Lights Out Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Exactly, although that's a poor rendering of the old logo. The former is elegant and solid. The more square shape really helps it, whereas the Mets logo is wispy and insubstantial. Too thin.I couldn't disagree more. The old logo is amateurish and wonky... the Mets logo is clean, iconic, and looks great on a baseball cap. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njmeadowlanders Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Exactly, although that's a poor rendering of the old logo. The former is elegant and solid. The more square shape really helps it, whereas the Mets logo is wispy and insubstantial. Too thin.I couldn't disagree more. The old logo is amateurish and wonky... the Mets logo is clean, iconic, and looks great on a baseball cap.Couldn't agree more with your disagreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightynine Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Not really sure where to put this, taken from another message board.I was at Buffalo Wild Wings in Midtown where they have their weekly "Astroline" show, and the show's guest last night was Jim Crane. They talked about the uniforms in-depth. He said they're bringing in 2 outside firms next week to consult for the new uniform design. They're going to take the 2 firms' ideas and incorporate some fan feedback into helping them decide. He also said that he was a fan of the old uniforms and wants to incorporate them as well (don't know if he was referencing the color scheme or wearing throwbacks more often). He said that they have to submit a new uniform idea to MLB before THIS season starts, and their plans are to have a design finalized by April 1st with the formal announcement taking place after this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshawaggie Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Twins to turn back the night for 1951 MillersCan they bring back Willie Mays too? @josh_j12 CFA- Fargo Bobcats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Looks a lot like the Giants. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Looks a lot like the Giants.It bloody well ought to - they were the Giants' top farm club at the time.If Horace Stoneham had his way, he would have moved the Giants to Minneapolis. He saw how Milwaukee worked out for the Braves. But that rat bastard O'Malley needed another team in California to keep his travel costs down, so... The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSox44 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Looks a lot like the Giants.It bloody well ought to - they were the Giants' top farm club at the time.If Horace Stoneham had his way, he would have moved the Giants to Minneapolis. He saw how Milwaukee worked out for the Braves. But that rat bastard O'Malley needed another team in California to keep his travel costs down, so...Minneapolis Giants DOES NOT have the same appeal to the ear as New York Giants or San Francisco Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 True, but I kind of like the sound of "Twin Cities Giants." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadSeed84 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 So the when the astros wear the Colt .45s throwback uniforms, it won't have the gun on it. (per Uni Watch)That's just stupid imo, and honestly if MLB doesn't want the pistol on the uniform, then they shouldn't wear them at all instead of some bastardized version of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 That is ridiculous. What, do they think kids are going to rush out and start shooting people or something if they see a Colt .45 on a baseball jersey? Bud Selig and his cronies need to pull the stick out of their asses like yesterday. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yac12 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 When the Rays wore a Smokers throwback jersey they didn't have a cigar on it. Is it MLB's decision or each team how PC the throwback's are going to be?Edit: Just read that it is MLB's decision. I don't remember reading this when the Rays wore the Smokers jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mojo Maniac Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 All of this political correctness is annoying the crap out of me. A jersey is part of a team history. Tramp stamping your brand on what is supposed to be a classy throwback (ahem, Majestic) is one thing, but removing an entire element altogether from the original design? Senseless. From San Berdoo to Kalamazoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSox44 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Normally, I'm on the side of political correctness and gun control, but come on. The kids won't care if the Colt .45s jersey have a gun on it or not. Their going to watch a movie/play a video game where the protagonist kills a bunch of guys.This is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksupilot Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Oh lord ... to think a gun on a uniform would influence violence in a child. Tsk tsk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksupilot Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/shoot-mlb-cuts-pistols-colt-45s-throwback-jerseys-221044934.html#more-31892I think this article says it best:In fact, there's nothing at all hypocritical about it all. It's not like we're subjected to 1,437 images of guns each day ? from No. 1 selling video games to primetime television.Nope, it's the pistol on the chests of what will likely be a 100-loss team ? for all of two early season games! ? that will send the wrong message to children. In a state where it's legal to carry a concealed firearm, no less. Yup, got it. Makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I figured if anything were to be a problem, it would be the Colt .45 copyright that scuttled the nickname the first time around. I mean, it's freakin' Texas; I'm surprised all their sports teams don't do it up big and put pictures of guns all over their uniforms. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesfan16 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 " the children!" - George Carlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSox44 Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 " the children!" - George CarlinMy constitutional law teacher played as Carlin's "seven dirty words" bit in class today as part of his freedom of speech lesson.I love that class so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Well, we do have concealed carry laws and Minute Maid doesn't wave a metal detector wand when you walk in (unlike Toyota Park that wanded my kids a couple of weeks ago). So it is possible that some gun guy could see the gun on the uniform and something could short circuit through his CHL brain making the whole affair just terrible. OR maybe Majestic has rules like New Era and won't put guns on their product period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.