marlinfan

2012 MLB & Logo Changes

Recommended Posts

Technically, the "e" in San Jose is actually supposed to be San José. If you have time, maybe you can change that up and see what that looks like?

No team in San Jose has ever used an accent mark, but for the heck of it, here's how it would look:

newathletics2-3.png

sanjoseroad2.png

I think it looks fantastic.

Even the city itself is emphasizing the accent mark.

http://www.sanjoseca.gov/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it with the accent. It seems pretentious since the city is in America and the accent mark is meaningless in English (unlike the tilde over an N). Montreal? Sure, use the accent because the province is French speaking. However, since very few people will pronounce San Jose differently with the accent mark it isn't needed. San Juan, PR would be a different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it with the accent. It seems pretentious since the city is in America and the accent mark is meaningless in English (unlike the tilde over an N). Montreal? Sure, use the accent because the province is French speaking. However, since very few people will pronounce San Jose differently with the accent mark it isn't needed. San Juan, PR would be a different story.

On April 3, 1979, the San Jose City Council adopted San José, with the diacritical mark on the "e", as the spelling of the city name on the city seal, official stationery, office titles and department names. Also, by city council convention, this spelling of San José is used when the name is stated in both upper- and lower-case letters, but not when the name is stated only in upper-case letters. The accent reflects the Spanish version of the name, and the dropping of accents in all-capital writing was typical in Spanish. The name is still more commonly spelled without the diacritical mark as San Jose. The official name of the city remains City of San Jose with no diacritical mark, according to the City Charter.[17] However, the City's website uses San José

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'J' just appears a little too slanted compared to the 'ose'. I don't know. Something just seems off a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it looks really good. I mean, I don't see them changing the script style soon and you can fit each word nicely on both halves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it with the accent. It seems pretentious since the city is in America and the accent mark is meaningless in English (unlike the tilde over an N). Montreal? Sure, use the accent because the province is French speaking. However, since very few people will pronounce San Jose differently with the accent mark it isn't needed. San Juan, PR would be a different story.

The Hispanic community is part of the identity of the city, hence the reason why I think the accent gives it a very local touch in my opinion. After all, it is accurate.

I mean, this guy was given the OK to do it

!CEnYKFwB2k~$(KGrHqZ,!lYE1GCzk7W+BNSbKgw,bw~~_3.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'J' just appears a little too slanted compared to the 'ose'. I don't know. Something just seems off a bit.

The line weights of that concept are very off. Look how thick the stem of the 'J' is when compared to the line width of the 'S'... I'm guessing that's why it looks off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it with the accent. It seems pretentious since the city is in America and the accent mark is meaningless in English (unlike the tilde over an N). Montreal? Sure, use the accent because the province is French speaking. However, since very few people will pronounce San Jose differently with the accent mark it isn't needed. San Juan, PR would be a different story.

The Hispanic community is part of the identity of the city, hence the reason why I think the accent gives it a very local touch in my opinion. After all, it is accurate.

I mean, this guy was given the OK to do it

!CEnYKFwB2k~$(KGrHqZ,!lYE1GCzk7W+BNSbKgw,bw~~_3.JPG

But again, he's from Quebec, a French speaking province. San Jose is an American city.

I personally don't care either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it with the accent. It seems pretentious since the city is in America and the accent mark is meaningless in English (unlike the tilde over an N). Montreal? Sure, use the accent because the province is French speaking. However, since very few people will pronounce San Jose differently with the accent mark it isn't needed. San Juan, PR would be a different story.

The Hispanic community is part of the identity of the city, hence the reason why I think the accent gives it a very local touch in my opinion. After all, it is accurate.

I mean, this guy was given the OK to do it

!CEnYKFwB2k~$(KGrHqZ,!lYE1GCzk7W+BNSbKgw,bw~~_3.JPG

But again, he's from Quebec, a French speaking province. San Jose is an American city.

I personally don't care either way.

True, but you see my point though. I don't think MLB would have the accent on the jersey but I would love to see it just to really be as authentic as possible.

After all, when the A's went for Hispanic Heritage jerseys, they went with Atléticos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, the "e" in San Jose is actually supposed to be San José. If you have time, maybe you can change that up and see what that looks like?

