Brewers' Cap Logo, etc.

[Gothamite]

Well, we at least used to have that in the outfield. Until they decided to child-proof the world.

[Hat Boy]

The return of Beer Barrel Man would be great, but you know the same marketing fools that got rid of the ball and glove logo would try to ruin him. They would ditch the stirrups and give him "pajama" pants and put his cap on backwords so he could be "gangsta".

[Gothamite]

The fools that got rid of the ball and glove are long gone.

I think the BBM is just whimsical enough to not appeal at all to those who would "update" him.

I did enough updating already - changing his 1940s socks to proper stirrups, doing some touch-up work on the tap and bat.

[BBTV]

I agree with you in principle, but I also think you're overly valuing hard and fast rules here. There are always exceptions.

Perhaps you're not willing to make an exception here because you don't like the logo, but in this case I think the fans ought to be heard and this should be the exception.

I'd much rather see them return to the 1996-1999 uniforms, with the Beer Barrel Man as the primary logo. That would serve both interests - the scheme would reflect both the aesthetics of the city and the nature of the nickname. Alas, that's not what the fans want.

And I still say that the glove is worlds better than the goofy, unblanced mess they wear now. Even though it's not my favorite logo by far, that's a trade this Brewers fan is more than willing to make.

It really has nothing to do with liking or disliking the logo. Honestly, I kind of like it (I actually made my mom buy me a mesh-backed yellow-blue mb cap back in the 80s) but I don't think it is a good logo for the Brewers.

I also believe fully that you have to make exceptions to some rules. However, I really can't see an instance where that would be possible in this context. If you can point out another instance of a logo totally not being indicitive of a team or city in some way I'd certainly address it. I can't think of one that would get my OK. And, my OK is really all that matters

I view the mb the same way as the Cavs 'hoop' logo. Kind of cool, just not appropriate.

[Bernd]

Should it really be up to the fans as to what logo is used for the team? The owners themselves are the final decision makers. I'm thinking of John Moores, the owner of the Padres. Judging from Cooperstown sales and from what the fans are wearing at Petco Park, there is a significant portion of the fanbase that loves the old Padres brown. But the huge Padres store at the ballpark doesn't even carry any retro gear. No taco hats, no brown jerseys, nothing. Moores has given a giant "up yours" to the brown and, like it or not, is trying to establish his own logo and color traditions.

[DrBear]

Let's be honest - if a Milwaukee team took the field wearing t-shirts that said CHICO'S BAIL BONDS and won the pennant, fans would be happy.

Given that the Brewers are, even with current improvement, far away from a pennant, why not give the paying customers what they apparently like?

[The_Admiral]

Should it really be up to the fans as to what logo is used for the team? The owners themselves are the final decision makers. I'm thinking of John Moores, the owner of the Padres. Judging from Cooperstown sales and from what the fans are wearing at Petco Park, there is a significant portion of the fanbase that loves the old Padres brown. But the huge Padres store at the ballpark doesn't even carry any retro gear. No taco hats, no brown jerseys, nothing. Moores has given a giant "up yours" to the brown and, like it or not, is trying to establish his own logo and color traditions.

But Milwaukee doesn't have a "significant portion," it's pretty much the vast majority of the fanbase that wants it back. If Moores want to establish his own traditions, fine. Too bad his traditions are guys that look like they wet themselves in road games.

It's good business sense to bring back the ball in glove, since that's what people are buying and clamoring for anyway. As for the current set, I like the Milwaukee and Brewers scripts, the M hat is okay, but Times New Roman doesn't look good. It's not "sporty," and definitely not Milwaukee.

[IceCap]

Sucks cause I cannot stand that logo.

The ball and glove logo is one of the greatest ever. It's better than their new generic wheat logo.

Give me a reason why the ball and glove logo sucks?

Milwaukee has never had a good logo/uniform since the Milwaukee Braves... courtesy of Boston.

Seriously, I want reasons why it sucks? It's unique, creative and genius. I show friends and family that logo, and they love it!

And you all better have Bernie Brewer diving in beer again. That slide is so PC it's embarassing.

you want a reason why the ball and glove logo sucks? well the team is named the brewers, and the ball and glove logo has NOTHING to do with beer making. the current brewers set is among the leauge's best, and it actually represents the team name.

