Twins in sleevless jerseys

[Gothamite]

Agreed. It does objectively suck.

It remains aesthetically more pleasing to my eye than the block letters they use now, which shows how little I like the current wordmark.

[gosioux76]

The Twins' uniforms would be significantly upgraded simply by ditching the pinstripes, and putting placket and sleeve piping on the home and road to match the alternates.

And a revival of the red home alt wouldn't hurt, either. You could wear 'em with the red hat.

And you might as well put big floppy shoes and rainbow wigs on them, too, since they'd be looking like clowns.

Sorry, but I think ditching the pinstripes is a horrible idea. And that red alt was a monstrosity that died the death it deserved.

As for the red hat, it worked well in days of the powder blue polyester pull-overs, but I think it looks grossly out of place with any of their current sets -- alternates included.

[winghaz]

And you might as well put big floppy shoes and rainbow wigs on them, too, since they'd be looking like clowns.

Sorry, but I think ditching the pinstripes is a horrible idea. And that red alt was a monstrosity that died the death it deserved.

As for the red hat, it worked well in days of the powder blue polyester pull-overs, but I think it looks grossly out of place with any of their current sets -- alternates included.

I totally, TOTALLY agree.

Pinstripes are just right for the Twins. And notice that their winningest years came in pinstripes.

Now, since I started this thing, maybe I should explain why I think the the Twins look great in their sleeveless uniforms.

First, it brings out more of the blue. The Twins' have a great-looking navy blue -- it almost seems like a cross between navy and Old Glory blue. I've always liked more emphasis on the blue in Twins uniforms and less on the red. So, naturally, I've LOVED the blue alts. Likewise, I've hated the red caps.

Also, I've always liked the sleeveless look, ever since I was a kid. Sure, some teams don't look good in them and some should never have the sleeveless look, but there are some teams that look better in them. Like the Pirates, Rangers, even the White Sox.

[frozenguy]

Damn, why do you guys hate on the red jersey so much..... is it that bad? What is so bad about it? You do realize that red is one of their colors right?

[apeman33]

Damn, why do you guys hate on the red jersey so much..... is it that bad? What is so bad about it? You do realize that red is one of their colors right?

True. But did the original designers mean to include red as an accent or as a dominant color? My feeling is "no," and that, I would bet, it also why a lot of the others don't like the Twins in red. It just wasn't intended to be that way.

I'd wager the same people who don't like the Twins in red also don't like the Braves' Sunday home alts and it would be for a similar reason (Not that I'm trying to speak for the entire board)

[gosioux76]

Damn, why do you guys hate on the red jersey so much..... is it that bad? What is so bad about it? You do realize that red is one of their colors right?

True. But did the original designers mean to include red as an accent or as a dominant color? My feeling is "no," and that, I would bet, it also why a lot of the others don't like the Twins in red. It just wasn't intended to be that way.

I'd wager the same people who don't like the Twins in red also don't like the Braves' Sunday home alts and it would be for a similar reason (Not that I'm trying to speak for the entire board)

Precisely. It's true that using an accent color as a primary color keeps the alt jersey within the same color scheme. But it delineates from its intended use and in most cases makes it look garish.

It's for this same reason that the Braves' alt is hideous, as is the red New York Giants jersey, and the orange Miami Dolphins jersey.

[spyboy1]

Not only is the red jersey the greatest Twins jersey of all time, it looks especially dapper when tucked way, way into the pants of shrimpy second basemen so that the main logo goes across your belly and your front numbers are in your pants.

What size Blizzard? would you like today?

[dutyfree]

If you just threw that old Twins script on a pinstriped jersey today, it would look hopelessly dated. It would be kind of sad, actually, with that odd little leg on the W and the too-dominant underline and all the

Quite frankly, I've never understood the "it looks dated" argument. By that reasoning, the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers are the most hopelessly, clueless, dated franchises in baseball.

No, no, and no. The particular characteristics of the original Twins script make it quite dated. Just like the Orioles script from that era looks hopelessly dated compared to the Orioles script from today. It's just kind of a crummy script. And that has nothing to do with the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers. Some things age well. When those things get old, we call them "classic." Some things do not age well. When those things get old, we call them "dated."

