Jump to content

Target Field logo


jlentz823

Recommended Posts

If the Twins can continue their magical 2009 playoff push, there is always the possiblity of a "2009 World Series Champions" patch as well for the 2010 season. I doubt this will happen, but it would be nice to see.

True, the Twins winning the World Series is about as likely as the U.S. president winning a Nobel Peace Prize, er, I mean, it's not very likely. But I don't recall the Twins wearing any kind of World Champion patches in 1988 or 1992. But my memory could just be off. Anyone know whether the Twins did wear patches the season after winning past Series?

20082614447.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It looks like the Twins are using the 'TC' logo fulltime on the majority of their promos and ads. Is it safe to say that the 'M' is a thing of the past and hopefully there is a completely redone identity on the horizon?

I for one have always loved the 'TC' logo because of how it looks but also for what it stands for. It seems to fit so nicely. Maybe they'll bring back the red hats w/ navy brims too? Who knows....but it would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like the Twins are using the 'TC' logo fulltime on the majority of their promos and ads. Is it safe to say that the 'M' is a thing of the past and hopefully there is a completely redone identity on the horizon?

I for one have always loved the 'TC' logo because of how it looks but also for what it stands for. It seems to fit so nicely. Maybe they'll bring back the red hats w/ navy brims too? Who knows....but it would be nice.

I think it's safe to say that there will not be a completely redone identity anytime soon. I mean, the Twins just literally engraved their slightly tweaked jersey script in stone at their new ballpark. There's a reason "engraved in stone" is the dominant metaphor for the concept of "not planning to change anytime soon."

But I wouldn't be surprised if the M at least is gone, either in 2010 or soon thereafter.

I too love the idea of the TC logo, and what it stands for, but it is in desperate need of some kind of tweaking. Great idea, poor execution. I recently watched footage of the 1965 World Series, and in black and white the red C is literally invisible. It's not much more visible in color, though HD does help somewhat. And the shame is that there are so many easy things the Twins could do to fix the contrast problem with the red-on-midnight cap logo: A one-color TC logo with an outline, a navy-and-red TC logo with an outline, even simply switching to a somewhat brighter shade of navy fabric (like the Brewers rather than the Yankees) would help.

20082614447.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That they wore the TC helmets on the road meant the M hats were only seen in the field for road games. Kind of pointless to do a 75-25 split, if you ask me.

For everything the Twins have done right with Target Field and their tweaked primary, how could they fail to fix the TC logo? Baffling.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That they wore the TC helmets on the road meant the M hats were only seen in the field for road games. Kind of pointless to do a 75-25 split, if you ask me.

For everything the Twins have done right with Target Field and their tweaked primary, how could they fail to fix the TC logo? Baffling.

Most fans of the team would look at your with puzzlement if you asked them this. In their opinion, there's nothing wrong with the TC mark. The T is emphasized, the C is unobtrusive. It's a great mark that is absolutely unique in MLB: No other team has a mark on their primary that does not correspond to their official location name or team name.

avatar47165711ar8.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "TC" mark is to the Midwest what the Yankees' "NY" mark is to NYC (only the Cubs' "C" rivals it in that region).

I'm all for keeping it-hopefully it's emphasized in the new set (which, from what I've seen, is going to be a VAST improvement over what they've got now)

bYhYmxh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most fans of the team would look at your with puzzlement if you asked them this. In their opinion, there's nothing wrong with the TC mark. The T is emphasized, the C is unobtrusive.

Here's where I look at you with puzzlement: don't you think both letters should stand out? You don't want 50% of a logo to get lost against the background. The next poster compared this mark to the Cubs' and Yankees' monograms. Yes, the Twins have a large fanbase with many people owning this cap, but the logo itself is flawed in ways that the C and NY are not. I definitely want it around, I just want the C to show up from more than a few feet away or in black-and-white, and maybe for it to take a different form than the Reds' wishbone C. This can be accomplished with ease.

It's a great mark that is absolutely unique in MLB: No other team has a mark on their primary that does not correspond to their official location name or team name.

I love how unique the TC is too for that same reason. Even though the old M cap probably matched the rest of the set better, it looked kind of ugly.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps an all-white TC with navy/red outlines is in order, at least on the home caps? I don't know, I'm just trying to stay on track while redirecting the thread back to the topic at hand with my next sentence.

Bank Gothic is the new Copperplate.

Welcome to DrunjFlix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Copperplate was the new Bank Gothic. I remember Bank Gothic and Eurose Wide being everywhere in the late '90s. Copperplate seems like a new development.