Actually technically it doesn't have to have the accent. San Jose uses both officially and it is still sans accent on the city charter. Both are correct.

Could you post them, please?

Once I get my primary computer back from the shop I'll throw them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technically, the "e" in San Jose is actually supposed to be San José. If you have time, maybe you can change that up and see what that looks like?

Actually technically it doesn't have to have the accent. San Jose uses both officially and it is still sans accent on the city charter. Both are correct.

I am just going off what the city is trying to do. Obviously both are acceptable, but I feel since the city is trying to emphasize it, it would be nice to have the jersey do the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oakland+Athletics+v+Boston+Red+Sox+gZc_B7TZI1Dl.jpgm75h6b.png

WOW...for some reason that looks way too minor league for me. I guess I need to wrap my head around the whole "They don't play in Oakland anymore" idea. Must have been what the Brooklyn fans felt about the Dodgers when they first saw 'Los Angeles' on their unis.

I'm on Bring Back the Vet's side on this one. I hope the de-emphasize the city and stick with the nickname on the unis like the Dodgers did for so long. I like 'Los Angeles' on a jersey partly because the name is so well known and recognizable. I just don't think 'San Jose' has earned the right to have their name on an MLB jersey yet...but thats just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1324799813' post='1713105']
1324794826' post='1713082']
1324780931' post='1712989']
1324746458' post='1712729']
1324744686' post='1712717']

I almost forgot when are the Rockies going to unvile their new uniforms or is it for next year?

The mods are relatively minor, and only affect the road unis. Don't know when they'll be unveiled however.

In January. There was a tweet from an official team source a week or two back.

Correct. They will be revealed at the season ticket holders' RockiesFest on 1/21.

This popped up on a Rockies blog. The piping is the wrong color, so this is probably a replica mock-up rather than an official image, but it more or less confirms what we've been expecting - no more pinstripes, and a look very similar to the pre-2000 road jersey, only with "COLORADO" instead of "ROCKIES". If it is similar to the pre-2000 jersey, then that will mean a purple NOB and numbers, and will likely also feature numbers on the front in line with the rest of the team's post-2000 jerseys.

ivU96.jpg

That appearing on a blog confirms nothing. Only someone who as actually seen the official files can "confirm" it.

Right. The only thing that confirms is that some people don't know what the word "confirms" means.

Just get rid of the piping and it'll be a great road uni!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on what I saw, it looks like that the new Arizona Diamondbacks primary is in fact a minor change. FWIW, the Diamondbacks script is no longer a part of the primary and it is now relegated to tertiary status...

Also, I know this has already been mentioned for the Mets and Astros with the anniversary logos...

Diamondbacks2012.png

Houston_Side.png

Mets_Rear_Cap.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is the DBacks primary? The logo on the far left I'm assuming. And also what are the all-black and all-brick versions of the logo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is the DBacks primary? The logo on the far left I'm assuming. And also what are the all-black and all-brick versions of the logo?

The D-Backs primary is the one on the far left. I assume the other two variations are for other prints. The black one might be for newspapers. The all red one...I am not so sure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just me, but the current DBacks "A" logo bugs me. It has so much potential, but one thing ruins it for me: the sand outline. It's barely visible, but when you do spot it, it just makes it look awkward. If it were up to me, I would swap black and sand and make the outline on the left thicker, and the primary mark would look like this:

dbacksprimary.png

For me, ideal Diamondbacks primary logo^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For HighCheese and the rest:

sanjoseroad.png

That looks awesome. I hope that's a glimpse of the ultimate future in 2015. I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's just me, but the current DBacks "A" logo bugs me. It has so much potential, but one thing ruins it for me: the sand outline. It's barely visible, but when you do spot it, it just makes it look awkward. If it were up to me, I would swap black and sand and make the outline on the left thicker, and the primary mark would look like this:

dbacksprimary.png

For me, ideal Diamondbacks primary logo^

Actually, to me, this one looks awkward. It's apparent throughout their identity that brick is their primary color and black is secondary with sand as a prominent accent. This one switches the roles of black and sand.

And as for the one colored versions of the logos, you always show the logo in one color form. A good logo should work in one color. Usually shown in each team color. Little design tip for you up-and-comers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.