Jump to content

Mets uniform changes


SPORTSDOCTOR

Recommended Posts

http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/metsblog/mets_mull_uniform_changes_ZUezYBah8uZtumjnIWfEVP

March 04, 638626 ι By Bart Hubbuch

WASHINGTON -- The Mets are considering a couple of significant alterations to their home uniforms in 2010, according to team officials.

The club has talked about abandoning the pinstripes that have been part of their home uniform since the franchise began in 1962, as well as switching to a cream-colored outfit at Citi Field instead of basic white.

The cream uniforms would be similar to the throwbacks they were in August, as well as the current home outfits of the San Francisco Giants.

Club spokesman Jay Horwitz would not be specific today except to say the Mets "are going to do something" with their home uniforms next season.

**********************************************ADAM RUBIN REPORTS ON METS BLOG THE FOLLOWING******************

The Mets plan to go retro with their pinstriped home uniforms next season. Those uniforms will change to off-white, as they were in the 1960s, from their current bright white. That will also serve to differentiate the pinstriped uniforms from the solid home uniforms, which will remain the brighter white.

Link here: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/mets/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah, typical Wilpon owned, clueless, driving the fans further away from this team, Mets.

Speak to most Mets fans and they want more than anything to have a set uniform combination that includes the pinstriped home look (sans the black) and a gray look without any black and a blue Mets hat.

This franchise continues to wonder why they have an identification crisis?

A stadium that is a replica on the exterior of Ebbets Field.

A 'rotunda' that celebrates Jackie Robinson.

No foresight given to dressing up a 'Mets ballpark' like a Mets ballpark - close your eyes inside CitiField and you have to guess whose home park it is.

Something small - but yet something so big as well. Mets ushers at all levels of the park are dressed in what color? Mets blue, right? Maybe a combo of Mets Blue & Orange? Maybe with some black trim as well?

Nah, why do that?

The rest of the place is a sterile and non-identifying home, so lets dress our ushers up in BRIGHT red uniforms...this way, just like the Dodgers get the feeling that we're hoping to make them comfortable when they visit NY by paying homage to their legacy, in a similar fashion we want the Cardinals to feel as though they aren't too far from home - and when we play the Angels in the goofy interleague series, they'll feel at home too.

This franchise lost its soul a long time ago - and I agree, this can't end well, the Mets will screw this next cosmetic move up as well.

Please Mr. Wilpon, SELL THIS TEAM to someone who understands what being a New York Metropolitan is all about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, typical Wilpon owned, clueless, driving the fans further away from this team, Mets.

Speak to most Mets fans and they want more than anything to have a set uniform combination that includes the pinstriped home look (sans the black) and a gray look without any black and a blue Mets hat.

This franchise continues to wonder why they have an identification crisis?

A stadium that is a replica on the exterior of Ebbets Field.

A 'rotunda' that celebrates Jackie Robinson.

No foresight given to dressing up a 'Mets ballpark' like a Mets ballpark - close your eyes inside CitiField and you have to guess whose home park it is.

Something small - but yet something so big as well. Mets ushers at all levels of the park are dressed in what color? Mets blue, right? Maybe a combo of Mets Blue & Orange? Maybe with some black trim as well?

Nah, why do that?

The rest of the place is a sterile and non-identifying home, so lets dress our ushers up in BRIGHT red uniforms...this way, just like the Dodgers get the feeling that we're hoping to make them comfortable when they visit NY by paying homage to their legacy, in a similar fashion we want the Cardinals to feel as though they aren't too far from home - and when we play the Angels in the goofy interleague series, they'll feel at home too.

This franchise lost its soul a long time ago - and I agree, this can't end well, the Mets will screw this next cosmetic move up as well.

Please Mr. Wilpon, SELL THIS TEAM to someone who understands what being a New York Metropolitan is all about.

Co-signed a big Mets fan a ticket plan holder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, typical Wilpon owned, clueless, driving the fans further away from this team, Mets.

Speak to most Mets fans and they want more than anything to have a set uniform combination that includes the pinstriped home look (sans the black) and a gray look without any black and a blue Mets hat.

This franchise continues to wonder why they have an identification crisis?

A stadium that is a replica on the exterior of Ebbets Field.

A 'rotunda' that celebrates Jackie Robinson.

No foresight given to dressing up a 'Mets ballpark' like a Mets ballpark - close your eyes inside CitiField and you have to guess whose home park it is.

Something small - but yet something so big as well. Mets ushers at all levels of the park are dressed in what color? Mets blue, right? Maybe a combo of Mets Blue & Orange? Maybe with some black trim as well?

