MLB Must ACT -- White Sox / Twins

[oakland ehs]

I recall someone on here had a concept that incorporated their own bird logo with the new T and it looked fantastic... anyone remember?

[patsox]

i think i remember braden creating a logo incorporating the bird from the 2003 cap logo and the new 'T'. it looked pretty cool.

found it!

[troy_3223]

I used to be a huge baseball fan when I was a kid, now I barely follow it at all. I think part of it was the whole steroids mess, part of it was MLB charging twenty bucks a month to listen to games online right after I moved to Virginia from Seattle, but I think a big part of it has to do with the aesthetics. This issue in particular - teams wearing their alternates night after night, it starts to look like spring training after a while. Another big part of the declining aesthetics is the blandness of the primary uniforms. Say what you want about the garish pullover era, but you knew instantly what team you were watching on TV. The uniforms had nice thick stripes, and many teams used those stripes to create iconic uniforms. Red-White-Black was the Cardinals. Royal-White-Powder was the Royals. The Tigers had those thick stripes going up the shoulders and down the sides. The Mets did, too. Now it's either pinstripes, piping down the front, or no stripes at all. The alternates don't even have the pinstripe option.

I get the argument that there are only four (three if you're a Mariners fan like me) places where you'll see an offensive player, and there isn't much chance of confusing the home team with the visiting team, but if you're catching the highlights on ESPN, you shouldn't have to wait through Peter Gammon's ENTIRE John-Kerry-esque monologue before you figure out which teams you're watching in the first place. I'm not saying teams shouldn't have alternate jerseys, but there is no reason there can't be 30 unique instantly recognizable identities. The Mets and Astros can put out a different uniform combination for each of the 162 games on the schedule, but I still can't distinguish them easily from the Rangers and the D-Backs.

[SteveR]

With tomorrow being a Monday home game, the Mariners are going to wear their dark navy jersey. I wonder if the White Sox will be forced to wear their gray jersey.

You would be correct. ChiSox were in gray last night.

[TheOldRoman]

With tomorrow being a Monday home game, the Mariners are going to wear their dark navy jersey. I wonder if the White Sox will be forced to wear their gray jersey.

You would be correct. ChiSox were in gray last night.

True, but the Sox also just dropped 3 games in a row (all of which they should have won, but I digress) wearing black. Maybe they decided to change it up. Hopefully they keep wearing the gray. I am admittedly biased, but their grays are among the top jerseys in baseball.

[loogodude90]

1. Why, for instance, did the Jays wear that stupid T/J (whatever it is) crap with their away unis yesterday? I actually think if I was gonna keep one Blue Jay uniform, it would be the away. I like the lettering/ numbers on the back and the use of color. But why the ugly T hat with it? Isn't that to be used for the black alternate? Another reason that hat is garbage and stupid and illogical...When the Jays batted yesterday, they used a helmet with the primary logo on it. That makes sense.

Stupid and illogical = the Blue Jays wearing a green hat (or a blue one, for that matter ). The T hat looks fine.

Please explain why the Blue Jays wearing a blue hat would be stupid and illogical.

The T hat is pointless. The Jays have always, with the exception of one season (2003), had caps that feature the head of a blue jay in some manner. It's even carried over with the recent scheme, which was a huge departure from the franchise's norm. The T hats not only go against the grain when it comes to tradition, but they just look bad. The font used for the T is horrible. It reminds me of toothpaste that's been squeezed out of the tube.

Not sure if you knew this, but it actually says TJ for Toronto Jays, hence the swivel at the bottom.

[fishheatcats]

Meh I don't mind teams both wearing alternates. I can see a problem when two similar colors match up, but still in baseball it's hard to confuse which team is which. Offense and defense don't look the same or mix like they do in other sports.

I wish more teams would use some color. Unfortunately when the horrible 60s-70s stadiums started dying, they began to take the awesome 60s-70s uniform styles with them. Having a white home and grey road is fine, but how about some real colored alts? Too many teams use black. I'm sure I'll be begging for black alts when Jeffrey Loria forces some sort of tacky rainbow clusterf*** on my Marlins in 2012, but damn the league needs some brightness.

