JQK Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 Boo.Baseball uniforms, above all other sports uniforms, should not have names on the back.I've always been an advocate of no names on the back, so to me, this is a huge step backwards... Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serge.101 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Boo.Baseball uniforms, above all other sports uniforms, should not have names on the back.I've always been an advocate of no names on the back, so to me, this is a huge step backwards...Even as MLB says it's MANDATORY to have names on the back and almost ANY OTHER TEAM has them?Hmm... By the way, love the new unis... Silver has no place on a Dodger jersey...One question: Is the "alternate" cap (the one with the shiny silver 'LA' and shiny silver brim) also gone? Hope so...Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tohasbo Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 It has been gone for a while, big man. It only lasted one year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManCalledAmp Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 I'm a proud Dodgers fan, and in my opinion they just did the splits. They took a huge step forward by returning the names, and an amazing step backwards at the same time by removing the outlines (esp. on the roads. Taking off the "Dodgers" logo on the sleeve seems a bit dense too, IMO.I listen to Rick Monday and Vin Scully (I assume I've heard Vin, as he's a large part of the reason I wanted my MLB Gameday Audio subscription last season) online sporadically through the season, if anyone wants to question my loyalty despite being in California (LA no less) for all of 8 days back in 2005.I understand wanting to salute the roots. I appreciate tradition. And I like that they want to maybe "clean up" a look. But in my opinion, losing all the trim makes the blue lose its pop on the roads, and combine the total loss of strokes with the simplistic back number font and NOB font and not only does it look bland, but to me it just looks unprofessional and downright indy league.Ick.Hopefully this is just a temporary "salute the past" fad. Their uniforms just before they took off the names were far and away the best. At least now we have the names back. Go Gators. Go Blue Raiders. Go Commodores. Go USC Trojans.Preds & Avs. Braves, Rays, & Dodgers. Titans, Colts, Broncos, Cardinals. Grizzlies. 14ers, Jam. Team Spirit + Laziness = Yay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Even as MLB says it's MANDATORY to have names on the back and almost ANY OTHER TEAM has them? This cant be true. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbeard's delight Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 if they really wanted to honor the team's past & tradition, they wouldn't be leaving vero beach to share a facility in AZ with the damn white sox. they've been there since the 1940's...being the home of the dodgers has been a big part of vero beach's identity for a long time -- there's a reason they call it dodgertown. a large part of my family calls the town home, and it will be a true shame to have the team leave. whenever i go down to visit my grandmother, aunt & uncles i always catch a game or two in the spring. this coming year i'm going to have to take some extra time off to see some games & soak up the atmosphere of the last spring of dodgertown...it sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctorpeligro Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 if they really wanted to honor the team's past & tradition, they wouldn't be leaving vero beach to share a facility in AZ with the damn white sox. they've been there since the 1940's...being the home of the dodgers has been a big part of vero beach's identity for a long time -- there's a reason they call it dodgertown. a large part of my family calls the town home, and it will be a true shame to have the team leave. whenever i go down to visit my grandmother, aunt & uncles i always catch a game or two in the spring. this coming year i'm going to have to take some extra time off to see some games & soak up the atmosphere of the last spring of dodgertown...it sucks.The Dodgers move to Arizona was inevitable. Training in Florida made it difficult (almost impossible?) for the vast majority of Dodger fans to go to spring training games. Truthfully, I'm an Angels fan, so I always took pleasure in the fact that the Dodgers played their pre-season games thousands of miles away. While it may bug your family, it was a smart move for McCourt to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbeard's delight Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 if they really wanted to honor the team's past & tradition, they wouldn't be leaving vero beach to share a facility in AZ with the damn white sox. they've been there since the 1940's...being the home of the dodgers has been a big part of vero beach's identity for a long time -- there's a reason they call it dodgertown. a large part of my family calls the town home, and it will be a true shame to have the team leave. whenever i go down to visit my grandmother, aunt & uncles i always catch a game or two in the spring. this coming year i'm going to have to take some extra time off to see some games & soak up the atmosphere of the last spring of dodgertown...it sucks.The Dodgers move to Arizona was inevitable. Training in Florida made it difficult (almost impossible?) for the vast majority of Dodger fans to go to spring training games. Truthfully, I'm an Angels fan, so I always took pleasure in the fact that the Dodgers played their pre-season games thousands of miles away. While it may bug your family, it was a smart move for McCourt to make.i guess i would argue that having the spring training site on the east coast served as an advantage for the team, and i wouldn't necessarily agree that the majority of dodger fans can be found on the west coast. there are probably as many dodger fans on the east as their are in the west, especially because they used to be in the east and many fans of the brooklyn dodgers remain fans of the LA dodgers. and they can't go to games in california, so this allows dodger fans to make it to games who wouldn't normally be able to see their team play. i can understand the reasons the team is giving for the move, but still, it is kind of