A white TC outlined in red is what people have been saying all along, yeah. That would look much better.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a former employee of Target, the baseball/bullseye thing still impresses me, but doesn't surprise me at all. TGT is one of the most brand-conscious businesses I've ever seen, and they do a great job. As far as the logos, very solid execution across the board, especially the Inaug logo. Pretty and classic, while still simple and classic.

The 50 on the other logo seems to be from the same font (or a similar family) a the Royals' 40. Still, not bad at all.

And I'd bet the beer ad on the pics wasn't negotiated...otherwise the blur would be more subtle.

I agree, which is why I'm still so confused about the rebrand of their "store brand" to "up and up". The target brand was too strong to get away from.

I'm not a big fan myself, especially since the packaging design smacks of late-00's minimalist design trends (see PepsiCo). However, I think it's a move to remove some of the generic-store-brand-stigma off it. It used to be, blatantly, just "Target brand" with no real prestige attached. Now, with a separate brand, name, and design, they're the same product, but can build a little brand equity. They have many store brands all with different connotations: Archer Farms (upscale, high-quality food, usually somewhat gourmet, and priced accordingly), Nick & Nora/Gilligan & O'Malley (women's sleepwear and intimates, all made by the same people that make high-quality big name brands for other companies, or so I hear), Mossimo Supply Co (lower-priced but decent quality clothes & shoes) & Mossimo "black" as we call it (higher fashion, and supposedly higher quality clothes, generally dressy), and TruTech (very cheap electronics...basically "Target brand" consumer TVs, radios, etc.)

In other words, while the Target brand itself is strong, we tend to look at the store brand itself as lesser quality than the national...so by renaming and rebranding it (up & up, TruTech, Archer) they probably are looking to make people potentially think more of it than just "oh, that's the Target brand; I'd rather have ______." Makes a little sense, esp with the TruTech, because Best Buy does the same thing...would you really want a Kroger-brand, Walmart-brand, or bullseye emblazoned Target TV? Probably not.

Now if you'll excuse me, I think Juan-Pablo Montoya needs my support in the Chase.

By the way, I can't help but wonder how subtly the Twins are going to change their entire look. I've been following the leaks and all...but only casually. It looks like changes may be relatively small...and I think I like that.

AUSPole.pngWAT2nd.png

Go Gators. Go Blue Raiders. Go Commodores. Go USC Trojans.

Preds & Avs.

Braves, Rays, & Dodgers.

Titans, Colts, Broncos, Cardinals.

Grizzlies. 14ers, Jam.

Team Spirit + Laziness = Yay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but wonder how subtly the Twins are going to change their entire look. I've been following the leaks and all...but only casually. It looks like changes may be relatively small...and I think I like that.

That's the impression I get, too. If so, it will be nice to see a comprehensive redesign that is also subtle and tweaky rather than brash and transformative. The Twins are kind of like the Mets, in that beneath the clutter of a really messy set of uniforms and trademarks they have a couple of really excellent elements. Paring away the mess down to the good original elements, and then tweaking them to bring them up to date, would be an excellent move for the Twins, and to date that sounds like what they're doing.

On the TC cap, I'd even settle for a switch to the red cap with the blue bill and the blue/white TC logo. Not perfect, but noticeably better contrast on the logo, and it has the advantage of bringing out the red in the uniform script and being a unique cap color combo in MLB. Not what I'd do if I owned the Twins, but it's a solution the team already has on hand and in stock, so it would fit with the atmospherics of the redesign.

20082614447.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except, of course, that the red cap with the blue bill looks stupid.

And is rarely seen around the Twin Cities. I agree. Ditch it. Again.

The two of you can go straight to hell. Please.

Welcome to DrunjFlix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except, of course, that the red cap with the blue bill looks stupid.

And is rarely seen around the Twin Cities. I agree. Ditch it. Again.

The two of you can go straight to hell. Please.

I guess I'll join 'em. I hate that red hat and while I acknowledge the problem with the current "C", I'll take it over that red hat.

Here's what I'd like:

1. Home jersey just as now, with new wordmark, updated logo for sleeve, and removal of the bush league nameplates. This is what I think will happen. It looks like people generally like this uniform and maybe it's just wishfull thinking, but I think they've recognized how bad the nameplate looks on pinstriptes (and that they're the only team that does it) and dump it.

2. Road jersey with no pinstripes. Some sort of new wordmark. Again, I think this is what they will do. Has any otherteam kept a road pinstripe set for over 20 years? And we have yet to really see a "Minnesota" mark. It think they're going to go a bit bigger on change for this.

3. Only one alt jersey--blue with a "TC" on the chest. I think they'll go with one blue alt, but with the "Twins" wordmark. I think we've seen the last of the sleeveless.

4. Only one cap. I think they will go with one cap. I realize that baseball caps are not the same as football helmets for identity, but the Twins seem to be moving toward this concept. You don't see too many "M" hats around here.

