JohnnySeoul Posted April 22, 2011 Author Share Posted April 22, 2011 I remember thinking that the late 90's Cavs identity was one of the coolest identities in the NBA back when it was in use. Now that I'm a little older and wiser, I realize how awful that identity was. Random nonsensical colors, random nonsensical splash on the jersey, completely generic-looking logo. A team with such an awesome name should never have had such a wasteland of an identity. Their current identity runs circles around that 90's identity.I'm actually the opposite. I hated them back in the 90's and wished the Price/Nance era blue/orange would return. But now looking back at the black/light blue/orange combo....I freakin' love it. Plus, that logo was perfection...simple and clean. I loved both versions too (the splash and without). Hell, the white set was one of my "whales" until I just had them created. JohnnySeoul's WikipageIF ONE IS CONSIDERED RACIST, THEN BOTH MUST BE CONSIDERED RACIST.BOTTOM LINE: NEITHER ONE IS RACIST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The '90s set is a mess now? I swear some people on here won't be happy until the whole league looks like this:...et cetera.Ugh! Those are horrible uniforms!!! The 90's set was a mess, and it's was the small things that killed the set. The added silver to the wordmark, and throw on the inconsistent piping that bothered me.On the home it was single piping on the jersey and double on the pants. It just bugged me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xTr1pleXx Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The original Indians 90's look was pretty good, but they really muddled it down with adding extra outlines, adding silver, etc. It was a decent, but not great, script to begin with, but the changes made to it over the years ruined that look.Their cream home and new road look way more professional than their previous road did. It's time for them to dump the script and go with the new block font as their identity (I'd throw Chief Wahoo out with the script too, but I'm not going to get into that debate). Right now, it isn't a cohesive identity - they're stuck between two eras, and they're wearing a beautiful retro look half the time and a muddled down old identity that doesn't match at all the other half of the time.(Oh, and dump the red caps. Those really need to go.) 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...
andrewharrington Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The '90s set is a mess now? I swear some people on here won't be happy until the whole league looks like this:...et cetera.Not saying it was a mess, just that it was amateur in how it was executed. The letterforms in the scripts are very 'of the era' and there's a good reason there isn't much design from the 1990s that is considered great, inside or outside the sports industry. The 1990s were a transition era, wherein the designer was moving from conceptualizing and executing everything by hand to doing it all on the computer, and many designers and instructors used it as a crutch (still do).Also, quit labeling people. It's beyond annoying. If you want to state your opinion in your post, fine. Saying, "I swear some people wont be happy until the whole league looks like it did in the 1920s." is not voicing your opinion. It's calling out the people who don't share your opinion. What looks good and what sells are not the same. 'Some people' value what looks good. You value what sells and is 'cool' or is 'out of the box.' That's fine. Quit calling people out for their valid opinions. Move on. I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lights Out Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 It was meant to be tongue-and-cheek, I just forgot the smiley. So I'm not trying to "call people out" for real. Note that I picked some of the most ridiculously-plain baseball uniforms ever - of course nobody actually wants that.Anyway, the scripts might have looked a bit amateurish but they just worked really well with the Wahoo logo, if that makes sense. I don't feel they would have worked back in the day with, say, the "block C" hats. POTD: 2/4/12 3/4/12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The Indians' '90s set was not a mess and it didn't contain any silver. You are thinking of the changes they made in 2002, which did blow.That is perfection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSky Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 This question is easy for me, and the answer IMO was simply money. Why else would you go from this...To this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnySeoul Posted April 22, 2011 Author Share Posted April 22, 2011 This question is easy for me, and the answer IMO was simply money. Why else would you go from this...To this?They brought that back as an 3rd alternate/throwback uni (still is officially), but they've stopped wearing them for some reason. JohnnySeoul's WikipageIF ONE IS CONSIDERED RACIST, THEN BOTH MUST BE CONSIDERED RACIST.BOTTOM LINE: NEITHER ONE IS RACIST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hormone Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 I think teams are trying to be "edgy" (Cincy Bengals) or jump on a retro craze. The problem I don't like now is the over-simplification of uniforms that were complex, but still nice. Examples would be teams like the Red Sox road dropping a two-color for just navy (but not on their other sets), Cavs, 49ers, etc. These teams had uniforms that weren't over the top, but still nice with a number with some trim color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xTr1pleXx Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The Indians' '90s set was not a mess and it didn't contain any silver. You are thinking of the changes they made in 2002, which did blow.That is perfection.Those are good uniforms, especially the home (never was a big fan of that Cleveland script). The silver additions in 2002 really muddled those down.That said, I still prefer the new block letter uniforms. Though I'd be okay with going with the Indians script as seen in that picture at home, while using the current road uniforms (they'd be far from the first team to wear a script at home and block letters on the road, and their current road uniform looks miles better than the old "Cleveland" script, IMO). 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...
