Jump to content

Reds unveil new unis


simpsontide

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The Reds also went a uniform overhaul in 1995 or so. I guess this makes them as bad as the Astros, but it seems to me like a bit much. The Yankees shuffled around a bit initially, but have basically the same for the past 60 years or so. The Reds, the oldest professional team in baseball, is reshuffling its look every 15 years or so on average. While hardly criminal, three overhauls from 1995 to 2006 seems to me like a lot.

what change in 1995? they went with the sleeveless white home uniforms in 1993 with the white caps and pinstriped road greys. kept those until 1998. in 99 they added black and did away with the pinstripped road uniforms. what other change was there?

I said "1995 or so." 1993 counts as "or so." Also, as listed above, major Reds changes:

1968-71

1972-87

1988-92

1993-98

1999-2006

2007-

Since 1987, the oldest team in professional sports is on its fifth completely different uniform. In my eyes, that's too much for a team with the history of the Reds. Averaging one new uniform every four years, to me, is a bad thing.

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, im not so sure on this one boys. I think im in the minority when i say i liked the black in some of the sets cinci possesed.

Although, I must say, the word mark on that grey jersey is pretty sharp.

Other then that, everything else looks pretty blah. Nothing exciting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is how they should have used the black to begin with. As a trim/ drop shadow only. I don't like the black brim but other than that it is much better than before and am glad the fixed their mistake without going the lazy approach that most people want and go back to an older uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

drop shadow looks good.

I don't think I like drop shadows on anyone but the NY Rangers and 49ers, and those aren't really the same kind of drop shadows as the ones plaguing baseball. I guess the road script MIGHT grow on me, but it doesn't look that old-school to me. It's too contrived. Just having "CINCINNATI" in plain red block letters on grey would be sufficiently classic for me. Adding the white outline and black shadow is contradictory to looking old-time as they intended. I don't care for the piping on the homes, it looks kind of softball to me. I'd have preferred red-white-red sleeve striping with nothing on the placket, or nothing at all. I'm undecided on the numbers, haven't seen enough, but I'm leaning toward "too contrived."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since 1987, the oldest team in professional sports is on its fifth completely different uniform. In my eyes, that's too much for a team with the history of the Reds. Averaging one new uniform every four years, to me, is a bad thing.

The Reds have changed their uniforms every few years throughout their long history. So in a way, changes in uniforms are in keeping with their tradition. The only exception was the 1972-87 BRM pullovers, which lasted sixteen years. Nothing else they've ever worn has lasted a decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a huge Reds fan for 34 years, I am extremely disappointed in the home jerseys. The piping looks out of place and tacked on, and just doesn't fit the Reds. And keep in mind that I love the piping on many other teams' jerseys.

The road jersey is fine (though the dropshadow is unnecessary) and the red alt looks good. But dang, I can't imagine how I could have been more disappointed in the home jersey.

Now pardon me, as I am very depressed. :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a story from the Cincinnati Enquirer. On the right side of the page is a link to some photos. I wish they had provided some shots of the back numbers and names.

<_<

And do the pants have any stripes? You'd never know from the photos. And somebody tell me that's not a black belt with that home set!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a story from the Cincinnati Enquirer. On the right side of the page is a link to some photos. I wish they had provided some shots of the back numbers and names.

<_<

And do the pants have any stripes? You'd never know from the photos. And somebody tell me that's not a black belt with that home set!

The pants do have stripes down the side.

I like them overall but I was hoping for a maroon alternate, like the colors on the website, with the brighter red as an accent color.

But I really like these, maybe the Reds Shop will have the old ones on sale.

They are already on clearance on their site. :wink2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of the site, GWAH! The background looks like a window awning. That riverboat expansion looks pretty sweet, though. A batter's eye sellout that really adds a lot of character to the park, unlike Wrigley sticking a big window in the junipers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a huge Reds fan for 34 years, I am extremely disappointed in the home jerseys. The piping looks out of place and tacked on, and just doesn't fit the Reds. And keep in mind that I love the piping on many other teams' jerseys.

But dang, I can't imagine how I could have been more disappointed in the home jersey.

Now pardon me, as I am very depressed. :cry:

The piping bothered me at first, but now after picturing it with a red undershirt and with a player in full uniform it actually looks nice. I think it just looks so strange because the uniform is a BRIGHT white and the red is so stark in contrast. I think it will look much better on the field than it does in the MLB sale pictures. It looked a lot nicer on the runway in full uniform anyhow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.