New Trenton Thunder logo

[Milo Meningocele]

The logos are great, and would be phenomenal for a team called the Storm. Call me a nitpick, but I don't think lightning bolts should be so prominent in a logo for the Thunder. Yeah, I don't know how to illustrate thunder besides with a cloud either, and I know lightning goes hand-in-hand with it. All things considered, I can forgive the bolts on account of how original and well executed the primary is. The alternate...blah. I think a lot of studios could've come up with that.

[swilson160]

Fantastic. I love these.

[rtrich11]

No close ups of the hats?

[Gothamite]

No close-ups of anything yet.

Wonder why they unveiled this so early? They're still playing this season.

EDIT: just realized, the online shop does have pictures of the caps. Some of them, anyway.

[leggman01]

this is a PERFECT minor league identity...very kid friendly logos that look cool on the hats and uni's...really, really great...

[Harlequin]

As a Sox fan... this logo is pretty sweet. Bolts are cool.

[Brian in Boston]

I still think the best branded minor league is the South Coast league. Not sure who did those.

Unless I'm mistaken, most of the South Coast League's team logos - if not all of them - were designed by Francis Santaquilani.

http://www.fsd-see.com/sprtlogos.html

[Joshawaggie]

No close-ups of anything yet.

Wonder why they unveiled this so early? They're still playing this season.

EDIT: just realized, the online shop does have pictures of the caps. Some of them, anyway.

ooo, I like that hat on the right. I like this set for sure.

[hstansbury]

XXX

[hstansbury]

XXX

[BB61]

A Major upgrade here. The original identities were unique, to say the least, but this one blows them both out of the water.

I too, am thankful that they decided to keep the "Thunder" moniker. We all know they're a Yankees affiliate, no need to plaster their name all over the place.

[SabreGuy]

this is a PERFECT minor league identity...very kid friendly logos that look cool on the hats and uni's...really, really great...

Not singling you out (other than the fact that I noticed this post and it got me thinking), but I'm not sure I agree with the recent (well, not TOO recent) trend of "minor league logos should be 'kid friendly.'"

Maybe it's because I'm from a minor league area, and I have major league envy... but part of me longs for days long before I was around, when the minor leagues were a big enough deal that they could sustain their own professional identity.

I think I started thinking about it when I saw that the Portland Beavers are considering rebranding, and giving people choices, and I thought "no... the Portland Beavers have always been the Portland Beavers." The Seattle Mariners would never, all of a sudden, decide to call themselves the Seattle Rainstorms or something, and their history is much shorter than the Portland Beavers.

I guess I don't have a real point, other than to say I think the minor leagues (hockey and baseball, specifically) are kind of cheapening their own product these days, at least in terms of a brand. The constant moving around from city to city and from league to league, and from parent team to parent team doesn't really help the issue either. But I just feel like I've seen enough cartoon characters holding a bat or a hockey stick to last me a lifetime.

[totc]

As a Trentonian, I hate these new logos. They are a direct ripoff of the Burlington Bees, Jamestown Jammers, and Lowell Spinners.

All of these changes completely invalidate the reasons for the original 1994 uniforms -- green because very few minor league teams were green back then, and the double-headed thunderbird, a chimera of the Delaware Indian tribe.

I am grateful that the team has not adopted the parent club name (i.e., Trenton Devils, SWB Yankees, Maine Phillies). To me, that lowers the value of the team to its community, but that's another topic.

[SabreGuy]

I am grateful that the team has not adopted the parent club name (i.e., Trenton Devils, SWB Yankees, Maine Phillies). To me, that lowers the value of the team to its community, but that's another topic.

Oh, I think that's DEFINITELY something they did right, here. Nothing makes less sense to me than the minor league team adopting the major league parent's name and identity. Cheesy logos aside, becoming the Trenton Yankees would have been stupid. I actually am offended that Scranton/Wilkes-Barre did that this year. Red Barons was a GREAT identity, and I loved their old SWB cap logo... now they just look like a joke... a little league team in one of those leagues where all the kids teams are named after MLB clubs.