JohnnySeoul Posted April 22, 2011 Author Share Posted April 22, 2011 The Indians' '90s set was not a mess and it didn't contain any silver. You are thinking of the changes they made in 2002, which did blow.That is perfection.PERFECTION indeed!!! "Cleveland" in block letters just doesn't look good on any uniform (including the current Cavs road uni). I think the SF Giants suffer from that same issue with thier block lettering on their road uni as well.I still don't get why the block "C" ballcap doesn't match any uniform the Indians currently have. It's a different "C" than on the block style road uni and the navy alternate is scripted, which completely clashed with a block style ballcap.They need to pick a style and stay with it....damn Indians 2011 uni's are all over the place without any logic. JohnnySeoul's WikipageIF ONE IS CONSIDERED RACIST, THEN BOTH MUST BE CONSIDERED RACIST.BOTTOM LINE: NEITHER ONE IS RACIST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCap Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The 90s set was, well, amateurish and reminds me of a softball look. Did the script work well with Wahoo? I guess, but he should be ditched anyway. I'll say this much: I think this is one of the best road uniform in Indians' history. And one of the better ones in baseball today. I absolutely love the Indians' new road look. (Also love the cream home jersey.) Their current road and cream uni's may be the worst in Indians' history, IMO.They're actually two of the best uniforms in Indians history. The road grey is absolutely perfect, and the home cream would be perfect if it had the blue cap and trim that mimics the road grey. The 90s era Indians uniform is ovverrated because of the success the team had while wearing it. The Indians don't have a lot of success in their history, so when there's one uniform that naturally represents one of their best eras, people are drawn to it because of that. I'm a big Indians fan, but I'm not biased by that stretch of success into thinking that the uniform was better than it was. Those scripts were (still are) very amateur looking.Agree to disagree. As a lifelong Indians fan (since the late 70's), I can easily say these are the ugliest in Indians' history.No, that title goes to the blood clot look from the 70s. Also, I agree with andrew. The current vintage look is working for the Indians. The 90s stuff is overrated. PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The 90s set was, well, amateurish and reminds me of a softball look. Did the script work well with Wahoo? I guess, but he should be ditched anyway. Wow. I can't see how custom wordmarks on a classic baseball template with placket piping is amateurish but standard block numbers you could get done at any embroidery shop isn't. To me, the softball look is a dark jersey or t-shirt with no striping (except maybe around the cuffs), worn with gray pants, kinda like the Sox' alternate.The White Sox alt looks like the team who wears t-shirts with heat-pressed numbers, while the Indians' new look is the bigshot team who paid for more-expensive uniforms. Agree to disagree, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueYankee26 Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The Indians' '90s set was not a mess and it didn't contain any silver. You are thinking of the changes they made in 2002, which did blow.That is perfection.Beautiful, and I also like the current unis. trueyankee26.wordpress.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buster Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Wrong color, Eagles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFoA Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Wrong color, Eagles.Of all the pictures on the internet of Mike Vick as an Eagle, you found a terribly photoshopped pic of Mike Vick in a Falcons uniform. That's impressive. But I do agree with the idea of the post, though. The Eagles definitely look better in kelly green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Lightning, the new logo/unis for next year is one of the biggest downgrades I've seen.The Devil Rays to Rays was by far the worst and most disaster filled change. From a unique look and color, to a burst of sunshine with shades of blue used by alot of teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cujo Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 This thread should apply to All NHL teams when they went RBK Edge in 2007. (except for Boston) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xTr1pleXx Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Teams this thread should apply to All NHL teams when they went RBK Edge in 2007. (except for Boston)THIS. Boston was pretty much the only upgrade during the conversion to Edge.I don't get why Reebok felt the need to try to purge hem stripes from the NHL, but it was an awful decision. Glad to see some teams who go rid of their hem stripes in 2007 are bringing them back. Now if they could just hem the bottom of the jersey so it's straight. 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...
IceCap Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 The 90s set was, well, amateurish and reminds me of a softball look. Did the script work well with Wahoo? I guess, but he should be ditched anyway. Wow. I can't see how custom wordmarks on a classic baseball template with placket piping is amateurish but standard block numbers you could get done at any embroidery shop isn't. Easy. The throwback Indians stuff looks professional because of its simplicity. Look at the block wordmarks. When I see wordmarks like that I see uniforms that take time to make. Each letter in those wordmarks has to be lined up perfectly and applied to every jersey. Every letter. On every jersey for every player. The 90s set? Those wordmarks looked patch-like. Easier to apply. The throwback, to me, looks more professional, like something a Major League team would wear. Something that's simple, but there's great care in executing that simplicity. The 90s look comes off as something the team had done a local pro shop. It doesn't look bad, but I prefer the vintage stuff. Especially on a team as old as the Indians.Plus, that logo was perfection...simple and clean. It was a nice looking piece of basketball themed clip art. Didn't quite cut it when it came to representing the team name though PotD 26/2/12 1/7/15 2020 BASS Spin the Wheel, Make the Deal Regular Season Champion 2021 BASS NFL Pick'em Regular Season Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.