5. Blue hat should have red "TC" with white outline--Essentially modeled after Cardinals' road hat. This is absolutely NOT going to happen. The photos of that beautiful dugout point to the T and C remaining different colors from each other. New ballpark, slightly cleaned up look, tweaked wordmark...It would be the best time to make this significant, yet positive, change to the "TC" logo. But the dugout thing is all I need to see. It's not happening. Probably will have the same hat...outside chance of the red hat.

5a. Put the "Cards-inspired" "TC" on the BP cap. See how the fanbase reacts...then work it into the primary in a few year. Again, about a 1% chance.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's what I'd like:

1. Home jersey just as now, with new wordmark, updated logo for shoulder, and removal of the bush league nameplates. This is what I think will happen. It looks like people generally like this uniform and maybe it's just wishfull thinking, but I think they've recognized how bad the nameplate looks on pinstriptes (and that they're the only team that does it) and dump it.

2. Road jersey with no pinstripes. Some sort of new wordmark. Again, I think this is what they will do. Has any otherteam kept a road pinstripe set for over 20 years? And we have yet to really see a "Minnesota" mark. It think they're going to go a bit bigger on change for this.

3. Only one alt jersey--blue with a "TC" on the chest. I think they'll go with one blue alt, but with the "Twins" wordmark. I think we've seen the last of the sleeveless.

4. Only one cap. I think they will go with one cap. I realize that baseball caps are not the same as football helmets for identity, but the Twins seem to be moving toward this concept. You don't see too many "M" hats around here.

5. Blue hat should have red "TC" with white outline--Essentially modeled after Cardinals' road hat. This is absolutely NOT going to happen. The photos of that beautiful dugout point to the T and C remaining different colors from each other. New ballpark, slightly cleaned up look, tweaked wordmark...It would be the best time to make this significant, yet positive, change to the "TC" logo. But the dugout thing is all I need to see. It's not happening. Probably will have the same hat...outside chance of the red hat.

5a. Put the "Cards-inspired" "TC" on the BP cap. See how the fanbase reacts...then work it into the primary in a few year. Again, about a 1% chance.

I generally like your inclinations, and if I were betting I would wager on your expectations being very close to reality.

Couple of things.

First, we've heard from people who should know that the vests probably are not going away. (Which is the only piece of truly bad news I've yet heard about the Twins rebrand. Death to the pixie vests!) Hope they're wrong.

Second, while I would also appreciate a Red Sox-style cap logo revision, I think it might also be worth considering simply taking the blue-T, red-C logo we'll be seeing all over the new ballpark, outlining it in white, and slapping that on the caps. Sure, blue on blue doesn't seem like a brilliant way to solve a problem with low contrast, but the right thickness of white outline would do the trick. And then the Twins would have unified their use of the TC logo behind a single mark and color scheme.

Third, pinstripes on the road must stay. The general mania against road pinstripes is simple philistinism. The Twins franchise was using pinstripes on the road before the Yankees were wearing pinstripes at home, fer crying out loud. There is no conceivable generally applicable principle that would allow us to approve of pinstripes at home but not on the road; if they're permissible at home, then they're permissible on the road. And given that pinstripes darken the appearance of a uniform, a pinstriped road uniform achieves the fundamental purpose of a road uniform better than an otherwise identical non-pinstriped uniform would.

With the Twins in particular, the pinstripes are an important part of the team's visual identity. If you see a player in a pinstriped uniform with red lettering and a navy cap, you know you're looking at the Minnesota Twins. Not many teams are so distinctively characterized by their uniforms, and the road pinstripes are part of that. They should therefore remain.

Fourth, I'm concerned about the road script, though. I fear that the Twins will adopt the home script on the road jerseys.

20082614447.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fourth, I'm concerned about the road script, though. I fear that the Twins will adopt the home script on the road jerseys.

I almost said that. The lack of "Minnesota" on anything new we've seen kind of scares me. I don't really want a "Minnesota" wordmark that tries to look like the "Twins" wordmark. But even worse, I don't want to be the Brewers. The Twins used "Twins" on the road from 1961 to 1986, so it is a possibility. It would be a huge disappointment.

Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse."

 

BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD

POTD (Shared)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm against road pinstripes, but if they're going to have them, I think a gray uniform with navy pinstripes and the TC logo on the chest would be a classy look and work well. Number on front is optional, but if it's there, it should be up at logo-level, not below.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fundamentally opposed to the idea of a TC logo on the chest. I really think it leaves the uniform unbalanced. It just lacks the weight of lettering stripped across the chest.

I'll also join the chorus of red-hat haters. That hat needs to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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