Mismatching Det. Tigers Logos

[kmw_29]

I was watching the Detroit Tigers game, and notices that the gothic "D" logo on their home jerseys was different from the gothic "D" on their dugout jackets, the graphic painted on the field, and in Fox's graphics. The difference was in that within the "D" on the jerseys, on the right hand side of the logo, there are two arcs, perhaps representing a ball, which were pushing outwards... however, on the dugout jacket, etc. the arcs were pointing inward, as if they were perhaps the seams on the baseball. Has anyone else noticed this, or does anyone else know why there is this discrepancy?

[NJTank]

The white D shows up better on the Stadium pic

[Discrim]

the first english D you describe (upper lefthand corner of the posted page) is the jersey D, the other D is used on both hats. Kinda like how the NY on the Yankees' caps and home/BP jerseys are different, or how the White Sox had different versions of the diagonal SOX on the cap and jersey on the sets using said logo before the current set.

[IceCap]

It's something left over from the old days, when streamlining a team's look wasn't that important. IMO the Tigers should have fixed it a long time ago.

[winghaz]

It's something left over from the old days, when streamlining a team's look wasn't that important. IMO the Tigers should have fixed it a long time ago.

Yes, they should have fixed it a long time ago, but they can't now. It's become part of the Tigers' tradition.

[nwtrailtrekker]

It's something left over from the old days, when streamlining a team's look wasn't that important. IMO the Tigers should have fixed it a long time ago.

Yes, they should have fixed it a long time ago, but they can't now. It's become part of the Tigers' tradition.

so stupid to have 2 different D's

also they should make the D on the hat white not orange

[IceCap]

It's something left over from the old days, when streamlining a team's look wasn't that important. IMO the Tigers should have fixed it a long time ago.

Yes, they should have fixed it a long time ago, but they can't now. It's become part of the Tigers' tradition.

I disagree. They could do it very quietly, and I doubt many people would notice. Same goes for the Yankees and their "NY"

[fiasco!]

It's something left over from the old days, when streamlining a team's look wasn't that important. IMO the Tigers should have fixed it a long time ago.

Yes, they should have fixed it a long time ago, but they can't now. It's become part of the Tigers' tradition.

so stupid to have 2 different D's

also they should make the D on the hat white not orange

the D on the home cap is white, the D on the road cap is orange.

[Proc]

The Tigers have used the two different Olde English "D's" forever. The "D" on the jersey is rounded. The one on the hat is pointed. No big deal. We here in Motown love it. Its tradition.

GO TIGERS!

[leopard88]

The Tigers have used the two different Olde English "D's" forever. The "D" on the jersey is rounded. The one on the hat is pointed.

And yet in my 39 years I have somehow failed to notice that.

[M59]

While there is little to no hope for the return of the "Tiger through the D" logo--which I LOVED, BTW--I do wish the Tigers would make the "D" on their caps larger. It doesn't make much of an impact in the current size.

[Gothamite]

It's little things like this that make the Tigers look so good.

Good for them. The Yankees have no fewer than four distinct versions of their "NY" - one for the uniforms, one for the caps, one for the batting helmets and one for print.

Ralph Waldo Emerson was right: a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

It's the little things like these, and like the red numbers on the front of the Dodgers' uniforms, that elevate a good look into a classic.

[leopard88]

It's little things like this that make the Tigers look so good.

Good for them. The Yankees have no fewer than four distinct versions of their "NY" - one for the uniforms, one for the caps, one for the batting helmets and one for print.

Ralph Waldo Emerson was right: a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

It's the little things like these, and like the red numbers on the front of the Dodgers' uniforms, that elevate a good look into a classic.

So does this mean you approve of the mismatching colors on the Cowboys' uniforms?

I apologize in advance if I have sent this thread veering wildly off course.

[BBM]

Honestly I could never see the Cowboys in anything different. Matching be damned; their look has to stay.

[Artmanc3po]

The Tigers know a good thing when they have it. Rarely does anyone complain about their home look. I say keep it and honor a long, long past. More teams need this sort of simple, strong look. The only things I have ever disliked about their look was the way their road unis have changed over the years. I like their current set because of its use of their old font, and the getting rid of side stripes. I didn't like the tiger through the D hats--too busy.

[leedsunited]

Frankly, both D's look fine.

I'm just glad that the D logo with the tiger intertwined is getting shafted on the website of theirs

[BallWonk]

It's little things like this that make the Tigers look so good.

Good for them. The Yankees have no fewer than four distinct versions of their "NY" - one for the uniforms, one for the caps, one for the batting helmets and one for print.

Ralph Waldo Emerson was right: a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.

It's the little things like these, and like the red numbers on the front of the Dodgers' uniforms, that elevate a good look into a classic.

Except that you seem to be arguing that inconsistency is, by itself, a virtue. As overrated as slick consistency is, inconsistency is usually just plain sloppy. As with the Yankees. It's ridiculous to have even two versions of the same NY logo. There is no reason not to use the jersey logo in all instances -- it's a beautiful, simple logo that scales perfectly. The cap logo, on the other hand, looks fine at the scale of a cap, but it looks like absolute crap at any larger scale when compared to the much cleaner jersey logo.

In Detroit's case, the two logos could use a little regularizing -- particularly the little curves inside the D; they should be convex or concave on both logos -- but the simpler, thicker logo works better on the jersey than the cap logo would, and the cap logo works much better on a cap than the jersey logo would. It makes aesthetic sense for the Tigers to have different iterations of their Old English D.

And yes, Detroit, like most teams, needs to make its cap logo larger. Just look at the size of the D on Magnum's cap:

A bunch of teams seem to have suffered cap logo shrinkage right about the time New Era switched to puffy logos.

[logodawg]

It's something left over from the old days, when streamlining a team's look wasn't that important. IMO the Tigers should have fixed it a long time ago.

Yes, they should have fixed it a long time ago, but they can't now. It's become part of the Tigers' tradition.

I disagree. They could do it very quietly, and I doubt many people would notice. Same goes for the Yankees and their "NY"

Accept every Tigers fan and their mom would notice. Don't you dare go near Detroit's Ds!

[hecticbro]

I don't like it, and I also don't like that they aren't using the caged tiger logo anymore. My favorite Tigers uniforms were the ones they wore a few years back with, basically, the same road jersey and the caged tiger on the caps, with an orange bill.

[leedsunited]

I don't like it, and I also don't like that they aren't using the caged tiger logo anymore. My favorite Tigers uniforms were the ones they wore a few years back with, basically, the same road jersey and the caged tiger on the caps, with an orange bill.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any Tiger fan to agree with that one.

You'd have to understand tiger lore and history to fully appreciate the Olde-English D and what it represents to the team and to the city. To have it changed to some godawful logo with a slinky tiger?