[IceCap]

1. Why, for instance, did the Jays wear that stupid T/J (whatever it is) crap with their away unis yesterday? I actually think if I was gonna keep one Blue Jay uniform, it would be the away. I like the lettering/ numbers on the back and the use of color. But why the ugly T hat with it? Isn't that to be used for the black alternate? Another reason that hat is garbage and stupid and illogical...When the Jays batted yesterday, they used a helmet with the primary logo on it. That makes sense.

Stupid and illogical = the Blue Jays wearing a green hat (or a blue one, for that matter ). The T hat looks fine.

Please explain why the Blue Jays wearing a blue hat would be stupid and illogical.

The T hat is pointless. The Jays have always, with the exception of one season (2003), had caps that feature the head of a blue jay in some manner. It's even carried over with the recent scheme, which was a huge departure from the franchise's norm. The T hats not only go against the grain when it comes to tradition, but they just look bad. The font used for the T is horrible. It reminds me of toothpaste that's been squeezed out of the tube.

Not sure if you knew this, but it actually says TJ for Toronto Jays, hence the swivel at the bottom.

This is the first I've heard of it. I don't think the team has EVER claimed it was TJ. It's always just been a T. If you compare the "swivel" at the bottom it doesn't match the curve of the J in the team's primary logo and wordmark. So the claim that it's a TJ is dubious at best.

If it is indeed a TJ that just serves to make it worse. For one, hat monograms should only represent the city/location, not the team's nickname. Hence why the Yankees' NY is a classic, but the Rockies' CR needs to go.

On top of that, "Toronto Jays" isn't the team name. The official name is still the "Toronto Blue Jays," so even if they were trying to combine the location and nickname into a single monogram going with "TJ" failed miserably.

[BBTV]

1. Why, for instance, did the Jays wear that stupid T/J (whatever it is) crap with their away unis yesterday? I actually think if I was gonna keep one Blue Jay uniform, it would be the away. I like the lettering/ numbers on the back and the use of color. But why the ugly T hat with it? Isn't that to be used for the black alternate? Another reason that hat is garbage and stupid and illogical...When the Jays batted yesterday, they used a helmet with the primary logo on it. That makes sense.

Stupid and illogical = the Blue Jays wearing a green hat (or a blue one, for that matter ). The T hat looks fine.

Please explain why the Blue Jays wearing a blue hat would be stupid and illogical.

The T hat is pointless. The Jays have always, with the exception of one season (2003), had caps that feature the head of a blue jay in some manner. It's even carried over with the recent scheme, which was a huge departure from the franchise's norm. The T hats not only go against the grain when it comes to tradition, but they just look bad. The font used for the T is horrible. It reminds me of toothpaste that's been squeezed out of the tube.

Not sure if you knew this, but it actually says TJ for Toronto Jays, hence the swivel at the bottom.

This is the first I've heard of it. I don't think the team has EVER claimed it was TJ. It's always just been a T. If you compare the "swivel" at the bottom it doesn't match the curve of the J in the team's primary logo and wordmark. So the claim that it's a TJ is dubious at best.

If it is indeed a TJ that just serves to make it worse. For one, hat monograms should only represent the city/location, not the team's nickname. Hence why the Yankees' NY is a classic, but the Rockies' CR needs to go.

On top of that, "Toronto Jays" isn't the team name. The official name is still the "Toronto Blue Jays," so even if they were trying to combine the location and nickname into a single monogram going with "TJ" failed miserably.

I'm with you as far as monograms representing the city and not the team, but not 100%. I'm... OK with the CR cap, though a well-designed C would be much better. Just curious why this "rule" seems to be limited to baseball cap logos though. Everyone raves about the Montreal Canadiens "CH" logo, which represents both the team's nicknames - both official and unofficial. People also seemed to like the Maple Leafs' TML logo, which is essentially the same as the CR logo. The Hartford Whalers' HW and Minnesota North Stars N* logos also get high marks, despite essentially being letters that represent nicknames. Is it because they're technically "logos" and not monograms? If so, where does that line get drawn?

