Rays seem ready to dump Devil

[Sir Donald]

Sooo...how about those Rays, huh?

Well they're ahead of the Yankees at the moment...

[Gothamite]

Heck, if the Brewers can have a 2 1/5 game lead in the NL Central, anything can happen. April is a crazy month.

We'll see how the rest of the season shakes out.

[Sir Donald]

The basements calling for the Rays. Its missing them.

Its a shame they can't get that kick in the right direction they need, Devil Rays or no Devil Rays.

[boardname]

I found it interesting that at the intro of the Rays/Angels game yesterday, FSN West specifically called them "the Rays". They have the two line graphic where it says the city name on top, and the team name below in larger print, and it said:

TAMPA BAY

RAYS

Obviously plenty of room for "devil". Maybe they know something for certain?

[Gothamite]

Maybe they were just following the lead of the team, which publicly announced it was downplaying the "Devil" part years ago:

The Orioles are frequently referred to as the "O's" in the corner box.

[Survival79]

Play at the plate: fans want 'Devil Ray' to stay

Tampa Bay Business Journal

2:18 PM EDT Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Baseball fans may be purists for tradition, and Tampa Bay is no exception.

As many as 37 percent (242) of the 643 responses to the latest Business Pulse survey said the Devil Rays should keep their name and colors the same. The survey is the newspaper's weekly nonscientific online snapshot of what readers are thinking.

The team has just a few weeks before it must decide on the issue and inform Major League Baseball of its decision to change its name, logo or colors. The second most popular choice, or 28 percent, said drop the "Devil," keep the "Rays" but keep the colors the same.

Just 16 percent, or 108 readers, said the drop the "Devil," keep the "Rays," but go ahead and change the colors.

Comments were extensive.

"I like "Rays" but ditch the colors. Light blue and yellow would be a solid choice as no MLB teams currently have those uniforms."

"Is it the 'Tampa Bay' part or the 'Devil' part of the name that is the issue here?" asked another reader. "For the last few years we've heard that it isn't right that the Tampa Bay Devil Rays play in St. Petersburg, or some such nonsense. So, I doubt seriously that they can change the name of the Bay; and I doubt that they can change the biological or common name of a sea creature. So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

For many more reader comments see the May 4 print edition of the Tampa Bay Business Journal.

[Gothamite]

Thanks for the article - interesting.

So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

What the heck does that mean? "Tampa Bay" doesn't represent the entire community?

[TBGKon]

Thanks for the article - interesting.

So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

What the heck does that mean? "Tampa Bay" doesn't represent the entire community?

Agreed, I just don't understand that, or any argument for changing the name to St. Petersburg. Tampa Bay is a regional name. Just because it has the word "Tampa" in it, doesn't mean they're just Tampa's team.

[BallWonk]

So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

What the heck does that mean? "Tampa Bay" doesn't represent the entire community?

It means people are stupid. I can't think of a single good team name/uniform decision that has ever come from asking the fans what they think. (Wasn't a fan poll involved in choosing "Devil Rays" in the first place?) The fact that only a minority of fans wants to drop the Devil name pretty much proves that it's a good idea. Aside from the XFL, nobody has ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the public.

I've been playing around with a generic Rays concept just to test colors. I've found a shade of saturated light blue that I think might actually look really good for the Rays. Something in the neighborhood of CMYK 100,0,6,18, or something between Pantone 640 and 641. It's like the color of deep blue you see in the sky on a clear day when you look where the sun isn't. It's light blue, but intense, so it stands up well next to yellow without making the overall combination look washed out.

Of course, if the team switches colors, New Era will just use Royals blanks to make Rays caps anyway, so finding the perfect shade of blue is a fool's erand.

[Survival79]

Thanks for the article - interesting.

So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

What the heck does that mean? "Tampa Bay" doesn't represent the entire community?

You're welcome. Maybe they're suggesting "St. Petersburg Bay Rays" or (I can't believe I'm about to post this) "St. Petersburg Rays of Tampa Bay"?

Of course, if the team switches colors, New Era will just use Royals blanks to make Rays caps anyway, so finding the perfect shade of blue is a fool's erand.

It's funny because it's true.

[Gothamite]

Of course, if the team switches colors, New Era will just use Royals blanks to make Rays caps anyway, so finding the perfect shade of blue is a fool's erand.

It's funny because it's true.

New Era uses two different shades of royal blue, regardless of the actual team colors:

- royal for the Mets, Royals and Brewers; and

- darker royal for the Cubs and Dodgers.

