What the MLB team logos should be

[MikeBunds2001]

[BrySmalls]

This is more of an opinion than a concept. What is striking is the amount of circular logos utilized, especially in the American League.

[DDR]

You should probably make your "Mike's Graphics" signoff into a watermark to prevent people from stealing your concept.

[Dogeshak]

It feels like I have seen all of these logos before somewhere.

[Darth Danielus]

You should probably make your "Mike's Graphics" signoff into a watermark to prevent people from stealing your concept.

Tee-hee.

[goforbroke]

i guess i'll treat this like a regular discussion rather than insulting the gentleman.

I think the current Giants and Pirates logos are way nicer than the ones you posted there. I also think the Tigers one is very outdated and the "D" or "D with Tiger" logo would be better, although I know some people are a soft spot for that logo.

I pretty much agree with everything else.

[lancebridwell]

You should probably make your "Mike's Graphics" signoff into a watermark to prevent people from stealing your concept.

LOL. +1

[TopCat]

He rejects your reality and substitutes his own! But I agree with the Diamondbacks and Red Sox changes.

[Lights Out]

This probably belongs in Sports Logos but here's my ideal MLB:

[MikeBunds2001]

This is more of an opinion than a concept. What is striking is the amount of circular logos utilized, especially in the American League.

Actually, I did.

Plus, I used to make graphics when I had access to photoshop at my old job. Now I don't cause the software is like 1,000 dollars.

[ThePreacher]

Wasn't I just being BASHED for posting non-concepts in the concept section?

Jeez, you guys sure are selective at who you spew your hate at...

[Lights Out]

This is an interesting topic that was posted in the wrong forum. Your thread was a very lengthy request thread in which you demanded a ton of time-consuming concepts, deliberately posted in the concept forum. There's a difference.

[illwauk]

Wasn't I just being BASHED for posting non-concepts in the concept section?

Jeez, you guys sure are selective at who you spew your hate at...

1. It wasn't until post #6 that anyone even took this semi-seriously

2. (Most importantly) He didn't make the same basic post in a handful of other places before starting this thread.

[aci]

This is an interesting topic that was posted in the wrong forum. Your thread was a very lengthy request thread in which you demanded a ton of time-consuming concepts, deliberately posted in the concept forum. There's a difference.

Plus this guy's only done it once.

[-Akronite-]

I wish leagues would have some uniformity in their primary logos. I hate seeing these teams together where some teams (like my Tribe) are represented by a totem or mascot while others have full word-marks. Most teams have the ability to do both, whether it's an animal or a signature letter, so why not?

In the NFL especially it is almost perfect on this account. A simple logo is used for nearly all the teams. There are a few exceptions with teams like the Jets (which is fine since they don't really have a mascot or totem) and the Eagles (who could easily convert with their eagle head logo). But, if you look at all the logos at once, they all seem like NFL logos.

The NBA is the same in the other direction, where most teams are represented by a logo WITH a word-mark.

I just don't see this within the MLB, which is why I like these "concepts" for the most part because they bring the MLB closer together in this regard.

[loogodude90]

I wish leagues would have some uniformity in their primary logos. I hate seeing these teams together where some teams (like my Tribe) are represented by a totem or mascot while others have full word-marks. Most teams have the ability to do both, whether it's an animal or a signature letter, so why not?

In the NFL especially it is almost perfect on this account. A simple logo is used for nearly all the teams. There are a few exceptions with teams like the Jets (which is fine since they don't really have a mascot or totem) and the Eagles (who could easily convert with their eagle head logo). But, if you look at all the logos at once, they all seem like NFL logos.

The NBA is the same in the other direction, where most teams are represented by a logo WITH a word-mark.

I just don't see this within the MLB, which is why I like these "concepts" for the most part because they bring the MLB closer together in this regard.

That's an interesting point, but I'm the exact opposite. I like the variety in logo styles. I mean I think it's cool that the NFL and NBA seem to have general "trends" for their logo styles, but I don't think that's really on purpose. I think it's just teams sort of modeling after each other, to some extent (especially in the NBA).

The unique thing about MLB is that you have some teams that have been around for literally over a century, and then you have some teams that have been around for just over a decade. I think that in itself causes a lot of logo style "clashes", but I like the variety. I don't think there is any other American professional league with such different "age" differences (can't speak for the NHL because I don't follow closely). And with "age" differences, you are going to have really different looks and styles.

I would be pretty upset if the logos went back to what the OP posted... too many circular logos.

[Chapeeko]

[ThePreacher]

This is an interesting topic that was posted in the wrong forum. Your thread was a very lengthy request thread in which you demanded a ton of time-consuming concepts, deliberately posted in the concept forum. There's a difference.

Whoa.

Cool down the hyperbole.

Christ.

[BBTV]

So basically, "what's your favorite logo for each MLB team?"

All of you have fantastic copy / paste skills.

[tj4eck]

My take