Nah, why do that?

The rest of the place is a sterile and non-identifying home, so lets dress our ushers up in BRIGHT red uniforms...this way, just like the Dodgers get the feeling that we're hoping to make them comfortable when they visit NY by paying homage to their legacy, in a similar fashion we want the Cardinals to feel as though they aren't too far from home - and when we play the Angels in the goofy interleague series, they'll feel at home too.

This franchise lost its soul a long time ago - and I agree, this can't end well, the Mets will screw this next cosmetic move up as well.

Please Mr. Wilpon, SELL THIS TEAM to someone who understands what being a New York Metropolitan is all about.

Co-signed a big Mets fan a ticket plan holder.

I feel your pain, Tank,

As someone who was as passionate a Mets fan that ever existed for 40 years (I'm now a Rockies fan) I feel your pain, sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So right now, we have two reports:

1. Mets drop pinstripes, change white home unis to cream.

2. Mets change pinstripes to cream, keep white home unis as-is.

From a couple of secondhand things I've heard, I suspect 2 is the more likely outcome.

Option 1 would actually be a smart move, that would help consolidate a very ill-defined team's identity and also further differentiate the Mets from the Yankees. (Personally, I want the Mets to look exactly like they did in either 1969 or 1986 forever, but I recognize the branding value of ditching the pinstripes, so I'm cool with it if the Mets want to go that way.) Option 2 is just about the only conceivable thing the Mets could do at this point to further muddle a brand identity that I for one thought was already maximally muddled. Apparently, I lack the Wilponian imagination to look at the Mets uniforms and say, "Dude: Two shades of white. That clash."

So the real good news here is that if the Mets really do go with option 2, the Nationals will no longer be the ugliest team in baseball, a title the Mets only lost to Washington earlier this year. The bad news is that the Nats still have plenty of options to increase their ugliness and take the ugliest team title back from the Mets, whereas after implementing clashing shades of home whites, the only way for the Mets to further screw up their uniforms will be the addition of a seventh uniform color (after blue, orange, black, gray, white, and cream). With the Phillies already wearing pink and Florida doing who knows what, another year or two of an escalated ugly-uniform competition between the Mets and Nats will make the NL East so ugly that intra-division games will give children seizures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we change the players in the unis while we're at it?

Like every other Mets fan, I'd like them to go back to 1996 or so. Pinstripes at home, roads as is sans black trim, and a blue hat. Throw in a blue 'Mets' alt if you want with piping around the sleeves and buttons.

I made it to Citi Field in April, while everyone was actually healthy. It is sterile, I agree. It's somehow oddly angular, and I hate the wall that changes height 40 times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing the pinstripes go. Why would any team want to wear a use a design element that's so closely associated with one its biggest rivals?

And before anyone points it out... I fully aware that teams wore pinstripes before the Yankees. But people actually refer to the Yanks as "the pinstripes." I didn't even like it when the Bucks wore purple because it reminded me of the Vikings... and that's not even the same sport...

Also... if the Mets wear orange to honor the Giants, then shouldn't black be ok too? (I've been wantin' to ask that for a minute).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For YEARS I've been on the "make a cream colored pinstriped home uniform" bandwagon.

alg_seaver-piazza.jpg

I would hope it's a little "creamier" than what Seaver has in that picture, but ESPECIALLY if it means no more black dropshadow on that, I'd pick one up in a heartbeat.

As for why don't they abandon them all together? They won 2 championships in pinstripes. They've been a part of their uniforms since their inception in 1962. It's part of Mets lore...Dodger Blue, Giant Orange, Yankee Pinstripes, the 3 NY teams that existed prior to the Mets into one uniform.

I'm still worried though about how they'll go and botch this. Of course I've already cancelled my tickets for next season and they wonder why I don't want them anymore. They keep sending me letters hoping I'll reconsider, but I'm not shelling out for a 13 game plan of which I went to 5 games this season. I'll use my cash elsewhere thank you very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing the pinstripes go. Why would any team want to wear a use a design element that's so closely associated with one its biggest rivals?

And before anyone points it out... I fully aware that teams wore pinstripes before the Yankees. But people actually refer to the Yanks as "the pinstripes." I didn't even like it when the Bucks wore purple because it reminded me of the Vikings... and that's not even the same sport...

Also... if the Mets wear orange to honor the Giants, then shouldn't black be ok too? (I've been wantin' to ask that for a minute).

Agree with you completely on the pinstripes. Those belong to the Yankees in this town and always have.