Well, that obviously is your opinion, but it doesn't hold up any better than my opinion that the old script is just fine. What makes it a crummy script? Just because you said so? What makes the Dodgers, Yankees, and Tigers script/logo any more "classic" than the Twins old script? Once again, just because you said so? I'm sure that just as many people think something "ages well" as those that don't.

Newsflash: Scientists working collaboratively on the Internet have discovered that aesthetic judgments are actually opinions!

Anyway, sarcasm aside, here is why the old Twins script does, in fact, suck:

1. Note the inconsistently placed connecters with differing styles of going in and out of the letterforms. Sometimes they hit at the middle of a vertical line, sometimes they connect at the top. Sometimes they flow into the letter shape like actual script writing, sometimes they just hit the letter as if the pen is lifted between letters.

2. Note the hanging connecter on the left of the W. Not only is it inconsistently placed with the others, especially the N, which should match in style within any given script, but it's squared off at the end, whereas all other script "edges" come to a point.

3. Sometimes changes in "pen" direction are indicated with loops or curves, but in other places such changes are not indicated, leaving the effect of perfectly retraced lines or a lifted "pen." The problem is that this is handled inconsistently between similar letterforms, as between similar vertical shapes in the W, I, and N. Also note the continuous looping line to connect the W to the I but a "lifted pen" between the end of the stroke that forms the S and the start of the underline.

4. The vertical lines in each letter are not parallel to those in any other letter. Even the I and N, which look close, are not quite parallel.

5. Nor are do the letters align properly on the bottoms; instead the I floats above the baseline, and the bottom of the N is aligned at an angle that crosses the baseline.

6. The connector between the S and the underline sticks out half the width of a letter, distorting the size and placement of the script on the jersey.

7. The giant fish-tail on the underline takes up nearly one-fourth of the vertical space of the entire script. That creates huge amounts of wasted space and shrinks the apparent and actual size of the letters. But the letters are the whole point of a jersey script!

These are, for the most part, objectively measurable characteristics that most people would regard as flaws. Any minimally competent designer today would not create a script with these flaws. The connecters would be consistent in alignment and style. The vertical elements would be parallel, and the letters would align on a baseline. The W would not have a stump on the left side. The S would blend into the tail more directly, and the left edge of the tail would waste less space. The Dodgers, to use one of your examples, have a script that does not suffer any of the technical flaws of the original Twins script. It therefore ages better (and has been tweaked over the years to keep it looking fresh).

You might think the old Twins script is pretty nonetheless, but these flaws don't cease to exist just because you think the script is pretty anyway. It's important not to mistake one's own gut sense of whether something is pretty with a reasoned judgment of whether that thing is actually any good.

I appreciate your efforts at dissecting the script. I do. But I still do not find it "flawed." If anything, your close observation of the script has caused me to find it even more appealing. You see, to my eyes, a little imperfection (as you see it, I think) is something to celebrate in an era of calculated, computerized graphics.

[frozenguy]

Not only is the red jersey the greatest Twins jersey of all time, it looks especially dapper when tucked way, way into the pants of shrimpy second basemen so that the main logo goes across your belly and your front numbers are in your pants.

What size Blizzard? would you like today?

LOL, damn, were they TRYING to look bad? (both of them!) Did the Steve Urkel fad last that late into the 90's?

[FirearmofMutiny]

Not only is the red jersey the greatest Twins jersey of all time, it looks especially dapper when tucked way, way into the pants of shrimpy second basemen so that the main logo goes across your belly and your front numbers are in your pants.

What size Blizzard? would you like today?

LOL, damn, were they TRYING to look bad? (both of them!) Did the Steve Urkel fad last that late into the 90's?

Well, they were trying to move to North Carolina at around that time...

[bulldogbarks55]

If you just threw that old Twins script on a pinstriped jersey today, it would look hopelessly dated. It would be kind of sad, actually, with that odd little leg on the W and the too-dominant underline and all the

Quite frankly, I've never understood the "it looks dated" argument. By that reasoning, the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers are the most hopelessly, clueless, dated franchises in baseball.