[Fjm]

I drew up a Rays concept about a week ago, with a green and navy blue color scheme, using their existing design for the most part with a few alterations. I was basically just trying to simplify their uniforms and colors to something more traditional.

Scroll down to the bottom ... the image on top was revised.

I've only had 3 responses, all of which hated it. If someone actually likes it I wouldn't object to hearing from you so I can get off my ledge.

http://boards.sportslogos.net/index.php?showtopic=48793

[BallWonk]

New Era uses two different shades of royal blue, regardless of the actual team colors:

- royal for the Mets, Royals and Brewers; and

- darker royal for the Cubs and Dodgers.

New Era's straitjacket approach to cap colors really bothers me. I mean, I can understand that back in like the 1920s it might have made sense that teams had to choose between "blue" and "red" and just accept whatever color fabrics the manufacturer had on hand. The team was only ordering a few dozen of each item, the orders were annual one-off jobs, and there was no merchandising. But when I think back to the 1980s, at the dawn of the modern era of fans buying caps and jerseys that otherwise might have been used by the team, there was real variety in team colors. The Twins wore caps that were a different shade of blue than the Yankees or the Indians. A Red Sox cap didn't look just like a Yankees cap when seen from behind. There were even different shades of red in use, as well as different shades of yellow.

But now New Era completely disregards each team's "official" colors to use only a handful of blanks to make caps. There's, what, four shades of blue (midnight, true navy, dark royal, true royal), maybe five, black, red, brick, and dark green? Am I missing any? Anyway, every once in a while it bothers me that so many teams now have Yankees midnight blue as official colors and I complain here. Then Pantone points out that, despite what the teams are actually wearing, Yankees midnight navy isn't actually their official color. Except that nobody cares if there's a different numerical value in some stylebook somewhere; the Nationals, Red Sox, and Twins are wearing Yankees midnight blue caps. I don't care what a team claims; if it wears Yankees midnight blue, then Yankees midnight blue is its official color. When you see the wall of MLB caps at a store it kind of looks like there are only four teams: The midnight navy team, the blue team, the red team, and the A's.

This is part of a trend of manufacturer league-wide standardization that's taking place across the board, and it's affecting many sports to a greater (worse) extent that baseball. But I just wish some baseball team would pick a really distinctive color and then stand up to New Era and force the company to source and use fabric in the correct color. Sort of, "I don't care how inconvenient you think it is to make our caps on a different run than the Royals. We're Major League Baseball, we hold a legal global monopoly on the world's second most popular sport, we do billions of dollars of business worldwide each year, and you're a half-assed hip-hop clothing accessory peddler. These are our colors. We expect you to use them."

[TBGKon]

One logo I'd like to see the Rays try out is a modern interlocking "TB" on their caps, with the stem of the T weaving thru the holes in the B. Not sure if anyone wants to try and tackle this at all.

[CubsFanBudMan]

New Era uses two different shades of royal blue, regardless of the actual team colors:

- royal for the Mets, Royals and Brewers; and

- darker royal for the Cubs and Dodgers.

New Era's straitjacket approach to cap colors really bothers me. I mean, I can understand that back in like the 1920s it might have made sense that teams had to choose between "blue" and "red" and just accept whatever color fabrics the manufacturer had on hand. The team was only ordering a few dozen of each item, the orders were annual one-off jobs, and there was no merchandising. But when I think back to the 1980s, at the dawn of the modern era of fans buying caps and jerseys that otherwise might have been used by the team, there was real variety in team colors. The Twins wore caps that were a different shade of blue than the Yankees or the Indians. A Red Sox cap didn't look just like a Yankees cap when seen from behind. There were even different shades of red in use, as well as different shades of yellow.

But now New Era completely disregards each team's "official" colors to use only a handful of blanks to make caps. There's, what, four shades of blue (midnight, true navy, dark royal, true royal), maybe five, black, red, brick, and dark green? Am I missing any? Anyway, every once in a while it bothers me that so many teams now have Yankees midnight blue as official colors and I complain here. Then Pantone points out that, despite what the teams are actually wearing, Yankees midnight navy isn't actually their official color. Except that nobody cares if there's a different numerical value in some stylebook somewhere; the Nationals, Red Sox, and Twins are wearing Yankees midnight blue caps. I don't care what a team claims; if it wears Yankees midnight blue, then Yankees midnight blue is its official color. When you see the wall of MLB caps at a store it kind of looks like there are only four teams: The midnight navy team, the blue team, the red team, and the A's.