That logic doesn't work for me. Baseball logos (unlike most other sports) are generally letters (see "NY" "SF" "LA" "StL" "C" "D" ...). None of these insertyoursuperlativehere logos have anything to do with their team.

I agree with you that the current Brewers set is fine, and I agree that it is better than the glove logo. I'm just saying that I think your arguing point is very flawed.

my logic is flawed? ha. think your argument through.

the yankees "NY" the cards "StL" the cubs "C" and the tigers "D" don't have anything to do with the team names. however those logos are just the cap logos. the teams acrtually have primary logos that represent their respective names:

*the dodgers and giants are exceptions because you can't really have logos that describe those teams without them seeiming minor leauge and cartoony.

the ball in glove logo however is a different situation. its not like there is an other logo that goes with it that represents beer making. it's just an "mb" in the shape of a baseball and glove. it wouldn't be so bad if the mb was used only as a hat logo, like the yankees "NY" and there was a primary that represented beer making. that is not the case however. there is no good primary to complement the ball and glove like the hat/bat complements the "NY." there's just the mb, and that simply dosn't work for a team named the brewers.

[The_Admiral]

there's just the mb, and that simply dosn't work for a team named the brewers.

THE FANS IN MILWAUKEE DON'T EVEN GIVE A DAMN

"Huh? This has nothing to do with brewing or beermaking! I will not support this!" It's more like "oh yeah, I remember when we didn't suck."

Use the beer barrel man as the primary then. Or stick the mb on a beer mug.

[winghaz]

*the dodgers and giants are exceptions because you can't really have logos that describe those teams without them seeiming minor leauge and cartoony.

Hmmm. If you had an actual logo of a Dodger, what would it be?

[Jigga]

*the dodgers and giants are exceptions because you can't really have logos that describe those teams without them seeiming minor leauge and cartoony.

Hmmm. If you had an actual logo of a Dodger, what would it be?

Bill Clinton? George W. Bush?

or any other draft dodger you can find

[ColeJ]

i know my opinion doesn't matter on this subject, since i'm not the biggest baseball fan, nor am i a fan of the brewers...

however, when i was a little kid, living on the alabama/georgia border, we used to go to the columbus mudcats games on a regular basis... they sold those little batting helmets with ice-cream in them.

i didn't know any MLB teams at the time (i was really young), but whenever i got the ball-in-glove logo, i loved it. after a few games, of getting indians or yankees or rangers helmets, i started requesting brewers helmets. i just loved that logo, for some reason.

so give the diehard fans what they want. if brewers fans want the logo to be a pink bunny rabbit, let them.

[DrBear]

[sc49erfan15]

Personally, I like the ball & glove logo. I used to have the old Cooperstown Collection hat until I lost it at school.

However...

I also think the Brewers' current unis are very nice and wouldn't want them to go back to it.

[doctorpeligro]

*the dodgers and giants are exceptions because you can't really have logos that describe those teams without them seeiming minor leauge and cartoony.

Hmmm. If you had an actual logo of a Dodger, what would it be?

Bill Clinton? George W. Bush?

or any other draft dodger you can find

The name "Dodgers" refers to trolley dodgers in turn-of-the-century Brooklyn. I always thought the Dodgers logo was of the "Dodgers" name dodging a baseball

[Jigga]

The name "Dodgers" refers to trolley dodgers in turn-of-the-century Brooklyn. I always thought the Dodgers logo was of the "Dodgers" name dodging a baseball

I knew what it originally referred to, I just wanted to throw in an off-color political remark where it was completely unwarranted. Thanks though.

[winghaz]

Bill Clinton? George W. Bush?

or any other draft dodger you can find 

I love it.

[brinkeguthrie]

i dont get why so many people hate the current Brewers logo and scheme. I really like the typeface and the blue/gold scheme. Of course, it is totally stolen from Miller beer...

heck, just dress em in yellow and green and put an oval G logo on that hat..

[Mac the Knife]

Now that this thread has decided to flagellate the Brewers' retro logo yet AGAIN, can we give similar exhaustive treatment to the "fat swirly" P of the Fightins'?

Sorry, but I miss the "swirly P".

And I miss the ball & glove.

I also miss the Pirates pillbox hats, though in that case I don't want to see them return.

[griffelh]

I also vote yes on the ball&glove...as well as the Phillies P!