LA Angels in Blue?

[mania]

That mid 90's set was classic and paid homage to the original California Angels. It was beautiful with the red numbers, letters and red brimmed cap at home and the navy blue on the road. The current set, pays homage to the Texas Rangers as it's just a rip-off of the Rangers from the mid 90's.

So they "ripped off" a look that another team briefly had and then abandoned years before? That's a little silly. In the history of baseball, almost everything has been tried at least once with uniforms. Plus, they basically took the uniforms they wore in the 1980's and changed the crown of the hat to red; it's not like they completely changed everything to look like someone else.

The Rangers went back to blue full time (after a year of red at home, blue on the road) THE SAME YEAR the Angels started their look-alike.

[loogodude90]

"The Rangers went back to blue full time (after a year of red at home, blue on the road) THE SAME YEAR the Angels started their look-alike."

Well, technically no, the rangers first all blue season was 2001. And the Angels went to the red unis in 2002.

I wouldnt have really pointed this out had it not been for your uppercase bold "THE SAME YEAR". Not trying to be a smartass just noting the correct years.

[mania]

Although the Angels didn't start wearing the red's until 2002, they unveiled them in 2001... I'm almost certain.

[chakfu]

Plus, they basically took the uniforms they wore in the 1980's and changed the crown of the hat to red; it's not like they completely changed everything to look like someone else.

But you could argue that the crown of the hat is the most unvarying part of a team's colors and uniform history...that's why home and road caps frequently alter the colors of the bill. I think the bright red hat is a pretty major departure.

[SilverNRed]

Although the Angels didn't start wearing the red's until 2002, they unveiled them in 2001... I'm almost certain.

The Rangers went to blue on the road in 2000, and then all blue in 2001. The Angels switched to red for the 2002 season. What is the big deal again?

[SilverNRed]

Plus, they basically took the uniforms they wore in the 1980's and changed the crown of the hat to red; it's not like they completely changed everything to look like someone else.

But you could argue that the crown of the hat is the most unvarying part of a team's colors and uniform history...that's why home and road caps frequently alter the colors of the bill. I think the bright red hat is a pretty major departure.

I'd say the logo is the most important part of a team's colors/uniform history. True, changing the crown of the hat makes a big difference, but it's not like they introduced a new color to the color scheme as part of that change. When you're at the stadium and you see pictures of Angels over the entire 50 year history, it's not a jarring transition when you go from looking at 80's and 90's pictures to current ones.

(Unless you count the Disney uniforms, which no one does.)

[oddball]

That mid 90's set was classic and paid homage to the original California Angels. It was beautiful with the red numbers, letters and red brimmed cap at home and the navy blue on the road. The current set, pays homage to the Texas Rangers as it's just a rip-off of the Rangers from the mid 90's.

So they "ripped off" a look that another team briefly had and then abandoned years before? That's a little silly. In the history of baseball, almost everything has been tried at least once with uniforms. Plus, they basically took the uniforms they wore in the 1980's and changed the crown of the hat to red; it's not like they completely changed everything to look like someone else.

It's the best look they've ever had. The fans embraced it immediately. Even with the terrible start in 2002, by May of that year everyone in the stadium was wearing red. Plus now it's associated with a team that makes the playoffs consistently and has won a World Series.

The current set fails with the cap that has a freakin' red "A" on a red cap and now with the red jerseys with red numbers and letters that are outlined in thin blue, silver, and white.

Welcome to the world of HD TV. A red "A" on a red cap looks just fine to me.

Let's be really honest with ourselves here. The only reason the Angels gear really sells and the fans embrace it is because of 2002. If they didn't win the Series in 2002, they'd be changing back to blue again. I'd be fine with the current set if they changed the "A" on the cap to red, and used either white or silver for the numbers and letters on the red jerseys. It's just two things that annoy me with the current set. And yes they did jack the current look from the Rangers, it's what cheapskates like Arte Moreno do. How cheap is Arte really? Simple, when the Angels do throwbacks, they are too cheap to even buy the proper batting helmets to match. Oh, and to get the facts straight, the uniforms were unveiled in November of 2001 and that is when they went with the "Hunt for Red October" theme. If you change those two issues, I'm totally fine with the uniforms. It just annoys me that they won't fix that.

