UnclearInitial Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 The ball-in-glove is a fantastic logo, but the current Brewers identity is much more fitting for the name.too bad they cant combine the eras together..... wait a minute! they can and should.No, they can't. The BiG would look completely out of place with the current set.(And the BiG is not that great of a logo) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tubby34 Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 The ball-in-glove is a fantastic logo, but the current Brewers identity is much more fitting for the name.too bad they cant combine the eras together..... wait a minute! they can and should.No, they can't. The BiG would look completely out of place with the current set.(And the BiG is not that great of a logo)You could always recolor the ball in glove to Navy and Gold, maybe tilt it a little too. and alter the M logo to take a little detail from the barley? out and dull the M a little. Same with the actual word mark. You'd tilt the glove a little to add the same effect the wordmark seems to have. Or straighten out the wordmark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 You could always recolor the ball in glove to Navy and Gold, maybe tilt it a little too. and alter the M logo to take a little detail from the barley? out and dull the M a little. Same with the actual word mark. You'd tilt the glove a little to add the same effect the wordmark seems to have. Or straighten out the wordmark.If any combination of eras is going on, the thing to be kept from the BiG set should be the colors, and this is coming from someone who likes everything about that set better than the current set. You can update logos and wordmarks, but ultimately teams are most identifiable by their colors. The Brewers should be wearing blue and yellow instead of the drabness they are wearing now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ltjets21 Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I hate stirrups Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportstar1212 Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 The ball-in-glove is a fantastic logo, but the current Brewers identity is much more fitting for the name.too bad they cant combine the eras together..... wait a minute! they can and should.No, they can't. The BiG would look completely out of place with the current set.(And the BiG is not that great of a logo)You could always recolor the ball in glove to Navy and Gold, maybe tilt it a little too. and alter the M logo to take a little detail from the barley? out and dull the M a little. Same with the actual word mark. You'd tilt the glove a little to add the same effect the wordmark seems to have. Or straighten out the wordmark.I love both Brewers identities, but I agree with Nash here, the current identity is much more fitting for the name. I'm good with them wearing the BiG uniforms on Retro Sundays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I hate stirrupsYep. Do not get the love for them at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody21 Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I hate the Kings new look. All they needed to do was remove the Los Angeles from the bottom of there old jerseys and place the pencil logo as the shoulder patch with the purple crown. I also hate Rangers and Nationals not able to make up there mind about what colour team they are. Are they a mainly RED or BLUE team? MAKE UP YOUR MINDS, ! Quote In the last game against Detroit, the time from ten minutes left to one minute left was probably the longest nine minutes of my life. But from one to zero was probably the greatest time I've ever had. I didn't want the clock to run out. It was such a great feeling: people crying in the stands, people jumping up and down, people cheering. Guys couldn't even sit up on the bench. It was probably the best minute of my life.Ah, the "I'm kidding" - the universal internet excuse for saying something that others perceived as dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illwauk Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 http://boards.sportslogos.net/index.php?app=forums&module=post§ion=post&do=reply_post&f=1&t=74523&qpid=1814343The ball-in-glove is a fantastic logo, but the current Brewers identity is much more fitting for the name.too bad they cant combine the eras together..... wait a minute! they can and should.No, they can't. The BiG would look completely out of place with the current set.(And the BiG is not that great of a logo)You could always recolor the ball in glove to Navy and Gold, maybe tilt it a little too. and alter the M logo to take a little detail from the barley? out and dull the M a little. Same with the actual word mark. You'd tilt the glove a little to add the same effect the wordmark seems to have. Or straighten out the wordmark.I love both Brewers identities, but I agree with Nash here, the current identity is much more fitting for the name. I'm good with them wearing the BiG uniforms on Retro Sundays.The current identity is more fitting for Miller, which is no longer technically a "Milwaukee Brewer." Maybe in a vacuum you could say the current duds are more appropriate for a team called the Brewers, but ask anyone in Wisconsin to describe "the Brewers' logo" and 10 times out of 9, they'll describe the BiG. I would also