No, no, and no. The particular characteristics of the original Twins script make it quite dated. Just like the Orioles script from that era looks hopelessly dated compared to the Orioles script from today. It's just kind of a crummy script. And that has nothing to do with the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers. Some things age well. When those things get old, we call them "classic." Some things do not age well. When those things get old, we call them "dated."

Well, that obviously is your opinion, but it doesn't hold up any better than my opinion that the old script is just fine. What makes it a crummy script? Just because you said so? What makes the Dodgers, Yankees, and Tigers script/logo any more "classic" than the Twins old script? Once again, just because you said so? I'm sure that just as many people think something "ages well" as those that don't.

Newsflash: Scientists working collaboratively on the Internet have discovered that aesthetic judgments are actually opinions!

Anyway, sarcasm aside, here is why the old Twins script does, in fact, suck:

1. Note the inconsistently placed connecters with differing styles of going in and out of the letterforms. Sometimes they hit at the middle of a vertical line, sometimes they connect at the top. Sometimes they flow into the letter shape like actual script writing, sometimes they just hit the letter as if the pen is lifted between letters.

2. Note the hanging connecter on the left of the W. Not only is it inconsistently placed with the others, especially the N, which should match in style within any given script, but it's squared off at the end, whereas all other script "edges" come to a point.

3. Sometimes changes in "pen" direction are indicated with loops or curves, but in other places such changes are not indicated, leaving the effect of perfectly retraced lines or a lifted "pen." The problem is that this is handled inconsistently between similar letterforms, as between similar vertical shapes in the W, I, and N. Also note the continuous looping line to connect the W to the I but a "lifted pen" between the end of the stroke that forms the S and the start of the underline.

4. The vertical lines in each letter are not parallel to those in any other letter. Even the I and N, which look close, are not quite parallel.

5. Nor are do the letters align properly on the bottoms; instead the I floats above the baseline, and the bottom of the N is aligned at an angle that crosses the baseline.

6. The connector between the S and the underline sticks out half the width of a letter, distorting the size and placement of the script on the jersey.

7. The giant fish-tail on the underline takes up nearly one-fourth of the vertical space of the entire script. That creates huge amounts of wasted space and shrinks the apparent and actual size of the letters. But the letters are the whole point of a jersey script!

These are, for the most part, objectively measurable characteristics that most people would regard as flaws. Any minimally competent designer today would not create a script with these flaws. The connecters would be consistent in alignment and style. The vertical elements would be parallel, and the letters would align on a baseline. The W would not have a stump on the left side. The S would blend into the tail more directly, and the left edge of the tail would waste less space. The Dodgers, to use one of your examples, have a script that does not suffer any of the technical flaws of the original Twins script. It therefore ages better (and has been tweaked over the years to keep it looking fresh).

You might think the old Twins script is pretty nonetheless, but these flaws don't cease to exist just because you think the script is pretty anyway. It's important not to mistake one's own gut sense of whether something is pretty with a reasoned judgment of whether that thing is actually any good.

Who are you, the script police?

[Gothamite]

Who are you, the script police?

Hardly a retort worthy of his thoughtful post....

[tajmccall]

Who are you, the script police?

Hardly a retort worthy of his thoughtful post....

No doubt.

The script is wildly inconsistent and leaves many things wanting.

...I don't like the current either, but it doesn't justify the crimes of the predecessor.

[RickV]

If you just threw that old Twins script on a pinstriped jersey today, it would look hopelessly dated. It would be kind of sad, actually, with that odd little leg on the W and the too-dominant underline and all the

Quite frankly, I've never understood the "it looks dated" argument. By that reasoning, the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers are the most hopelessly, clueless, dated franchises in baseball.

No, no, and no. The particular characteristics of the original Twins script make it quite dated. Just like the Orioles script from that era looks hopelessly dated compared to the Orioles script from today. It's just kind of a crummy script. And that has nothing to do with the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers. Some things age well. When those things get old, we call them "classic." Some things do not age well. When those things get old, we call them "dated."