[IceCap]

1. Why, for instance, did the Jays wear that stupid T/J (whatever it is) crap with their away unis yesterday? I actually think if I was gonna keep one Blue Jay uniform, it would be the away. I like the lettering/ numbers on the back and the use of color. But why the ugly T hat with it? Isn't that to be used for the black alternate? Another reason that hat is garbage and stupid and illogical...When the Jays batted yesterday, they used a helmet with the primary logo on it. That makes sense.

Stupid and illogical = the Blue Jays wearing a green hat (or a blue one, for that matter ). The T hat looks fine.

Please explain why the Blue Jays wearing a blue hat would be stupid and illogical.

The T hat is pointless. The Jays have always, with the exception of one season (2003), had caps that feature the head of a blue jay in some manner. It's even carried over with the recent scheme, which was a huge departure from the franchise's norm. The T hats not only go against the grain when it comes to tradition, but they just look bad. The font used for the T is horrible. It reminds me of toothpaste that's been squeezed out of the tube.

Not sure if you knew this, but it actually says TJ for Toronto Jays, hence the swivel at the bottom.

This is the first I've heard of it. I don't think the team has EVER claimed it was TJ. It's always just been a T. If you compare the "swivel" at the bottom it doesn't match the curve of the J in the team's primary logo and wordmark. So the claim that it's a TJ is dubious at best.

If it is indeed a TJ that just serves to make it worse. For one, hat monograms should only represent the city/location, not the team's nickname. Hence why the Yankees' NY is a classic, but the Rockies' CR needs to go.

On top of that, "Toronto Jays" isn't the team name. The official name is still the "Toronto Blue Jays," so even if they were trying to combine the location and nickname into a single monogram going with "TJ" failed miserably.

I'm with you as far as monograms representing the city and not the team, but not 100%. I'm... OK with the CR cap, though a well-designed C would be much better. Just curious why this "rule" seems to be limited to baseball cap logos though. Everyone raves about the Montreal Canadiens "CH" logo, which represents both the team's nicknames - both official and unofficial. People also seemed to like the Maple Leafs' TML logo, which is essentially the same as the CR logo. The Hartford Whalers' HW and Minnesota North Stars N* logos also get high marks, despite essentially being letters that represent nicknames. Is it because they're technically "logos" and not monograms? If so, where does that line get drawn?

Well I think you hit the nail on the head with the "monograms vs logos" comparison. The Yankees' NY and the Padres' SD aren't those teams' primary marks. They aren't even secondaries or alternates, really. Baseball cap monograms are in a classification all on their own as far as logos go, I think.

Other then that, a few things.

The H in the Canadiens logo stands for "Hockey," not "Habs." Also, I don't think anyone liked the Leafs' TML logo.

[NYYNYR]

To the guy who mentioned about the Twins' new infatuation with the navy jersey...they used it yet again...at home.

They hardly used it starting out the season. Now it's getting tons of use both on the road (which makes sense) and at home.

[The_Admiral]

Yeah, monograms are different. A monogram just has to be some interesting style of the first letter of the city name (or the words in it). It doesn't have to be excessively stylized to say something about the team. There's not enough room to do that anyway. Hockey crests allow for working letters into more complicated logos in ways you can't really do with monograms.

Too bad there's no good way for an M to point north to a star, because then the logo would spell out "Minnesota North Stars" instead of just "North Stars." Too bad the league rendered future North Stars improvements moot by not saying "taking a hockey team out of Minnesota is probably the dumbest idea I've ever heard so you can't do that, you groping idiot." Oh well. I can't draw a good northward M anyway.

[NYYNYR]

Chi Sox brought their great away unis to Seattle and win again ! Should they only wear that on the road ? Cynical me says yes !

[OnWis97]

To the guy who mentioned about the Twins' new infatuation with the navy jersey...they used it yet again...at home.

They hardly used it starting out the season. Now it's getting tons of use both on the road (which makes sense) and at home.

And since they are absolutely stinking it up now, maybe they should stick with the primaries.

[NYYNYR]

To the guy who mentioned about the Twins' new infatuation with the navy jersey...they used it yet again...at home.