This is part of a trend of manufacturer league-wide standardization that's taking place across the board, and it's affecting many sports to a greater (worse) extent that baseball. But I just wish some baseball team would pick a really distinctive color and then stand up to New Era and force the company to source and use fabric in the correct color. Sort of, "I don't care how inconvenient you think it is to make our caps on a different run than the Royals. We're Major League Baseball, we hold a legal global monopoly on the world's second most popular sport, we do billions of dollars of business worldwide each year, and you're a half-assed hip-hop clothing accessory peddler. These are our colors. We expect you to use them."

I wasn't really aware that this was a New Era problem. They certainly have enough "wrong" colors available for each team that you'd think something unique wouldn't be a problem -- just crank out the Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox, Cardinals versions of it as well...

[tBBP]

Thanks for the article - interesting.

So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

What the heck does that mean? "Tampa Bay" doesn't represent the entire community?

Agreed, I just don't understand that, or any argument for changing the name to St. Petersburg. Tampa Bay is a regional name. Just because it has the word "Tampa" in it, doesn't mean they're just Tampa's team.

Right on. And there are many more instances of this type of thing.

A few years ago in the AF2 (arenafootball2) league, there was a team named the Tennesee Valley Vipers. I thought it was a cool name..."Valley Vipers" when I first heard it...until I was told the team's locale was, in fact, "Tennessee Valley", and the moniker was "Vipers".

Where did the team play?

HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA.

So you see, "regional" nicknames don't always have to be constrained to the area one most associates with it.

Not sure that this helps the argument (especially since I'm offering up here, as a point of argumentation, a "minor league" team), but regardless, I thought I'd throw that bone out there...arf.

[TruColor]

But now New Era completely disregards each team's "official" colors to use only a handful of blanks to make caps. There's, what, four shades of blue (midnight, true navy, dark royal, true royal), maybe five, black, red, brick, and dark green? Am I missing any? Anyway, every once in a while it bothers me that so many teams now have Yankees midnight blue as official colors and I complain here. Then Pantone points out that, despite what the teams are actually wearing, Yankees midnight navy isn't actually their official color. Except that nobody cares if there's a different numerical value in some stylebook somewhere; the Nationals, Red Sox, and Twins are wearing Yankees midnight blue caps. I don't care what a team claims; if it wears Yankees midnight blue, then Yankees midnight blue is its official color. When you see the wall of MLB caps at a store it kind of looks like there are only four teams: The midnight navy team, the blue team, the red team, and the A's.

This is part of a trend of manufacturer league-wide standardization that's taking place across the board, and it's affecting many sports to a greater (worse) extent that baseball. But I just wish some baseball team would pick a really distinctive color and then stand up to New Era and force the company to source and use fabric in the correct color. Sort of, "I don't care how inconvenient you think it is to make our caps on a different run than the Royals. We're Major League Baseball, we hold a legal global monopoly on the world's second most popular sport, we do billions of dollars of business worldwide each year, and you're a half-assed hip-hop clothing accessory peddler. These are our colors. We expect you to use them."

Reebok's REALLY been homogenizing the NBA...I hate to see this in the MLB as well.

I've got an official New Era color chart - with Pantone/Robison-Anton equivalents even. I was given this chart in confidence; I'm not sure if it's supposed to be in the public domain. You're right - there aren't many variations in the colors, but there are a few other Blues, Navys, Greens, Reds, etc. that don't appear to be used too often.

Hopefully, New Era can somehow expand their color palette, and get some different shades out there.

[FiddySicks]

Play at the plate: fans want 'Devil Ray' to stay

Tampa Bay Business Journal

2:18 PM EDT Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Baseball fans may be purists for tradition, and Tampa Bay is no exception.

As many as 37 percent (242) of the 643 responses to the latest Business Pulse survey said the Devil Rays should keep their name and colors the same. The survey is the newspaper's weekly nonscientific online snapshot of what readers are thinking.

The team has just a few weeks before it must decide on the issue and inform Major League Baseball of its decision to change its name, logo or colors. The second most popular choice, or 28 percent, said drop the "Devil," keep the "Rays" but keep the colors the same.

Just 16 percent, or 108 readers, said the drop the "Devil," keep the "Rays," but go ahead and change the colors.

Comments were extensive.

"I like "Rays" but ditch the colors. Light blue and yellow would be a solid choice as no MLB teams currently have those uniforms."