Well, that obviously is your opinion, but it doesn't hold up any better than my opinion that the old script is just fine. What makes it a crummy script? Just because you said so? What makes the Dodgers, Yankees, and Tigers script/logo any more "classic" than the Twins old script? Once again, just because you said so? I'm sure that just as many people think something "ages well" as those that don't.

Newsflash: Scientists working collaboratively on the Internet have discovered that aesthetic judgments are actually opinions!

Anyway, sarcasm aside, here is why the old Twins script does, in fact, suck:

1. Note the inconsistently placed connecters with differing styles of going in and out of the letterforms. Sometimes they hit at the middle of a vertical line, sometimes they connect at the top. Sometimes they flow into the letter shape like actual script writing, sometimes they just hit the letter as if the pen is lifted between letters.

2. Note the hanging connecter on the left of the W. Not only is it inconsistently placed with the others, especially the N, which should match in style within any given script, but it's squared off at the end, whereas all other script "edges" come to a point.

3. Sometimes changes in "pen" direction are indicated with loops or curves, but in other places such changes are not indicated, leaving the effect of perfectly retraced lines or a lifted "pen." The problem is that this is handled inconsistently between similar letterforms, as between similar vertical shapes in the W, I, and N. Also note the continuous looping line to connect the W to the I but a "lifted pen" between the end of the stroke that forms the S and the start of the underline.

4. The vertical lines in each letter are not parallel to those in any other letter. Even the I and N, which look close, are not quite parallel.

5. Nor are do the letters align properly on the bottoms; instead the I floats above the baseline, and the bottom of the N is aligned at an angle that crosses the baseline.

6. The connector between the S and the underline sticks out half the width of a letter, distorting the size and placement of the script on the jersey.

7. The giant fish-tail on the underline takes up nearly one-fourth of the vertical space of the entire script. That creates huge amounts of wasted space and shrinks the apparent and actual size of the letters. But the letters are the whole point of a jersey script!

These are, for the most part, objectively measurable characteristics that most people would regard as flaws. Any minimally competent designer today would not create a script with these flaws. The connecters would be consistent in alignment and style. The vertical elements would be parallel, and the letters would align on a baseline. The W would not have a stump on the left side. The S would blend into the tail more directly, and the left edge of the tail would waste less space. The Dodgers, to use one of your examples, have a script that does not suffer any of the technical flaws of the original Twins script. It therefore ages better (and has been tweaked over the years to keep it looking fresh).

You might think the old Twins script is pretty nonetheless, but these flaws don't cease to exist just because you think the script is pretty anyway. It's important not to mistake one's own gut sense of whether something is pretty with a reasoned judgment of whether that thing is actually any good.

Well your breakdown is quite impressive, but the bottom line as you stated is that aesthetic judgements are opinions. Do you really think the average guy will automatically see all the flaws you dissected and judge that script as a disaster, unworthy of MLB standards? Can't you just accept that people might like the old look better, JUST BECAUSE, without having to justify their preference with a micro dissection? I think that your analysis has credence, but I think it is wrong to automatically dismiss other people's preferences and call them dated. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. You like the current look, I like the old look. Peace, my friend.

[frozenguy]

If you just threw that old Twins script on a pinstriped jersey today, it would look hopelessly dated. It would be kind of sad, actually, with that odd little leg on the W and the too-dominant underline and all the

Quite frankly, I've never understood the "it looks dated" argument. By that reasoning, the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers are the most hopelessly, clueless, dated franchises in baseball.

No, no, and no. The particular characteristics of the original Twins script make it quite dated. Just like the Orioles script from that era looks hopelessly dated compared to the Orioles script from today. It's just kind of a crummy script. And that has nothing to do with the Yankees, Dodgers, and Tigers. Some things age well. When those things get old, we call them "classic." Some things do not age well. When those things get old, we call them "dated."