They hardly used it starting out the season. Now it's getting tons of use both on the road (which makes sense) and at home.

And since they are absolutely stinking it up now, maybe they should stick with the primaries.

aaaaaaaamen to that.

[loogodude90]

1. Why, for instance, did the Jays wear that stupid T/J (whatever it is) crap with their away unis yesterday? I actually think if I was gonna keep one Blue Jay uniform, it would be the away. I like the lettering/ numbers on the back and the use of color. But why the ugly T hat with it? Isn't that to be used for the black alternate? Another reason that hat is garbage and stupid and illogical...When the Jays batted yesterday, they used a helmet with the primary logo on it. That makes sense.

Stupid and illogical = the Blue Jays wearing a green hat (or a blue one, for that matter ). The T hat looks fine.

Please explain why the Blue Jays wearing a blue hat would be stupid and illogical.

The T hat is pointless. The Jays have always, with the exception of one season (2003), had caps that feature the head of a blue jay in some manner. It's even carried over with the recent scheme, which was a huge departure from the franchise's norm. The T hats not only go against the grain when it comes to tradition, but they just look bad. The font used for the T is horrible. It reminds me of toothpaste that's been squeezed out of the tube.

Not sure if you knew this, but it actually says TJ for Toronto Jays, hence the swivel at the bottom.

This is the first I've heard of it. I don't think the team has EVER claimed it was TJ. It's always just been a T. If you compare the "swivel" at the bottom it doesn't match the curve of the J in the team's primary logo and wordmark. So the claim that it's a TJ is dubious at best.

If it is indeed a TJ that just serves to make it worse. For one, hat monograms should only represent the city/location, not the team's nickname. Hence why the Yankees' NY is a classic, but the Rockies' CR needs to go.

On top of that, "Toronto Jays" isn't the team name. The official name is still the "Toronto Blue Jays," so even if they were trying to combine the location and nickname into a single monogram going with "TJ" failed miserably.

1) The fact that the TJ font doesnt match anything else, really is meaningless. Have you seen the Jay's uniforms lately? They have different fonts for home script, away script, home numbers, name-on-back. Not to mention the whole thing about the Yanks having different NY's for everything. And what about the Tigers' D? That's different on the cap and chest.

2)Out of the 30 teams, there are 16 teams teams who have not had a hat monogram that represented the teams nicknames: The Red Sox, Tigers, Rays, Cubs, Reds, Pirates, Cardinals, Royals, Twins, Rangers, Braves, Astros, Dodgers, Mets, Phillies, and Nationals.

So about half the teams have or have had a monogram that uses the team name. I don't really see whats wrong with that.

3) Agreed about their name not being the Jays. But... even their uniform only says "Jays". So it wouldn't be out of the question for them to have some type of TJ thing going on. Not to mention they are referred to pretty often as just "The Jays".

[BBTV]

The Phillies actually have two primary red caps - one on which the P represents "Philadelphia", and one on which it represents "Phillies". I believe it is up to the starting pitcher to determine which one to wear.

[loogodude90]

The Phillies actually have two primary red caps - one on which the P represents "Philadelphia", and one on which it represents "Phillies". I believe it is up to the starting pitcher to determine which one to wear.

That raises an interesting point though... For the Cubs, Phillies, and Pirates, does the monogram represent the city or the nickname? Or is it just up to the fans to decide?

[BBTV]

The Phillies actually have two primary red caps - one on which the P represents "Philadelphia", and one on which it represents "Phillies". I believe it is up to the starting pitcher to determine which one to wear.

That raises an interesting point though... For the Cubs, Phillies, and Pirates, does the monogram represent the city or the nickname? Or is it just up to the fans to decide?

I've always assumed the city, but I'm not sure that there is any way to know. For a team like the Phillies who's branding is based completely around their "Phillies" script, if they were just invented today (like if they were an expansion team), I'd say that it's for the nickname and not the city, but since they've essentially always had a P, who knows. Same with their '70 - '91 jerseys.

