Jump to content

White Sox Concept


LEWJ

Recommended Posts

Introduced the trend to MLB, yes. I didn't even think of the Kings, but I've always given the Raiders credit for "making black cool." Even before hip hop stars began wearing the Sox hat, the Raiders were insanely cool. I was in grade school in the late '80s, and Raiders gear was everywhere. And I give the Raiders singlehanded credit for Zubaz' rise to prominence.

Point very well taken. While the Kings and Chisox (re)introduced the look to our generation, the Raiders have always been there, still are, and still make black look better than anyone else.

LT

To be fair, the Spurs have been reppin' black for a while too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, first off, scha-wee-heet! As a Twins fan, I believe it should be a federal crime for the White Sox to look as good as this concept.

However, I have a couple of criticisms. First, a team with the word "White" in its name needs to wear white home uniforms, not cream. That's just mandatory. Sorry; the cream does look great with the blue. Save that thought for a team that doesn't have the word "White" in its name.

I'd still prefer black for the Sox instead of blue, but the blue has history and it's a nice looking concept. I only worry that the blue road script is too Boston-esque in general appearance. I don't think that would be an issue with black.

Finally, the numbers have too much going on. You need to simplify that font slightly on the numbers. Bring the little side wedges in a bit, make them smaller and slightly less acute. Same withe the little curlicue serif things too. Just make the shapes 25 percent less busy and you'll have a winner of a number font.

Oh, and even more finally, the double-outline around the letters on the back? That's gotta go. It makes the letters hard to read than they would be without the outer blue outline. When you're decorating letters like player names that are meant to be read at a distance, your first, second, third, and last priorities must be legibility. If an outline or other decorative element does not noticeably increase legibility, it has no business being anywhere near a letter. I don't mean to single you out for criticism on this; most pro uniforms these days are guilty of sacrificing legibility to add pointless multiple outlines. It's a design fad. But letters are nothing more than simple geometric shapes. When you add shapes, lines, or angles to, near, or around a letter, you begin the process of making it into something other than a letter. If you just want to put some color or some pretty shapes on the back of a jersey, then do so. But if you want to put a player's name on the back of the jersey, keep your focus on plain legibility.

But to reiterate, this is a freakin' sweet concept. The White Sox are not worthy of it. ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the words of my tv announcer, Ken the Hawk Harrelson:

"YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSS"

I really like this, I don't think that the White Sox should wear this, but it is an exceptional concept that like aforementioned is retro while still staying plausible to the modern market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red Sox

Goin pretty retro with these. I'm not expecting everyone to like them. Someone should like them, but i dont think everyone will. I like how they turned out.

Not much to explain here, just look at the concept. :P

(images removed)

C&C Please

I think that having piping, in the fashion that the striping is in currently, would look good. (you know the double stripe)

Like Tampa Bay's away jerseys:

TB_4193.gif

But have the piping and striping on all of the jerseys; home, alt, and away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, I LOVE these! I think that ur kinda going down the same road that Cincinatti took with thier new unis,

I love them too.

It is spelled CINCINNATI.

How hard is that to get right?

CB.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, I LOVE these! I think that ur kinda going down the same road that Cincinatti took with thier new unis,

I love them too.

It is spelled CINCINNATI.

How hard is that to get right?

CB.png

I'm an editor, and usually a total hardass about this sort of thing, but "Cincinnati" is on my very short list of words I don't count against people if they misspell. It's an unusual word, actually a Latin plural, and one most people are unlikely to need to write more than a few times in their lives, unless they live in a certain section of Ohio or are scholars of the Federalist period of American history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CWS.png

CWS2.png

soxaltttt.png

C&C Please

I actually like these a lot. They have a nostalgic look to them. From the cream homes to the font, there's really nothing bad I can say and no criticism to offer...

I lied. :P The nameplate font doesn't fit with the all-one-font scheme and takes away from what would be a great concept. I also would simply the scripts a bit. The double outline doesn't bode for good distance clarity, meaning that the two outlines run together. Other than than, (**)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is spelled CINCINNATI.

How hard is that to get right?

CB.png

I'm an editor, and usually a total hardass about this sort of thing, but "Cincinnati" is on my very short list of words I don't count against people if they misspell. It's an unusual word, actually a Latin plural, and one most people are unlikely to need to write more than a few times in their lives, unless they live in a certain section of Ohio or are scholars of the Federalist period of American history.

Ever heard of Proctor and Gamble?

It makes you look foolish and uneducated when you spell it wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.