Lions back in the early 60's.

[Intimidator85]

I think all the uniforms are fine. The Twins don't have the best uniforms in all of baseball, but they're good enough and they're not hideous.

I like the Timberwolves' new uniforms and there is no need in change there. Though other teams did it, it somehow did not seem right for them in particular to only place "WOLVES" on their uniforms. Also, the Mavericks already had the blue/green combination at the time, so it was good the T'wolves changed.

The Vikings don't need to change. They never had bad uniforms. They definitely should never switch from or downplay the color purple, as it is a big part in their identity and is very unique. Purple pants aren't a bad idea, either, but I think both the home and away uniforms look best with white pants.

No one has talked about the Wild yet, probably because the team is very new. I'd make the most changes here. Pretty much, they stole Kansas State's logo and used it for themselves. Though I like the colors, they are just holding on to too many of the things of the old Minnesota North Stars and need a fresh start. The nickname "Wild" is OK with me, but I'd change everything else regarding the logo and colors.

[WSU151]

When the Wolves introduced the current design, I thought it was the coolest because of the font, the color, and the design. Of course, that was the mid-90s and I was in my mid-teens. Same with the Coyotes.

But now, the Wolves' look is old and ugly. I like the trees, but don't really like the font, and the color just doesn't look as good to me as it used to.

And the old Coyotes jersey (except for the green alt) looks really ugly to me too.

[-kj]

Pretty much, they stole Kansas State's logo and used it for themselves.

Ummmm... no. Not even close.

[tajmccall]

Yah K-State and Wild logo?

Thats like saying the chiefs stole the FSU logo.

[winghaz]

Speaking of logos, the Vikings should never, ever, EVER change the fierce-looking Norseman logo. To me, that logo is perfect.

The Twins should make the shaking-hands logo their main logo.

The Wolves ... well, I like the logo but I'm indifferent about everything else. Even the colors.

The Wild name sucks, but we're stuck with it. So, considering it's a lousy name, I think the logo is pretty damn good and shouldn't be changed. What's especially cool to the folks in Minnesota is that the eye in the bear's head is the north star (take that, Norm Greene).

[-kj]

The Twins should make the shaking-hands logo their main logo.

Why?

Granted, their current main logo is dull, but a lot of baseball logos are. But I'm just not a fan of the goofy shaking-hands-across-the-river logo.

[andrewharrington]

the Vikings should never, ever, EVER change the fierce-looking Norseman logo.

You do realize that logo is about as un-fierce as a sunflower, don't you?

[Andy]

The Wild name sucks, but we're stuck with it. So, considering it's a lousy name, I think the logo is pretty damn good and shouldn't be changed. What's especially cool to the folks in Minnesota is that the eye in the bear's head is the north star (take that, Norm Greene).

That's a bear? I thought of it as a wildcat.

[winghaz]

The Twins should make the shaking-hands logo their main logo. 

Why?

Granted, their current main logo is dull, but a lot of baseball logos are. But I'm just not a fan of the goofy shaking-hands-across-the-river logo.

Because it offers a sense of tradition, making one remember the teams of Harmon Killebrew, Tony Oliva, Rod Carew, etc.

Now, on the other hand, if you can come up with a great-looking logo for a team called the Twins, I'd love to see it. And, if I like it, I'd gladly shake your hand (like the logo I prefer) and say that that logo is what the Twins should use.

[ColeJ]

The Wild name sucks, but we're stuck with it. So, considering it's a lousy name, I think the logo is pretty damn good and shouldn't be changed. What's especially cool to the folks in Minnesota is that the eye in the bear's head is the north star (take that, Norm Greene).

That's a bear? I thought of it as a wildcat.

it's actually neither... i believe the official term that the team uses is a nondescript "wild-thing"

i hate the wild's name and colors... the fans of minnesota deserve something better. how awful is that "let's go wild" chant? ugh. it's a bad pun.

[spyboy1]

Unless the Timberwolves of the treNdBA change their jerseys again, the first Minnesota team to change theirs will be the WILD.

Guaranteed.

The whole thing about the "Wild" is that it is just vauge enough that once the marketing department determines that sales of the current logo merchandise have fallen below League Averages for Projected Income Streams, ie: sales start to slow down enough, they will simply redo the logo to some new, fresh and exciting! newly vauge and non-specific wild animal that might be more cat, badger, chicken or raptor like in apperance (without ever commiting officially to exactly what it is this time around either) to Renew Maximum Income Revenue Streams so that every hockey fanatic will have to run out and buy new jerseys and hats, etc. so they can once more line thier pockets with YOUR hard-earned cash and NOT SPEND A FRICKIN' DIME ON ANY FREE AGENTS WHILE THE PITTSBURGH PENGUINS SIGN EVERY VETERAN AND HOT ROOKIE UNDER THE SUN.

Stay tuned, that new Wild logo is coming the day after you tire of the current one. (Oh, the one after that has surely already been designed as well.)

It ain't sports no more kids, it's marketing.

JeffB

Cynical, but right.

[-kj]

Wow, and I thought I was a cynic.

[no97]

No, spyboy1's right, not to turn this into a (gasp) hockey thread, but Wild fans have a lot to bitch about. The "develop players" model that worked so well pre-lockout (getting them to the Western Conference Finals in 2003) is not the same method that will work in the "new" NHL. The Wild are destined to become the Expos of the league, developing other teams talent, only to see them become stars elsewhere. By the time players can become free-agents at the age of 27, the Wild will have develpoed them all into great playears, then signed none of them to long-term deals. All this, plus look at all the current free-agents the Wild have taken in! For how much more than they are paying the current crop of youth? The difference in Minnesota is they will still sell out the "X," and still sell merchandise, unlike other markets around the NHL. Until that stops, the Wild will continue to refuse to put a competative product on the ice...

Moose

[usahockeyrube]

I wish the Twins would go back to the old script of "Twins" on the jerseys in blue, like the 1965 team. Keep the road uni's gray with that script and the home uni's white with blue pinstripes.