Rays seem ready to dump Devil

[Gothamite]

So I don't see the new Rays uni as a glass half full. I see it as a large wet spot on an otherwise empty bar, and I ask, "where's the glass?"

Just have to say: that's a great line.

[dahatman]

Not the worst uniforms in the big leagues, but darn close, and probably the biggest negative step any team has taken since Disney redid the Angels. Or since the Phillies adopted their current uniforms. Whichever was most recent.

The Angel redo was done in 1997 and the Phillies uni's were changed back in '91. The Mets black uni's really suck too and don't forgot the Pirate ketchup vests. The Rays uniforms are boring but not the worst.

[So_Fla]

Outstanding post. Well thought out, well researched and well stated.

Did you do all of that yourself?

i smell a sour Tampa fan here.

And I smell someone who is so parochial they haven't traveled further than New York State...

Nope, sorry. Not a New Yorker. Not everyone in the Tampa Bay area is from New York. Even though it seems like it.

[Thad]

The Devil Rays new look seems to me as if they said: "Modern and fresh doesn't work to win games, so let's try bland and boring."

[BallWonk]

Not the worst uniforms in the big leagues, but darn close, and probably the biggest negative step any team has taken since Disney redid the Angels. Or since the Phillies adopted their current uniforms. Whichever was most recent.

The Angel redo was done in 1997 and the Phillies uni's were changed back in '91. The Mets black uni's really suck too and don't forgot the Pirate ketchup vests. The Rays uniforms are boring but not the worst.

In my defense, I don't regard the introduction of additional elements to be a uniform redesign, or else I certainly would have put the Mets noir movement and the Ketchup vests on the list. And I certainly don't think the Phillies have terrible uniforms. Below average, absolutely. But it's just that the maroon unis that preceeded the current set are some of the best uniforms any team has ever worn, in my book. So the size of the backwards step is big. Tampa Bay is going from just-below-average to barely-better-than-league-worst, which is a concurrently big step. I'm dismayed not so much by the quality of the end result as by the negative direction this represents for the Rays.

[powersurge]

I'm sure that's not what's happening here. But it's a shame -- there's no reason a team couldn't do the kind of strategic leaking that goes on with regularity in here Washington. In this case, toward the end of the season before the new unis are unveiled, deliberately leak incorrect designs, perhaps a selection from among the designs the team rejected. Leak-hungry fans, journalists, and bloggers are not going to dig deeper than the first official-looking leak, so when the uniforms are unveiled, they can be a surprise.

You sound like someone who looks at the glass as half full.

I on the other hand look at the glass and say "I asked for a g-damned MUG!"

Like I said, I don't for a minute think a strategic disinformation leak is at work here. If it took the Rays three years to come up with the crap we've seen, they're not going to come up with something better in the next six weeks. I'm just saying that it would be possible for a clever team to pull off such a stunt to preserve the surprise at their uniform unveiling.

So I don't see the new Rays uni as a glass half full. I see it as a large wet spot on an otherwise empty bar, and I ask, "where's the glass?" Not the worst uniforms in the big leagues, but darn close, and probably the biggest negative step any team has taken since Disney redid the Angels. Or since the Phillies adopted their current uniforms. Whichever was most recent.

HA!

Touche Mr. Wonk, Touche.

I do have to disagree with your assessment of the current Phillies look, its a classic look that works much better than the previous one both colorwise and design wise. Maroon and white just doesn't work for me as a good Phillies color set. I think its too dark and too reminiscent of the 70's. I did have a little soft spot for the maroon and light blue road unis....but not enough to want them back.

[BallWonk]

I do have to disagree with your assessment of the current Phillies look, its a classic look that works much better than the previous one both colorwise and design wise. Maroon and white just doesn't work for me as a good Phillies color set. I think its too dark and too reminiscent of the 70's. I did have a little soft spot for the maroon and light blue road unis....but not enough to want them back.

Well, you're just wrong about the Phillies. (Kidding!) "Too reminiscent of the 70s"? It reminds you of the only era in which the Phillies were the best-dressed team in baseball, and this is a problem? Or perhaps it reminds you of the one time that accursed franchise actually won a World Series, and this also brings back bad memories? (I lived in Philly at the time, and I admit it was brutal: A whole winter when fans couldn't bitch about the Phillies. Worst four months in Philadelphia sports-fan history. Heck, the Eagles, Flyers, and 76ers would make the playoffs that winter, so we had nothing to complain about.)

But on a slightly more serious note, the current Phillies set actually compares quite well with the new Rays set. You've got a dull-as-paint script running flat across the chest, like type on a page. You've got the same script at home and on the road. You've got uninspired numbers. I'm even willing to bet that the Rays are going with a Phillies-esque shade of too-light gray (really off-white) for the road uniforms. If the Phillies have good uniforms, then the new Rays uniforms are awesomeness defined.

