smith03 Posted April 21, 2010 Posted April 21, 2010 Note the article states that the orginial logo had "MT" on the two players and was later changed to "M" and "StP"http://wcco.com/sports/twins/twins.shaking.hands.2.1647091.html Just say NO to gray facemasks.
Gothamite Posted April 21, 2010 Posted April 21, 2010 Barton's son, Tony Barton, said his dad never really liked the logo."It wasn't one of his crowning achievements," Barton said. "He was a cartoonist, a writer, a creative director, but he never really thought it was that great. And if you look at it close, it really isn't. Anyone out of art school could have done it. He just happened to be the one who did it.Wow. I couldn't disagree more. I think it's an inspired logo. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog.
Gothamite Posted April 21, 2010 Posted April 21, 2010 Here's his original. Note the "MT" logo on each player (as pointed out in the story): The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog.
vikmurphy Posted April 21, 2010 Posted April 21, 2010 Wow i never saw that logo with MT before, very good find
DelayedPenalty Posted April 21, 2010 Posted April 21, 2010 I like that MT logo. Have the Twins ever considered using that as an alternate logo? I know they use the TC logo currently.
Gothamite Posted April 22, 2010 Posted April 22, 2010 Just to clarify - that's not my find. It was on UniWatch last year.I don't really like the "MT" logo, because the overlap obscures the T. It looks like a Psi symbol surrounded by Is, especially on Minne.IΨII'm surprised that they weren't labeled as Minneapolis and St. Paul from the start. Seems so integral into the concept, especially considering how hard they were trying to convince St. Paul it wasn't just a Minneapolis team. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog.
OnWis97 Posted April 22, 2010 Posted April 22, 2010 Just to clarify - that's not my find. It was on UniWatch last year.I don't really like the "MT" logo, because the overlap obscures the T. It looks like a Psi symbol surrounded by Is, especially on Minne.IΨII'm surprised that they weren't labeled as Minneapolis and St. Paul from the start. Seems so integral into the concept, especially considering how hard they were trying to convince St. Paul it wasn't just a Minneapolis team.Yeah, the StP is key. I think that naming the team "Minnesota" was a way to placate St. Paul. It's also why it took over 20 years to get a hat with an "M" (which just happened to not go over as well as "TC").Were the Twins the first team to name themselves after something other than a City? 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)
Gothamite Posted April 22, 2010 Posted April 22, 2010 Yes, they were.Setting aside 19th century teams which didn't use a place name, and things like that. But the Twins started that trend. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog.
lich0037 Posted April 22, 2010 Posted April 22, 2010 I still can't get over that he was only paid $15 for the design. Crazy! Sports Branding and Design | The Minnesota High School Helmet Project | Eric's Helmet Collection
The_Admiral Posted April 23, 2010 Posted April 23, 2010 I believe the original name was "Twin Cities Twins," which was changed to "Minnesota Twins" because someone realized "Twin Cities Twins" sounds kinda clunky. I'm not averse to "TC" as a cap monogram, though. TC is much more appropriate than M. With the whole Minneapolis-St. Paul friendly rivalry thing (though it's worth mentioning that the Twins initially played in neither one), I'd say that the Twin Cities is (are?) the only place where state name is more appropriate than city name. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫
Gothamite Posted April 23, 2010 Posted April 23, 2010 I believe the original name was "Twin Cities Twins," which was changed to "Minnesota Twins" because someone realized "Twin Cities Twins" sounds kinda clunky. I don't think that's true. If it is, they changed their mind before making it public. The first announcement of the team name I can find is the one which accompanied that logo wire photo.The Milwaukee Journal decided to call them the "Twin Cities Twins" for the first couple years, prompting this letter to the editor, published on August 16, 1961:DEAR SIR: On behalf of 99% of baseball fans of the Twin Cities, let me extend my thanks to your sports page for referring to our major league teams as Twin Cities Twins in baseball and Twin Cities Vikings in football. The vast majority of people in this area object strenuously to the name "Minnesota Twins" and "Minnesota Vikings." Pro teams all over the country are named after their cities, but the misguided powers that be in our metropolitan community were sold on the idea that St. Paul fans would not support the teams if the word Minneapolis was included in the title and chose "Minnesota." Please continue to write about the Twin Cities Twins and the Twin Cities Vikings. You have done the right thing.C.W. GROSSSt. Paul The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog.
smith03 Posted April 23, 2010 Author Posted April 23, 2010 Yes, they were.Setting aside 19th century teams which didn't use a place name, and things like that. But the Twins started that trend.Actually the Minnesota Vikings were. They announced their name on Sept 27 1960 a month before the Senators moved to Minnesota and two months before the name Minnesota Twins were announced. Of course the baseball season begans before the football season. So the Twins took the field first as it were. Just say NO to gray facemasks.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.