[loogodude90]

That mid 90's set was classic and paid homage to the original California Angels. It was beautiful with the red numbers, letters and red brimmed cap at home and the navy blue on the road. The current set, pays homage to the Texas Rangers as it's just a rip-off of the Rangers from the mid 90's.

So they "ripped off" a look that another team briefly had and then abandoned years before? That's a little silly. In the history of baseball, almost everything has been tried at least once with uniforms. Plus, they basically took the uniforms they wore in the 1980's and changed the crown of the hat to red; it's not like they completely changed everything to look like someone else.

It's the best look they've ever had. The fans embraced it immediately. Even with the terrible start in 2002, by May of that year everyone in the stadium was wearing red. Plus now it's associated with a team that makes the playoffs consistently and has won a World Series.

The current set fails with the cap that has a freakin' red "A" on a red cap and now with the red jerseys with red numbers and letters that are outlined in thin blue, silver, and white.

Welcome to the world of HD TV. A red "A" on a red cap looks just fine to me.

Let's be really honest with ourselves here. The only reason the Angels gear really sells and the fans embrace it is because of 2002. If they didn't win the Series in 2002, they'd be changing back to blue again. I'd be fine with the current set if they changed the "A" on the cap to red, and used either white or silver for the numbers and letters on the red jerseys. It's just two things that annoy me with the current set. And yes they did jack the current look from the Rangers, it's what cheapskates like Arte Moreno do. How cheap is Arte really? Simple, when the Angels do throwbacks, they are too cheap to even buy the proper batting helmets to match. Oh, and to get the facts straight, the uniforms were unveiled in November of 2001 and that is when they went with the "Hunt for Red October" theme. If you change those two issues, I'm totally fine with the uniforms. It just annoys me that they won't fix that.

That "red" should say "white", right?

And regarding the second portion I bold-faced, Bobby Abreu would like to have a word with you:

[SilverNRed]

Let's be really honest with ourselves here. The only reason the Angels gear really sells and the fans embrace it is because of 2002. If they didn't win the Series in 2002, they'd be changing back to blue again.

Everyone in the stadium was wearing red by May of 2002, a month after a 6-14 start to that season and several months before they won their first pennant and World Series.

I'd be fine with the current set if they changed the "A" on the cap to red, and used either white or silver for the numbers and letters on the red jerseys. It's just two things that annoy me with the current set.

The "A" is already red. They already tried white numbers/letters on the red BP jerseys and it doesn't look as good as the red on red.

And yes they did jack the current look from the Rangers, it's what cheapskates like Arte Moreno do.

Great point, except that Arte Moreno didn't own the team in 2001 when the current set was designed.

How cheap is Arte really? Simple, when the Angels do throwbacks, they are too cheap to even buy the proper batting helmets to match.

It's weird to call Arte Moreno "cheap" when the Angels have consistently been in the top 5 MLB payrolls since he bought the team. But I guess the batting helmets are a better indication of owner investment to you than paying well over $100 million dollars a year for players.

[The_Admiral]

The home counterparts to these '96 throwbacks were fairly nice, but I hate it when red teams switch to wearing navy blue on the road (Cardinals, Nationals, these Angels). The current set is very nice. I'd rather have yellow halos and a Los Angeles script, but whatever.

[The Six]

The old California Angels look is by far the best.

They've just gone overboard with the "A" logo. It's on the wordmark across the chest. It's on the hat. It's on the sleeve. It's on the mound. We get it. The A Team. I know it's been like that for decades, but at least the CA logo provided some respite. The only problem is that calling themselves the "California Angels" is almost as preposterous as the current name, because there are already multiple teams in California.

Also, the halo simply must be yellow/gold.

[NYYNYR]

i also like the angels as "the all-red team" in the AL. The NL is littered with red : Nationals / Reds/ Cardinals/ Diamondbacks / Astros. It's almost over-satured.