If the Mets had adopted black as a primary team color in 1961, then I don't think we'd have a problem with it. But the Mets carved out a great visual identity with their orange and blue, and elegant solution - one color from the Dodgers, one from the Giants - and there's no escaping the simple truth that the club threw that all away to chase a few pathetic merchandising dollars.

Even had they applied black without completely screwing up their scheme, then maybe we'd all be okay with it. It's my perception that much of the opposition to the Detroit Lions' black trim has subsided because it's actually done pretty well (and with restraint) in the new uniforms. Not so with the Mets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing the pinstripes go. Why would any team want to wear a use a design element that's so closely associated with one its biggest rivals?

And before anyone points it out... I fully aware that teams wore pinstripes before the Yankees. But people actually refer to the Yanks as "the pinstripes." I didn't even like it when the Bucks wore purple because it reminded me of the Vikings... and that's not even the same sport...

Also... if the Mets wear orange to honor the Giants, then shouldn't black be ok too? (I've been wantin' to ask that for a minute).

Agree with you completely on the pinstripes. Those belong to the Yankees in this town and always have.

If the Mets had adopted black as a primary team color in 1961, then I don't think we'd have a problem with it. But the Mets carved out a great visual identity with their orange and blue, and elegant solution - one color from the Dodgers, one from the Giants - and there's no escaping the simple truth that the club threw that all away to chase a few pathetic merchandising dollars.

But don't forget the one element from the Yankees aspect too. We're approaching 50 seasons, or a half-century worth of Mets baseball. The ONLY constant with their jerseys over the existence of the franchise is a pinstriped home uniform.

It's not like they've been in the league for 7 years. They've ALWAYS been a part of the team in one form or another. Nobody is mistaking them for being the Yankees, so what does it matter? They mostly wear the snow-whites anyway...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing the pinstripes go. Why would any team want to wear a use a design element that's so closely associated with one its biggest rivals?

And before anyone points it out... I fully aware that teams wore pinstripes before the Yankees. But people actually refer to the Yanks as "the pinstripes." I didn't even like it when the Bucks wore purple because it reminded me of the Vikings... and that's not even the same sport...

Also... if the Mets wear orange to honor the Giants, then shouldn't black be ok too? (I've been wantin' to ask that for a minute).

Agree with you completely on the pinstripes. Those belong to the Yankees in this town and always have.

If the Mets had adopted black as a primary team color in 1961, then I don't think we'd have a problem with it. But the Mets carved out a great visual identity with their orange and blue, and elegant solution - one color from the Dodgers, one from the Giants - and there's no escaping the simple truth that the club threw that all away to chase a few pathetic merchandising dollars.

Even had they applied black without completely screwing up their scheme, then maybe we'd all be okay with it. It's my perception that much of the opposition to the Detroit Lions' black trim has subsided because it's actually done pretty well (and with restraint) in the new uniforms. Not so with the Mets.

No argument from me that the execution of using black has been terrible. But since they added it, they've had an unmistakably unique identity in a sport that could really use more of those. One only needs to take a quick glance at the tv and know that it's the Mets... you really couldn't say that before. Also, being from the Midwest, I tend to free associate the royal blue cap and royal blue pinstripe combo with the Cubs (as I'm sure a lot of other people do thanks to WGN).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone needs to go a little easier on the Mets. I am a DIE HARD Mets fan, and I mean that in the truest sense of the word. You would be hard pressed to find a bigger Mets fan than me and I am also a 15 game plan holder and fairly disgruntled by the way this season turned out. I think Jeff and Fred are just as inept as the rest of you and also think that they've been a mess identity-wise for the past 12 years...

BUT

they deserve a break on this one. Give them some credit. They did listen to the fans on this for the most part. Now, we still don't know what will be the end result of this. All indications, considering Rubin's report, is for a cream pinstripe and the snow whites as is. I have to believe that SOMETHING is going to be done with the black. Either completely eliminated, or less likely, a blue alternate. But a cream pinstripe gives them an old-school look, with presumably no black drop shadow, and gets everyone one step closer to what they want. Remember, the world champions currently have both a white and cream home uni set, so it's unfair to call them out on that when everyone went gaga over the Phillies' throwbacks.

As far as the pinstripes debate, no the pinstripes stay. I'm sorry, but Mets fans have to get the hell over the Yankees stuff and see that pinstripes have been in Mets tradition since 1962. Seaver wore 'em, Doc wore 'em, Piazza, Straw, Hojo, Koosman, Kingman, Mays and everyone in between. The Yankees have their pinstripes and we have ours. They can co-exist. They have for almost 5 decades.

EDIT: Supposedly Paul Lukas has confirmed that the new pinstripes will have a black dropshadow. L-A-M-E!

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.