Well, that obviously is your opinion, but it doesn't hold up any better than my opinion that the old script is just fine. What makes it a crummy script? Just because you said so? What makes the Dodgers, Yankees, and Tigers script/logo any more "classic" than the Twins old script? Once again, just because you said so? I'm sure that just as many people think something "ages well" as those that don't.

Newsflash: Scientists working collaboratively on the Internet have discovered that aesthetic judgments are actually opinions!

Anyway, sarcasm aside, here is why the old Twins script does, in fact, suck:

1. Note the inconsistently placed connecters with differing styles of going in and out of the letterforms. Sometimes they hit at the middle of a vertical line, sometimes they connect at the top. Sometimes they flow into the letter shape like actual script writing, sometimes they just hit the letter as if the pen is lifted between letters.

2. Note the hanging connecter on the left of the W. Not only is it inconsistently placed with the others, especially the N, which should match in style within any given script, but it's squared off at the end, whereas all other script "edges" come to a point.

3. Sometimes changes in "pen" direction are indicated with loops or curves, but in other places such changes are not indicated, leaving the effect of perfectly retraced lines or a lifted "pen." The problem is that this is handled inconsistently between similar letterforms, as between similar vertical shapes in the W, I, and N. Also note the continuous looping line to connect the W to the I but a "lifted pen" between the end of the stroke that forms the S and the start of the underline.

4. The vertical lines in each letter are not parallel to those in any other letter. Even the I and N, which look close, are not quite parallel.

5. Nor are do the letters align properly on the bottoms; instead the I floats above the baseline, and the bottom of the N is aligned at an angle that crosses the baseline.

6. The connector between the S and the underline sticks out half the width of a letter, distorting the size and placement of the script on the jersey.

7. The giant fish-tail on the underline takes up nearly one-fourth of the vertical space of the entire script. That creates huge amounts of wasted space and shrinks the apparent and actual size of the letters. But the letters are the whole point of a jersey script!

These are, for the most part, objectively measurable characteristics that most people would regard as flaws. Any minimally competent designer today would not create a script with these flaws. The connecters would be consistent in alignment and style. The vertical elements would be parallel, and the letters would align on a baseline. The W would not have a stump on the left side. The S would blend into the tail more directly, and the left edge of the tail would waste less space. The Dodgers, to use one of your examples, have a script that does not suffer any of the technical flaws of the original Twins script. It therefore ages better (and has been tweaked over the years to keep it looking fresh).

You might think the old Twins script is pretty nonetheless, but these flaws don't cease to exist just because you think the script is pretty anyway. It's important not to mistake one's own gut sense of whether something is pretty with a reasoned judgment of whether that thing is actually any good.

Well your breakdown is quite impressive, but the bottom line as you stated is that aesthetic judgements are opinions. Do you really think the average guy will automatically see all the flaws you dissected and judge that script as a disaster, unworthy of MLB standards? Can't you just accept that people might like the old look better, JUST BECAUSE, without having to justify their preference with a micro dissection? I think that your analysis has credence, but I think it is wrong to automatically dismiss other people's preferences and call them dated. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. You like the current look, I like the old look. Peace, my friend.

....Exactly. By that guy's logic every team would have an identical ultra-generic Utopian script.....

And the funny thing is, the current Twins script could be pointed out as "flawed" in many ways too... I mean look at the goddamn "T" !!

And I disagree that letters are the whole point of a jersey script.... otherwise there would only be letters....

I guess what I am saying is that you can't analyze beauty like that.... its not physics.....

And you haven't really proven anything. You can't "prove" flaws when it comes to script. Especially when the script font is not specified.

[BallWonk]

Well your breakdown is quite impressive, but the bottom line as you stated is that aesthetic judgements are opinions. Do you really think the average guy will automatically see all the flaws you dissected and judge that script as a disaster, unworthy of MLB standards? Can't you just accept that people might like the old look better, JUST BECAUSE, without having to justify their preference with a micro dissection? I think that your analysis has credence, but I think it is wrong to automatically dismiss other people's preferences and call them dated. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. You like the current look, I like the old look. Peace, my friend.