Maybe THAT is my major problem with the "taking the parent club's name" thing. These aren't 12 year olds dreaming of playing for the Yankees someday. These are professional athletes who actually have a CHANCE of playing for the Yankees, and it's patronizing to slap them in a mock Yankees uniform, pat them on the back and send them out there.

[Ez Street]

From Ballpark Digest:

http://www.ballparkdigest.com/news/2007/NewThunder.pdf

[Lee.]

From Ballpark Digest:

http://www.ballparkdigest.com/news/2007/NewThunder.pdf

Nice work, Streets.

And I repeat, that alt cap with the yellow brim is really boiling my potato. It will be mine.

[whchoclte]

Teh cloud batter is actually shaded diff from the logo to the cap. His arm and shoulder just have highlights and on the cap their full colored.

That bugs me. The package is great because thats what most minor league teams are looking for, appealing to aborader base of fans and more fun times.

[McCall]

I do like the upgrade. But doesn't the primary, especially on the hats, just look like the Michelin Man joined the Blue Man Group?

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

First, on the issue of the Thunder?s logo: I am surprised at all the approval for the new logo, especially as compared to the older ones. The old ones both had a nice, bold letter! We need more of that! I almost always prefer a letter-based cap logo -- either the letter itself, or else the letter placed amongst some other graphic elements.

Please note that I said I *ALMOST* always prefer letter cap logos to graphical ones! Major exceptions would be the original Blue Jays cap logo, and any of the many Orioles cap logos. These are some rare cases where graphical cap logos are indeed more attractive and more appropriate than any letter-based cap logo could have been. Many minor league teams, however, have recently unveiled caps with cartoony logos which have none of the charm or dignity of the Blue Jays? or Orioles? graphical cap logos (the Lugnuts and Lookouts of the world), and I lament the Thunder?s joining this unattractive trend. The last great minor league logo that I can recall was the New Haven Ravens, and their R-bird cap.

The Trenton Thunder having a letter T logo should be especially obvious since this letter begins both the nickname AND the city?s name, a la the letter logos of the Phillies, Pirates, and Cubs! (Though, for the record, in the case where the city?s name and the nickname start with different letters, the letter on the cap should preferably be the initial of the city, despite the Ravens example above.)

Now, on to this broader question, one which I have though about a lot recently:

Maybe it's because I'm from a minor league area, and I have major league envy... but part of me longs for days long before I was around, when the minor leagues were a big enough deal that they could sustain their own professional identity.

Let me offer a differing viewpoint -- and hope that the mere fact of my location in New York City won?t cause you to stop reading right here!

To me, the whole idea of farm clubs having separate names and identities is a rather shaky concept. Ever since the introduction of farm systems, the sad fact is that an affiliated minor league team is not actually an entity unto itself -- it is just a contractor to a Major League franchise.

As a kid learning of the early, pre-farm-system minors, and also of the PCL?s ?open? experiment in the 50s, I became uncomfortable with affiliated teams supposedly having ?identities?. And, ever since the re-emergence in the 90s of the independent minor leagues (Northern League, Atlantic League, etc.), this discomfort has become ever stronger.

I think I started thinking about it when I saw that the Portland Beavers are considering rebranding, and giving people choices, and I thought "no... the Portland Beavers have always been the Portland Beavers." The Seattle Mariners would never, all of a sudden, decide to call themselves the Seattle Rainstorms or something, and their history is much shorter than the Portland Beavers.

Of course there are some names, like Portland Beavers, Rochester Red Wings, and some others, which are venerable in their own right. But, while not disputing the beauty of these names, my point is that, sadly, these names no longer refer to anything.

Look at it this way: What is the job of a the GM of a baseball club? He signs the players, and also the manager and coaches. He makes trades. Overall, the job of the GM of a baseball club is to act in the interest of that club.

Now consider the job of the GM of an affiliated minor league team. He does not sign players; indeed, he has no player-personnel duties at all, since his roster dictated to him, as is his manager and coaching staff. (Though I am aware of a few instances of non-prospect local favourites playing long-term for a minor league team, such as Razor Shines in Indianapolis.)

