Gothamite Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Not sure I agree with your contention. Sometimes I can see wanting to add a little to the primary logo. If your logo is to be used outside of a baseball context, then the streamlined primary might not be enough. For example, at a charity event, where the Sox logo is to be displayed alongside other, non-baseball logos. So in that situation, the City/Team Name secondary would be helpful. Doesn't mean you need all that information on the primary logo, though. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Socks. Red ones. What more do they need?Meanwhile in Chicago, "HOW WILL THEY KNOW WE ARE THE SOX IF WE DON'T SPELL IT OUT?!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laobanlail Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 You will like it.spam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eye Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Not sure I agree with your contention. Sometimes I can see wanting to add a little to the primary logo. If your logo is to be used outside of a baseball context, then the streamlined primary might not be enough. For example, at a charity event, where the Sox logo is to be displayed alongside other, non-baseball logos. So in that situation, the City/Team Name secondary would be helpful. Doesn't mean you need all that information on the primary logo, though.Which is why the cap logo B should be the primary. That mark is iconic and would be a perfect primary. The red socks sans wordmark would make a phenomenal secondary, but to me is minor leagueish looking for the Red Sox as a primary. I'm still unsure about how I feel about it as a sleeve patch, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 I can't agree, but I think very few cap logos are strong enough to be primary marks. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bravo96 Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 I can't agree, but I think very few cap logos are strong enough to be primary marks.Off the top of my head, cap logos that should/could be primaries: D-backs (the capital A), Braves, Yankees, and Red Sox. Click the Banner - Join the Movement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 I can't agree, but I think very few cap logos are strong enough to be primary marks.Off the top of my head, cap logos that should/could be primaries: D-backs (the capital A), Braves, Yankees, and Red Sox.The Diamondbacks' logo could, but only because their entire identity is equally terrible. The current Braves' primary is the best, as it shows the full identity (and the tomahawk A would be the worst idea ever as a primary). Yes to the Yankees, but I still prefer the Red Sox circle logo as its primary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCheese Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 so if the o's do bring back the cartoon, they're still going to be using the current logo, right?that's pretty weird. doesn't match at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Socks. Red ones. What more do they need?a GM.....a Coach....a new direction... when should I stop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powersurge Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Not sure I agree with your contention. Sometimes I can see wanting to add a little to the primary logo. If your logo is to be used outside of a baseball context, then the streamlined primary might not be enough. For example, at a charity event, where the Sox logo is to be displayed alongside other, non-baseball logos. So in that situation, the City/Team Name secondary would be helpful. Doesn't mean you need all that information on the primary logo, though.Which is why the cap logo B should be the primary. That mark is iconic and would be a perfect primary. The red socks sans wordmark would make a phenomenal secondary, but to me is minor leagueish looking for the Red Sox as a primary. I'm still unsure about how I feel about it as a sleeve patch, though.while I want to agree with your point, I find it tough to do so considering the fact that the 'B' logo is so similar (if not almost identical) to the Brooklyn Dodgers. Even though they haven't been around for decades their hat logo is still pretty recognizable and iconic in most baseball circles. for the sox to stake claim on that would be pretty tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Exactly. They're certainly closer than the Mets and Yankees logos are. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxmc89 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Is this the first World Series where the road team's uniforms had the team name on it and the home team's uniforms had the location name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Is this the first World Series where the road team's uniforms had the team name on it and the home team's uniforms had the location name?Well until they get back to St. Louis. Â Â https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eye Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Not sure I agree with your contention. Sometimes I can see wanting to add a little to the primary logo. If your logo is to be used outside of a baseball context, then the streamlined primary might not be enough. For example, at a charity event, where the Sox logo is to be displayed alongside other, non-baseball logos. So in that situation, the City/Team Name secondary would be helpful. Doesn't mean you need all that information on the primary logo, though.Which is why the cap logo B should be the primary. That mark is iconic and would be a perfect primary. The red socks sans wordmark would make a phenomenal secondary, but to me is minor leagueish looking for the Red Sox as a primary. I'm still unsure about how I feel about it as a sleeve patch, though.while I want to agree with your point, I find it tough to do so considering the fact that the 'B' logo is so similar (if not almost identical) to the Brooklyn Dodgers. Even though they haven't been around for decades their hat logo is still pretty recognizable and iconic in most baseball circles. for the sox to stake claim on that would be pretty tough.Disagree with the both of you, mainly because since the Brooklyn Dodgers haven't been around for over 50 years, the Red Sox's cap logo has pretty much become exclusively associated with the Red Sox. Maybe not to people on a sports logos message board, but I'd say most fans think Red Sox way before they think Brooklyn Dodgers. The colors are also a huge factor in that determination as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outplace Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 That's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xTr1pleXx Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The Dodgers' B and the Red Sox's B are NOT identical.Brooklyn:Boston:Sadly, if MLB didn't sell "Brooklyn Dodgers" caps with the Red Sox's B on them, this confusion wouldn't exist.(And I specifically picked a game-used Dodgers cap to illustrate this.) 1923 1927 1928 1932 1936 1937 1938 1939 1941 1943 1947 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1956 1958 1961 1962 1977 1978 1996 1998 1999 2000 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erlovepuck Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The Dodgers' B and the Red Sox's B are NOT identical.Brooklyn:Boston:Sadly, if MLB didn't sell "Brooklyn Dodgers" caps with the Red Sox's B on them, this confusion wouldn't exist.(And I specifically picked a game-used Dodgers cap to illustrate this.)I'm glad someone brought up this poiint. The Dodger's 'B' as you can see on that game worn cap is much more round than the Red Sox one, its almost like the number 8 with the side added. Modern merchandise versions of the Dodger cap merely seem to be the Boston 'B' with that small triangle cut out of it to make it more like the Dodgers version. As far as modern baseball merchandise goes the 'B' on the Brooklyn Cyclones cap looks much more like the traditionl Brooklyn 'B' than what we often see in today's Brooklyn Dodgers merchandise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The Cyclones' "B" was borrowed from the Dodgers, but was only worn by them for a short time. For a period, they did indeed wear the exact same "B" as the Red Sox, since they bought their caps from the same supplier. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 The Cyclones' "B" was borrowed from the Dodgers, but was only worn by them for a short time. For a period, they did indeed wear the exact same "B" as the Red Sox, since they bought their caps from the same supplier.This one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 I'm pretty confident saying that the Dodgers never actually that logo.The "B" in that logo dates to the mid-1950s Dodgers, but didn't have the triangular cutout notch. And they didn't use a diamond. That looks like a bad modern recreation. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.