Beauty is in the eye off the beholder, yes, but there is nothing wrong with thinking critically about one's own opinions and tastes. I mean, for example, I still listen to Def

's album Hysteria. Love that record. But the fact that I enjoy that particular album on some sentimental/gut level doesn't blind me to the truth that it's pretty much crap music. Favorite =/= best.

And, hey, I'm a sucker for the original Twins look, too. I met most of those guys back in the day. But just because I like the overall look, I don't have to turn off my brain and pretend that it's a perfect uniform in every way and completely beyond criticism or improvement. I like the current Twins uniforms (the basic home white and road grays, not the crazy closet full of mismatched alts) precisely because it preserves the overall look of the original Senators/Twins uniforms while fixing some of the undeniable flaws in some elements of the old uniforms. Could the Twins uniforms be even better than they are? Absolutely. I wouldn't be opposed to going back to a connected script, either, as long as it's a good script, not the junk script the Twins used to wear. Wouldn't be hard to fix the old script, actually.

Anyway, I don't see your disagreement with me as an attack on me, so please don't regard my disagreement with you as an attack on you. We hold opposing opinions. That's cool. I've explained in some detail why my opinion is what it is. Nothing more.

[Sport]

Not only is the red jersey the greatest Twins jersey of all time, it looks especially dapper when tucked way, way into the pants of shrimpy second basemen so that the main logo goes across your belly and your front numbers are in your pants.

What size Blizzard? would you like today?

I get that the red jersey sucks, but I've never understood the Dairy Queen comparison. Can someone please explain that to me?

[winghaz]

Call the original script Twins what you want. Call it inconsistent. Call it out of shape. Whatever.

Point is, it was worn by people like Harmon Killebrew, Tony Oliva, Rod Carew, Bert Blyleven, Jim Kaat, etc., etc., etc. THAT'S what makes it great -- the memories associated with it.

[bulldogbarks55]

Well your breakdown is quite impressive, but the bottom line as you stated is that aesthetic judgements are opinions. Do you really think the average guy will automatically see all the flaws you dissected and judge that script as a disaster, unworthy of MLB standards? Can't you just accept that people might like the old look better, JUST BECAUSE, without having to justify their preference with a micro dissection? I think that your analysis has credence, but I think it is wrong to automatically dismiss other people's preferences and call them dated. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. You like the current look, I like the old look. Peace, my friend.

Beauty is in the eye off the beholder, yes, but there is nothing wrong with thinking critically about one's own opinions and tastes. I mean, for example, I still listen to Def

's album Hysteria. Love that record. But the fact that I enjoy that particular album on some sentimental/gut level doesn't blind me to the truth that it's pretty much crap music. Favorite =/= best.

And, hey, I'm a sucker for the original Twins look, too. I met most of those guys back in the day. But just because I like the overall look, I don't have to turn off my brain and pretend that it's a perfect uniform in every way and completely beyond criticism or improvement. I like the current Twins uniforms (the basic home white and road grays, not the crazy closet full of mismatched alts) precisely because it preserves the overall look of the original Senators/Twins uniforms while fixing some of the undeniable flaws in some elements of the old uniforms. Could the Twins uniforms be even better than they are? Absolutely. I wouldn't be opposed to going back to a connected script, either, as long as it's a good script, not the junk script the Twins used to wear. Wouldn't be hard to fix the old script, actually.

Anyway, I don't see your disagreement with me as an attack on me, so please don't regard my disagreement with you as an attack on you. We hold opposing opinions. That's cool. I've explained in some detail why my opinion is what it is. Nothing more.

You should do an update of the original script and see how it looks. I was being a bit flippant when I asked about the "script police." Frankly I never gave the old script a thought about not being symmetrical. I kind of liked the look. And I always thought the Twins should have used the original "Minnesota" jacket script with the star dotting the "i" for their road shirts. It's the best one they've ever used. I've never really considered the current script as script because it's not connected. But that's just my opinion.

[TruColor]

For what it's worth, I never liked that original Twins script either. It always looked to me like it was drawn freehand, and cut out of felt.

I SO prefer the new(er) script (and the "M" too)...but that's just my opinion.