"Is it the 'Tampa Bay' part or the 'Devil' part of the name that is the issue here?" asked another reader. "For the last few years we've heard that it isn't right that the Tampa Bay Devil Rays play in St. Petersburg, or some such nonsense. So, I doubt seriously that they can change the name of the Bay; and I doubt that they can change the biological or common name of a sea creature. So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

For many more reader comments see the May 4 print edition of the Tampa Bay Business Journal.

I think the fact that they had less than a thousand responses is what they need to focus on before tinkering with the unis.....

[dahatman]

But now New Era completely disregards each team's "official" colors to use only a handful of blanks to make caps. There's, what, four shades of blue (midnight, true navy, dark royal, true royal), maybe five, black, red, brick, and dark green? Am I missing any? Anyway, every once in a while it bothers me that so many teams now have Yankees midnight blue as official colors and I complain here. Then Pantone points out that, despite what the teams are actually wearing, Yankees midnight navy isn't actually their official color. Except that nobody cares if there's a different numerical value in some stylebook somewhere; the Nationals, Red Sox, and Twins are wearing Yankees midnight blue caps. I don't care what a team claims; if it wears Yankees midnight blue, then Yankees midnight blue is its official color. When you see the wall of MLB caps at a store it kind of looks like there are only four teams: The midnight navy team, the blue team, the red team, and the A's.

This is part of a trend of manufacturer league-wide standardization that's taking place across the board, and it's affecting many sports to a greater (worse) extent that baseball. But I just wish some baseball team would pick a really distinctive color and then stand up to New Era and force the company to source and use fabric in the correct color. Sort of, "I don't care how inconvenient you think it is to make our caps on a different run than the Royals. We're Major League Baseball, we hold a legal global monopoly on the world's second most popular sport, we do billions of dollars of business worldwide each year, and you're a half-assed hip-hop clothing accessory peddler. These are our colors. We expect you to use them."

Reebok's REALLY been homogenizing the NBA...I hate to see this in the MLB as well.

I've got an official New Era color chart - with Pantone/Robison-Anton equivalents even. I was given this chart in confidence; I'm not sure if it's supposed to be in the public domain. You're right - there aren't many variations in the colors, but there are a few other Blues, Navys, Greens, Reds, etc. that don't appear to be used too often.

Hopefully, New Era can somehow expand their color palette, and get some different shades out there.

New Era's faults have been discussed in depth but in this case part of the blame lies with the league. From what I understand, the teams "consult" with the MLB office to design new uniforms. So, if the league wants all uniforms to be six colors (midnight blue, navy blue, red, brick, black & green) then they should be blamed for it as well. As for New Era, they are "a half-assed hip-hop clothing accessory peddler" but some of these hats do use other colors than the ones discussed. The teams need to stand up to both and become creative. I am not suggesting a return of the Astro rainbow uni's with the orange hat but a little variety would not be bad.

[powersurge]

Play at the plate: fans want 'Devil Ray' to stay

Tampa Bay Business Journal

2:18 PM EDT Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Baseball fans may be purists for tradition, and Tampa Bay is no exception.

As many as 37 percent (242) of the 643 responses to the latest Business Pulse survey said the Devil Rays should keep their name and colors the same. The survey is the newspaper's weekly nonscientific online snapshot of what readers are thinking.

The team has just a few weeks before it must decide on the issue and inform Major League Baseball of its decision to change its name, logo or colors. The second most popular choice, or 28 percent, said drop the "Devil," keep the "Rays" but keep the colors the same.

Just 16 percent, or 108 readers, said the drop the "Devil," keep the "Rays," but go ahead and change the colors.

Comments were extensive.

"I like "Rays" but ditch the colors. Light blue and yellow would be a solid choice as no MLB teams currently have those uniforms."

"Is it the 'Tampa Bay' part or the 'Devil' part of the name that is the issue here?" asked another reader. "For the last few years we've heard that it isn't right that the Tampa Bay Devil Rays play in St. Petersburg, or some such nonsense. So, I doubt seriously that they can change the name of the Bay; and I doubt that they can change the biological or common name of a sea creature. So if neither of these names is acceptable to the majority, change the entire name of the team. But change it to represent the entire community," said the reader.

For many more reader comments see the May 4 print edition of the Tampa Bay Business Journal.

Thanks for the article.

UGH! This makes me hate public polls even more....Totally worthless in this case. If they end up keeping 'DEVIL Rays' as part of their nickname it will be a totally horrible decision. I've always thought that if they wanted to keep 'Rays' in their name then keep it simple and stay with 'Tampa Bay Rays'. That name rolls off the tongue so much easier and lends itself to easier more personable marketing IMO.