I've gotta figure there is a reason that the majority of the 20,000 or so Phillies fans who show up at RFK when Philadelphia is in town wear maroon pinstripes or powder blue, and I'm figuring it's not because they think the current pink pinstripes and Howdy-Doody script are so fantastic.

[powersurge]

I've gotta figure there is a reason that the majority of the 20,000 or so Phillies fans who show up at RFK when Philadelphia is in town wear maroon pinstripes or powder blue, and I'm figuring it's not because they think the current pink pinstripes and Howdy-Doody script are so fantastic.

May I submit the possiblity that the 'throwback' fashion craze hasn't quite gone away yet?

In all fairness, I didn't find their old script much better. If they took the old design and changed the colors to a lighter red with blue somewhere in the uni I might be able to stomach it....but I'm not 100% sure about that.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I've gotta figure there is a reason that the majority of the 20,000 or so Phillies fans who show up at RFK when Philadelphia is in town wear maroon pinstripes or powder blue, and I'm figuring it's not because they think the current pink pinstripes and Howdy-Doody script are so fantastic.

May I submit the possiblity that the 'throwback' fashion craze hasn't quite gone away yet?

In all fairness, I didn't find their old script much better. If they took the old design and changed the colors to a lighter red with blue somewhere in the uni I might be able to stomach it....but I'm not 100% sure about that.

I've been thinking the opposite ever since they switched. I always thought they should have kept the maroon, even with the current look. It was unique... although these days would New Era/Majestic force them to use "brick" instead?

[powersurge]

I've gotta figure there is a reason that the majority of the 20,000 or so Phillies fans who show up at RFK when Philadelphia is in town wear maroon pinstripes or powder blue, and I'm figuring it's not because they think the current pink pinstripes and Howdy-Doody script are so fantastic.

May I submit the possiblity that the 'throwback' fashion craze hasn't quite gone away yet?

In all fairness, I didn't find their old script much better. If they took the old design and changed the colors to a lighter red with blue somewhere in the uni I might be able to stomach it....but I'm not 100% sure about that.

I've been thinking the opposite ever since they switched. I always thought they should have kept the maroon, even with the current look. It was unique... although these days would New Era/Majestic force them to use "brick" instead?

Hey, I've got a question for you CubsFanBudMan: Have you ever noticed that the Cubs have either a 'TM' or 'R' symbol next to their 'Cubs' logo on their home whites? Isn't that kind of odd that a team would have that on their jersey? Isn't that usually left off the uniform? Anyone else notice that? It was bugging the hell out me. Just thought maybe you'd know because your a Cubbies fan.

Any ideas?

Here's a bad pic: http://www.wrigleyvillesport.com/istarimag...J-3208266_d.jpg

[Brian in Boston]

"Too reminiscent of the 70s"? It reminds you of the only era in which the Phillies were the best-dressed team in baseball, and this is a problem?

No, the problem is in regarding a uniform that resembled nothing so much as a cranberry juice-and-Drano cocktail to have been the epitome of baseball style.

Seriously, I understand why human nature dictates that some folks like to bask in the warm glow of nostalgia, but the Phillies' uniforms of the 1970s were an abomination. Particularly, the "Drano Blue" road unis.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Hey, I've got a question for you CubsFanBudMan: Have you ever noticed that the Cubs have either a 'TM' or 'R' symbol next to their 'Cubs' logo on their home whites? Isn't that kind of odd that a team would have that on their jersey? Isn't that usually left off the uniform? Anyone else notice that? It was bugging the hell out me. Just thought maybe you'd know because your a Cubbies fan.

Any ideas?

Here's a bad pic: http://www.wrigleyvillesport.com/istarimag...J-3208266_d.jpg

Oh yes, I've noticed. Not a fan... bugs me, too. Unfortunately, I also don't know why it's there. Might be a good question for the cubs.com mailbag. The reporter has answered uni-related questions before.

[ltravisjr]

"Too reminiscent of the 70s"? It reminds you of the only era in which the Phillies were the best-dressed team in baseball, and this is a problem?

No, the problem is in regarding a uniform that resembled nothing so much as a cranberry juice-and-Drano cocktail to have been the epitome of baseball style.

Seriously, I understand why human nature dictates that some folks like to bask in the warm glow of nostalgia, but the Phillies' uniforms of the 1970s were an abomination. Particularly, the "Drano Blue" road unis.

To be honest, I have never been thrilled with the current or the previous Phillies uniforms - although I have always thought those zippers on the 70's jerseys were cool.

LT

[Gothamite]

Hey, I've got a question for you CubsFanBudMan: Have you ever noticed that the Cubs have either a 'TM' or 'R' symbol next to their 'Cubs' logo on their home whites? Isn't that kind of odd that a team would have that on their jersey? Isn't that usually left off the uniform? Anyone else notice that? It was bugging the hell out me. Just thought maybe you'd know because your a Cubbies fan.

Any ideas?