I guess I don't have a real point, other than to say I think the minor leagues (hockey and baseball, specifically) are kind of cheapening their own product these days, at least in terms of a brand. The constant moving around from city to city and from league to league, and from parent team to parent team doesn't really help the issue either. But I just feel like I've seen enough cartoon characters holding a bat or a hockey stick to last me a lifetime.

I agree that the minor-league teams cheapen the product by associating it with goofy imagery. But the fundamental problem is that the product itself is a flawed one, since the interests of an affiliated team are irrelevant as compared to the ?player-development? needs of the parent organisation. As examples, the team may have to play a Major Leaguer who is rehabbing an injury; also, a league-leading team will almost always lose its best players to callups late in the season.

As I mentioned before, this reality is a sad one. I think the overall game would be healthier without farm systems and without a draft, if Major League teams had to buy players they considered prospects from minor-league clubs for market value. Players? interests would certainly be better served -- which is precisely why we will never see the return of such a situation.

So, I say that the whole phenomenon of affiliated teams having names and identities is just a false veneer that has shrouds a very different reality. I think the rational solution is...

Nothing makes less sense to me than the minor league team adopting the major league parent's name and identity. Cheesy logos aside, becoming the Trenton Yankees would have been stupid.

...(gulp)...well, er, I was going to say that I think the solution to this question is to just admit this reality, and to simply call the teams by the parent club names. So, just as Premiership teams have their ?reserve? sides, so that one sees ?Chelsea reserves? playing against ?Arsenal reserves? or whatever, let?s just call them ?Trenton Yankees?, ?Allentown Phillies? (soon), etc.

Actually, the REAL answer to the crisis of the loss of localism in pro baseball is to support the independent minors, as opposed to the affiliated minors! I support the Newark Bears, and it is great to know that manager Wayne Krenchicki and GM John Brandt are making moves that are designed solely to better the Bears, as opposed to developing players for some Major League franchise.

Of course, I know that not every area has a local independent team. Your posts say you come from Welland, Ontario, and so I?d imagine that the closest independent team to you would be the Quebec Capitales, who are actually the current champions of the Can-Am League. (I guess the short-lived CBL also had a team near you in Niagara.)

Anyway, the bottom line for me is that to sell an affiliated team as an entity with its own identity is kind a scam on the fans. It would be more reasonable to just acknowledge the unfortunate reality of affiliated ball, and save the separate identities for the independent clubs, which actually deserve them.

Ultimately, the Newark Bears are a baseball club; the Portland Beavers are not.

[Brian in Boston]

Maybe THAT is my major problem with the "taking the parent club's name" thing.

The notion that too many minor-league baseball teams are copying the identity packages of their major-league parent clubs is "much ado about nothing".

In truth, it's not as if there are a slew of affiliated minor-league baseball teams adopting their parent clubs' identity packages. In point of fact, less than a third of affiliated minor-league baseball teams sport their parent clubs' brand. The vast majority of those minor-league teams that do copy their parent clubs are members of so-called complex-based leagues (i.e. the Arizona Rookie League, the Gulf Coast Rookie League and the Florida State League) or the Appalachian League.

Triple-A? Five teams out of thirty copy the big-league parent club.

Double-A? Four teams out of thirty.

Advanced Single-A? Ten teams out of thirty, but seven of those are Florida State League clubs... and I believe six of those seven are owned and operated by the major-league organization.

Single-A? A single team - out of thirty - copies it's major-league parent club.

Short-Season Single-A? Two teams out of twenty-two.

Rookie? Thirty-seven of forty-two Rookie level minor-league baseball teams do copy the identity packages of their parent clubs. That said, twenty-five of those thirty-seven teams are members of the Major League Baseball-owned and operated Arizona and Gulf Coast Leagues, with another nine teams representing the entire membership of the Appalachian League. Three of eight Pioneer League clubs copy the identities of their major-league parents.

All six members of the Arizona Fall League sport unique identity packages.