The AL is almost oversaturated with navy / medium-to-dark blue : Yanks/ Red Sox/ Twins/ Tigers/ Indians/ Mariners

[Ryoma]

i also like the angels as "the all-red team" in the AL. The NL is littered with red : Nationals / Reds/ Cardinals/ Diamondbacks / Astros. It's almost over-satured.

The AL is almost oversaturated with navy / medium-to-dark blue : Yanks/ Red Sox/ Twins/ Tigers/ Indians/ Mariners

Don't forget the Rays.

[BBM]

Pretty much every team in baseball can be boiled down to red, blue, or black. Except the A's.

[Cujo]

Pretty much every team in baseball can be boiled down to red, blue, or black. Except the A's.

Nope. Not even the A's.

[oddball]

Let's be really honest with ourselves here. The only reason the Angels gear really sells and the fans embrace it is because of 2002. If they didn't win the Series in 2002, they'd be changing back to blue again.

Everyone in the stadium was wearing red by May of 2002, a month after a 6-14 start to that season and several months before they won their first pennant and World Series.

I'd be fine with the current set if they changed the "A" on the cap to red, and used either white or silver for the numbers and letters on the red jerseys. It's just two things that annoy me with the current set.

The "A" is already red. They already tried white numbers/letters on the red BP jerseys and it doesn't look as good as the red on red.

And yes they did jack the current look from the Rangers, it's what cheapskates like Arte Moreno do.

Great point, except that Arte Moreno didn't own the team in 2001 when the current set was designed.

How cheap is Arte really? Simple, when the Angels do throwbacks, they are too cheap to even buy the proper batting helmets to match.

It's weird to call Arte Moreno "cheap" when the Angels have consistently been in the top 5 MLB payrolls since he bought the team. But I guess the batting helmets are a better indication of owner investment to you than paying well over $100 million dollars a year for players.

You're right, it was a mistake calling him cheap. He's reminds me so much of Frank McCourt and Bruce McNall, owners who really don't have money except on credit. The Angels have what to describe their payroll, an average team at best with horrible pitching. Their big time move was to get an old DH? They still hold onto Ervin Santana like he's something. After Weaver they have a bunch of 4th starters because Arte doesn't have the money to go get real talent such as Halladay. They won't do anything at the trade deadline again because Arte doesn't have the money to pay anyone as they sit on crappy prospects who don't turn out to be anything more than average bench players. Arte doesn't have the money, he never did and never will. He's one of these guys who it will come out sooner or later that he's a fraud. The signs are there, if you know what to look for. The only thing Arte Moreno cares about is stroking his ego.

[cmm]

Pretty much every team in baseball can be boiled down to red, blue, or black. Except the A's.

Nope. Not even the A's.

For what it's worth, when the Yankees were in Oakland, YES' Ken Singleton said he heard this was the last year of the black A's jerseys.

[ThePreacher]

Hey, I noticed you called them the "LA" Angels... They're proper name is actually the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

[LMU]

Hey, I noticed you called them the "LA" Angels... They're proper name is actually the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

And that's why they have a giant "Los Angeles Times" ad on top of the scoreboard?

The old California Angels look is by far the best.

They've just gone overboard with the "A" logo. It's on the wordmark across the chest. It's on the hat. It's on the sleeve. It's on the mound. We get it. The A Team. I know it's been like that for decades, but at least the CA logo provided some respite. The only problem is that calling themselves the "California Angels" is almost as preposterous as the current name, because there are already multiple teams in California.

Also, the halo simply must be yellow/gold.

The A logo is meant to be a complete brand and not just a cap logo. It's something where you know what it is as soon as you look at it, and it's quite a smart marketing strategy (plus Todd Radom did a fantastic job with it). I don't see what other logo they can add that would be strong as a primary yet not take away from the brand. I honestly wasn't at all a fan of the original primary with the blue field background, and there's really nothing that can improve on the current branding strategy. Heck, if you're getting sick of it, at the same time, the plan's working.

[TampaBayEverybodyLovesRays]

Hey, I noticed you called them the "LA" Angels... They're proper name is actually the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

And that's why they have a giant "Los Angeles Times" ad on top of the scoreboard?

lol really? The NY Times airs television ads in my area. Does that mean I'm in NY? Nope. They have the ad because the LA Times paid for it.