Here's a bad pic: http://www.wrigleyvillesport.com/istarimag...J-3208266_d.jpg

Oh yes, I've noticed. Not a fan... bugs me, too. Unfortunately, I also don't know why it's there. Might be a good question for the cubs.com mailbag. The reporter has answered uni-related questions before.

From the UniWatch Archives - May 25th, 2002!

Corporate Graffiti

Those annoying little ® and ? symbols, so symptomatic of our legalese-obsessed culture, are especially prevalent in sports, where any officially licensed team product?a Met T-shirt, say, or a Yankee bumper sticker?is sure to be festooned with trademark-related iconography. The one exception is on the field of play itself, where the team emblems on players' jerseys, caps, and helmets are blissfully free of trademark symbols.

Except at Wrigley Field, that is. Look closely at the Cubs' home unis and you'll see that the team's circular chest emblem carries an ®, just below the s in Cubs. This is unique not only in Major League Baseball, but among all the major sports. So if other teams aren't cluttering up their unis with excess marks, why are the Cubs doing it?

"I'd like to give you a good reason," said Cubs marketing VP John McDonough when this question was posed to him. "But I've been here 19 years and I really have no idea." McDonough referred Uni Watch to the Cubs' uniform manufacturer, Majestic, where a representative said the company was simply using the same design specifications it inherited three years earlier from the team's previous outfitter, Rawlings, which no longer has any records on the matter. In fact, nobody's even sure when Chicago's ® began appearing, much less why. "I don't mean to sound insensitive," said McDonough after fruitlessly searching his files for relevant info, "but really, who cares?"

Ah yes, the middle manager's favorite tactic: When flummoxed by a question, accuse the questioner of being pedantic. Granted, it's a picky point, but McDonough's indifference is precisely the sort of attitude that has allowed corporate graffiti like ® and ? to proliferate in the first place, and the last thing we need is for this particular phenomenon to spread to other teams. Uni Watch has long maintained that the only logo on a team's uniform should be that of the team itself?that's what the fans are actually cheering for, after all. And given that the typical big-leaguer is already wearing Major League Baseball's logo in three places (back of cap, back jersey collar, undershirt collar), the uniform manufacturer's logo in at least two places (left jersey sleeve, above left pants pocket, and sometimes on undershirt sleeves), and a carnival of iconography on his spikes, wristbands, and batting gloves, it's time to say enough is enough. Read Uni Watch's lips: There's no ® in Cubs.

Don't know if he's ever gotten a better answer to the question.

There's also some more recent discussion of the Cubs' trademark here.

[powersurge]

Hey, I've got a question for you CubsFanBudMan: Have you ever noticed that the Cubs have either a 'TM' or 'R' symbol next to their 'Cubs' logo on their home whites? Isn't that kind of odd that a team would have that on their jersey? Isn't that usually left off the uniform? Anyone else notice that? It was bugging the hell out me. Just thought maybe you'd know because your a Cubbies fan.

Any ideas?

Here's a bad pic: http://www.wrigleyvillesport.com/istarimag...J-3208266_d.jpg

Oh yes, I've noticed. Not a fan... bugs me, too. Unfortunately, I also don't know why it's there. Might be a good question for the cubs.com mailbag. The reporter has answered uni-related questions before.

From the UniWatch Archives - May 25th, 2002!

Don't know if he's ever gotten a better answer to the question.

There's also some more recent discussion of the Cubs' trademark here.

Thanks for the info.

I guess I'm NOT the only one who noticed that. Do you think it may simply have been a lazy designer who forgot to remove the symbol when submitting it to the uniform maker? ....Occam's Razor maybe.

[Sec19Row53]

Occam's Razor? I thought they were made by Majestic!

[Gothamite]

Thanks for the info.

I guess I'm NOT the only one who noticed that. Do you think it may simply have been a lazy designer who forgot to remove the symbol when submitting it to the uniform maker? ....Occam's Razor maybe.

Maybe, but you'd figure after so many different manufacturers they'd have fixed it eventually, unless the mistake just keeps getting passed along and along without question.

[powersurge]

Thanks for the info.

I guess I'm NOT the only one who noticed that. Do you think it may simply have been a lazy designer who forgot to remove the symbol when submitting it to the uniform maker? ....Occam's Razor maybe.

Maybe, but you'd figure after so many different manufacturers they'd have fixed it eventually, unless the mistake just keeps getting passed along and along without question.

Trust me, its possible...I've seen this happen WAAAY too many times to count.

[Gothamite]

Me, too, but this seems a little high-profile to have escaped this long.

[CubsFanBudMan]

I'm sure I read that before, just hadn't remembered it... probably since it wasn't resolved. Good memory. Thanks.

I like the rip on the middle manager. That VP of marketing is now the president of the team.

I'm sure it predates even Rawlings. Here's a 1984 SI cover:

Maybe it started when they updated the logo in 1979?

Doesn't appear to be here.