Jump to content

front side baseball numbers


karby65

Recommended Posts

Which baseball teams would look better if they drop their front number? Would like to see Colorado, Pittsburgh, Chi Cubs (road), Texas (home), LA Angels, and Cincinnati (new roads) loose their numbers. Any others? The Cardinals, Dodgers, and A's look great with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really like the Dodgers front numbers because they are the only red place in the whole jersey

Actually, I think that's what makes it look good. Plain blue with white or grey are weak color combinations (see KC). The red is the salt of the LA jersey.

And let's be honest. It just wouldn't be a Dodger jersey without it. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really like the Dodgers front numbers because they are the only red place in the whole jersey

Actually, I think that's what makes it look good. Plain blue with white or grey are weak color combinations (see KC). The red is the salt of the LA jersey.

And let's be honest. It just wouldn't be a Dodger jersey without it. :D

Yeah exactly. That's what makes it unique, it's been around forever, and besides, I think it actually looks pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really like the Dodgers front numbers because they are the only red place in the whole jersey

Actually, I think that's what makes it look good. Plain blue with white or grey are weak color combinations (see KC). The red is the salt of the LA jersey.

And let's be honest. It just wouldn't be a Dodger jersey without it. :D

Agreed - it's the little touch that elevates the Dodger jersey to greatness.

Personally, I don't like the front numbers on uniforms that feature the cap logo - the Rockies alts and White Sox spring to mind. It looks somehow unbalanced to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really like the Dodgers front numbers because they are the only red place in the whole jersey

I 100% agree with you about the Dodgers.

As for what the Buccos would look like, just get an old picture of Clemente because they are modeled after that set and they didn't have a front number. I like the Bucco numbers on the front though. I just hate the new rec league softball jersey they are going to wear on Friday night home games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Mets insist on keeping the atrocious black uniforms, the least they could do is drop the front digits on those...

Keep it on the Pinstripes, White, and Gray though...

And I think the Rockies, and Cubs should keep them on as well...

And finally, yes, the red #'s that LA has are untouchable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dodgers were the first team to wear front numbers starting in 1952. They were going to debut them in the 1951 World Series but some guy named Thomson screwed up their plans so they waited until the start of the '52 season. And since they WERE the first to wear them they CAN and MUST stay red. They look very classy. Some of you youngsters have no respect for tradition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dodgers were the first team to wear front numbers starting in 1952. They were going to debut them in the 1951 World Series but some guy named Thomson screwed up their plans so they waited until the start of the '52 season. And since they WERE the first to wear them they CAN and MUST stay red. They look very classy. Some of you youngsters have no respect for tradition.

I am not a youngster and have SOME respect for tradition. I respect keeping a classic uniform like the Yankees and Celtics, but I have no respect for RED Dodger numbers and Notre Dame's helmets. Those both aren't really traditional. They are just lazy all those years for never upgrading :P Can't say I've ever heard someone say they bleed Dodger "red"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dodgers without red numbers are the Royals. The red numbers are fantastic, though I couldn't see a team introducing a uniform like that in this era.

Front numbers are OK if your script / wordmark is not arched, otherwise IMO it looks silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Front numbers are OK if your script / wordmark is not arched, otherwise IMO it looks silly.

In most cases, yes. The Angels manage to pull it off, though, with the arched script leaning to the left slightly to accommodate the numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Front numbers are OK if your script / wordmark is not arched, otherwise IMO it looks silly.

In most cases, yes. The Angels manage to pull it off, though, with the arched script leaning to the left slightly to accommodate the numbers.

the cardinals looked ok in 97 w/o the number, but when they modernized the birds and all after the 97 season, it looked a bit silly. although, the numbers are smaller since '99, which makes them better than when they were a bit large from '96 and earlier. about the angels and pirates, the numbers are a huge distraction from their team word mark. the focal point should be the name, not number. the script should not acccomodate the number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hormone, what don't you understand? The Dodgers were the FIRST, ORIGINAL, INITIAL team to wear front numbers in baseball. I don't know how much more traditional they could be. They can do as they please. They, after all, wrote the freakin' book! Everyone else just copied the idea. Are you going to rag on the Yankees for having red in their logo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Front numbers are OK if your script / wordmark is not arched, otherwise IMO it looks silly.

Anyone remember when the Cubs had road uniforms with an arched "CHICAGO" and numbers centered under the wordmark? They looked like basketball uniforms!

Image at Hall of Fame's "Dressed to the Nines"

I'm old enough to vaguely remember those jerseys. THAT is a look no one should emulate. It looks like an old Evansville Purple Aces jersey.

As for the Dodgers, I love the red front number. It is true that there is no other red in the uniform, however there is red in the primary logo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hormone, what don't you understand? The Dodgers were the FIRST, ORIGINAL, INITIAL team to wear front numbers in baseball. I don't know how much more traditional they could be. They can do as they please. They, after all, wrote the freakin' book! Everyone else just copied the idea. Are you going to rag on the Yankees for having red in their logo?

No, I just feel that the red is out of place with the rest of the uniform. The Pirates used red as a trim on the Pirate's bandanna and now look what they will be wearing on Friday nights. Like I said, sometimes tradition looks like a lazy way to avoid upgrading. That's just the way I feel. I feel that way about Dodger red numbers, ND's helmets, and gray facemasks. As far as the Yanks, yes, red is in their logo, but where do you see it on the uniform? Wouldn't it look odd if they trotted out with red numbers on their chest?...but by everyone's logic, if the originally did it in 1950, that makes it ok then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I just feel that the red is out of place with the rest of the uniform. The Pirates used red as a trim on the Pirate's bandanna and now look what they will be wearing on Friday nights. Like I said, sometimes tradition looks like a lazy way to avoid upgrading.

You're talking about change for change's sake. Not every team should "upgrade" their look.

In any case, I wouldn't exactly look to the Pirates as an example of what should be done....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • LMU locked this topic

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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