[IceCap]

1. Why, for instance, did the Jays wear that stupid T/J (whatever it is) crap with their away unis yesterday? I actually think if I was gonna keep one Blue Jay uniform, it would be the away. I like the lettering/ numbers on the back and the use of color. But why the ugly T hat with it? Isn't that to be used for the black alternate? Another reason that hat is garbage and stupid and illogical...When the Jays batted yesterday, they used a helmet with the primary logo on it. That makes sense.

Stupid and illogical = the Blue Jays wearing a green hat (or a blue one, for that matter ). The T hat looks fine.

Please explain why the Blue Jays wearing a blue hat would be stupid and illogical.

The T hat is pointless. The Jays have always, with the exception of one season (2003), had caps that feature the head of a blue jay in some manner. It's even carried over with the recent scheme, which was a huge departure from the franchise's norm. The T hats not only go against the grain when it comes to tradition, but they just look bad. The font used for the T is horrible. It reminds me of toothpaste that's been squeezed out of the tube.

Not sure if you knew this, but it actually says TJ for Toronto Jays, hence the swivel at the bottom.

This is the first I've heard of it. I don't think the team has EVER claimed it was TJ. It's always just been a T. If you compare the "swivel" at the bottom it doesn't match the curve of the J in the team's primary logo and wordmark. So the claim that it's a TJ is dubious at best.

If it is indeed a TJ that just serves to make it worse. For one, hat monograms should only represent the city/location, not the team's nickname. Hence why the Yankees' NY is a classic, but the Rockies' CR needs to go.

On top of that, "Toronto Jays" isn't the team name. The official name is still the "Toronto Blue Jays," so even if they were trying to combine the location and nickname into a single monogram going with "TJ" failed miserably.

1) The fact that the TJ font doesnt match anything else, really is meaningless. Have you seen the Jay's uniforms lately? They have different fonts for home script, away script, home numbers, name-on-back. Not to mention the whole thing about the Yanks having different NY's for everything. And what about the Tigers' D? That's different on the cap and chest.

2)Out of the 30 teams, there are 16 teams teams who have not had a hat monogram that represented the teams nicknames: The Red Sox, Tigers, Rays, Cubs, Reds, Pirates, Cardinals, Royals, Twins, Rangers, Braves, Astros, Dodgers, Mets, Phillies, and Nationals.

So about half the teams have or have had a monogram that uses the team name. I don't really see whats wrong with that.

3) Agreed about their name not being the Jays. But... even their uniform only says "Jays". So it wouldn't be out of the question for them to have some type of TJ thing going on. Not to mention they are referred to pretty often as just "The Jays".

The Tigers' and Yankees' mismatches are holdovers from eras when it was near impossible to match everything from different parts of the uniform. Everything in the Jays' current set was designed by a modern firm with a modern sense of brand uniformity and marketing.

As for monograms, I have no idea what you're on. You forgot the Padres, Yankees, Mariners, Marlins, Brewers, and Giants. Not to mention you made a mistake by incorporating the Astros. They don't use any form of monogram. Just the shooting star logo. So of the 30 MLB teams 21 employ location-only monograms. The teams that utilize team name monograms would be the Orioles (alternate only), Indians (alternate only), Angeles (location identity crisis), A's (been using it forever, so they get a pass), Blue Jays, Diamondbacks, and Rockies. So using nicknames as part of the monogram is a much more limited practice then you've let on.

Yeah, and the Canadiens are regularly called the Habs. That still wouldn't make a Canadiens logo with a plain H logo acceptable. Look no further then the train-wrecks that are the Lighting and Senators' alternate sweaters to see the dangers of using unofficial nicknames on actual game-worn uniforms. It looks minor-league.

At no time have the Jays stated the alternate cap logo was a TJ. It's always been just a T. Go dig up the old press release when they unveiled the thing. It has always meant to be a T. Nothing more. Personally I'm inclined to believe you pulled the whole "IT'S A TJ" thing out of your a$$.

Finally, the main point of all of this. The Jays have, for most of their history, utilized some form of a blue jay logo on their caps. They have rarely used a monogram of any sort. Which is my main gripe with the current T alternate cap. It has not baring in the team's visual history. The current cap logo, mess that it is, at least uses the same broad imagery that previous cap logos for the club have used.

With that I say good day sir.