a punch in the stomach for a city whose lifeblood relies so much on the team and revenue brought in during the spring by fans. the city has done a lot for the team, but the ownership is turning away from the tradition of this very unique spring training town. if you've ever been to a game there, you know what i'm talking about...the players are very accessible: no dugout; merely just a bench like any little league field, which lets you get up close with the players. then there is the onsite apartments where the players all live right by the stadium during the spring, which makes them easy to find on the practice fields on off days. it's just sad to see the team eventually giving that fan experience up for a likely multi-million dollar shared facility where the fans will not be able to rub elbows with their heroes like they have been able to do in vero. but that's life, i guess...all about the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazz013 Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 It's not just a reduction of the Silver...it's a complete elimination of the Silver.It's gone. Completely.So I guess that's "grey" on their BP gear? Save the slugalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruColor Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 It's not just a reduction of the Silver...it's a complete elimination of the Silver.It's gone. Completely.So I guess that's "grey" on their BP gear?I don't know. Haven't seen the BP graphics...just the home and road. And, all of the Silver was completely removed from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctorpeligro Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 there are probably as many dodger fans on the east as their are in the west, especially because they used to be in the east and many fans of the brooklyn dodgers remain fans of the LA dodgers. and they can't go to games in california, so this allows dodger fans to make it to games who wouldn't normally be able to see their team play. I'm sorry that you and your family are disappointed over the move, but to claim that the Dodgers have as many fans on the East Coast as they do on the West Coast is pretty far-fetched. It's not as if the move was recent; it happened 49 years ago. The vast majority of the people who were Brooklyn Dodgers fans are now 65 or older; the majority of New York baseball fans younger than that age are either Mets or Yankees fans.But that said, I would be happy to admit I'm wrong if you can provide evidence (and not anecdotes) to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
koizim Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 yup....no white outlines...Great jerseys! A classic look for a classic team. Lovin' it! Engine, Engine, Number Nine, on the New York transit line, If my train goes off the track, pick it up! Pick it up! Pick it up! Back on the scene, crispy and clean, You can try, but then why, 'cause you can't intervene. We be the outcast, down for the settle. Won't play the rock, won't play the pebble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
averyj Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 I'm a proud Dodgers fan, and in my opinion they just did the splits. They took a huge step forward by returning the names, and an amazing step backwards at the same time by removing the outlines (esp. on the roads. Taking off the "Dodgers" logo on the sleeve seems a bit dense too, IMO.I listen to Rick Monday and Vin Scully (I assume I've heard Vin, as he's a large part of the reason I wanted my MLB Gameday Audio subscription last season) online sporadically through the season, if anyone wants to question my loyalty despite being in California (LA no less) for all of 8 days back in 2005.I understand wanting to salute the roots. I appreciate tradition. And I like that they want to maybe "clean up" a look. But in my opinion, losing all the trim makes the blue lose its pop on the roads, and combine the total loss of strokes with the simplistic back number font and NOB font and not only does it look bland, but to me it just looks unprofessional and downright indy league.Ick.Hopefully this is just a temporary "salute the past" fad. Their uniforms just before they took off the names were far and away the best. At least now we have the names back.Wow. I bleed Dodger Blue, and I completely disagree with what you just said. I mean everything. You know, I rarely visit ccslsc anymore. I really should fix that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 did they change the color of the mlb logo on the back of the hat?did they change the color of the mlb logo on the back of the hat? On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 did they change the color of the mlb logo on the back of the hat?did they change the color of the mlb logo on the back of the hat?did they change the color of the mlb logo on the back of the hat? https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronxmet Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 Even as MLB says it's MANDATORY to have names on the back and almost ANY OTHER TEAM has them? This cant be true.Blame your good friend former NL President Chub Feeney who implemented a rule requiring all NL Teams to have names in the back of road jerseys circa 1978. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 UGLY "...You Ain't Got No Alibi. You Ugly. Yeah Yeah, You Ugly." https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swilson160 Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 As a longtime Dodger fan, I like 'em--I think the subtraction of the white outlines makes them look much more retro. But the sleeve piping on the road duds seems out of place, and they don't need sleeve logos--it should just be Dodgers/Los Angeles and the number on the front, name and number on the back, and that's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardcore Legend Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 Love them, look great. The Reds should have taken note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Discrim Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 The best being the blue alternate...I can't understand all the hate for that jersey.I agree with ya, and I don't even like the Dodgers. A strong mind gets high off success, a weak mind gets high off bull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.