put down money that royal and yellow are still more widely recognized by Wisconsinites as "Brewers colors" than navy and gold.Even with all the alleged appropriateness of the current Brewers unis, they're still rife with unnecessary drop-shadows, unbalanced scripts and stock MS Word fonts... none of which make for a great uniform. The retros might be plain, but they could certainly get away with using them fill-time because royal and yellow are unique colors in MLB.Of course, they could always take a third option and come up with something completely new that incorporates royal & yellow, the BiG and beer-barrell man (since that's a MKE baseball tradition that stretches back to WWII).Although, FWIW, I do think this (www.lids.com/MLB/Milwaukee-Brewers/20130062) looks rather nice... in fact, I'm wearing it right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolyStroke Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 The Blue Jays new uniforms aren't that great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I am in-between on stirrups. I think the '70s and '80s stirrups pulled really high looked silly, but I also think it looked bad when they are worn very low so an inch or two of the sanitary socks show. If players are going to wear stirrups, I think there should be four to five inches of sock showing underneath.I wonder when the stirrup really first started getting pulled up high. We all know that the original intent of stirrups was to look like a sock while allowing for a sani to be worn around the feet, so the decision to pull them up was one purely against the original baseball aesthetic. Quote "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 More sharing options...
illwauk Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 A kid came into my job wearing a Disney/periwinkle Angels hat, and it reminded me of how much I like that entire set. Granted, the Angels have never looked better than they do now, and literally every other uniform they wore before they became the Anaheim Angels is better than the periwinkles, but in a vacuum, it's not so bad. In fact, I still maintain that it would've been hailed as a great look if the Angels had been a 90s expansion club and it could still work today for an Angels farm club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Six Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I'd take pretty much any Angels identity over the current one. I like that old alternate California logo they had on the sleeves. Now their uniform is a lesson in redundancy with the same "A" logo featured about 18 times between the hat, jersey, and sleeves. The lowercase "a" logo was pretty cool, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The Ball in Glove sucks and the Brewers' current uniforms suck. Nothing tops these classics: Quote POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I wonder when the stirrup really first started getting pulled up high. If memory serves, the high stirrups look started in the late 60's. (Maybe mid 60's?) Jim Bouton talks about it in Ball Four as (I'm paraphrasing)"the latest uniform craze." He mentions how guys like Frank Robinson started "cutting" their stirrups to look more sleek or something. I remember as a kid playing little league, we all wanted to wear our stirrups "up high" like the big leaguers did but we could never get ours to look like theirs. We had no idea that they cut their stirrups to get that look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 On 5/25/2012 at 10:31 PM, Lights Out said: The Ball in Glove sucks and the Brewers' current uniforms suck. Nothing tops these classics: Quote 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 More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 On the nook...cannot edit above post.Anyway....totally agree. After dumping the Motre Bame cap, thisset was awesome. Easily the best they have ever looked Quote 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 More sharing options...
BigBubba Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 The Ball in Glove sucks and the Brewers' current uniforms suck. Nothing tops these classics:The scripts weren't bad, but everything about that set sucked serious . The new set is good design-wise, but the colours are so dull. The BiG set is my favourite by a mile, and I maintain that that logo is one of the best in sports history (which may be an unpopular opinion by its self).Also, I quite liked these:I still think their current set is far superior, however. Quote Nobody cares about your humungous-big signature. PotD: 29/1/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltere Posted May 26, 2012 Share Posted May 26, 2012 I am not a fan of this look, at all.NOT PARTICULARLY NINJA EDIT: I don't think stirrups in baseball are as awesome as many others do. Long pants are still stupid though. To me the ideal look is a plain long sock. Quote 1 hour ago, BringBackTheVet said: sorry sweetie, but I don't suck minor-league d CCSLC Post of the day September 3rd 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evanmaldonado Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 I absolutely loved the above Islanders jerseys. By far their best look in my opinion, and it's not even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 This is a great logo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.