Orioles 2012 Changes

[BBTV]

It is grammatically correct, but awkward. I also think that Os could be argued to be correct as well. Correct or not, it's dumb. The A's should just have an A like they did for most of their existence, and the Orioles should (if they need a second cap) have a B.

[Sabrejeff]

Deadspin's take on the typo brings up a pet peeve: It should be Os, not O's. It's plural, not possessive.

Likewise, it should be As, not A's. I understand that makes it look as if it's the word "as" and it is tradition. But it's wrong.

Oh, well. If Maple Leafs doesn't bother me, then I shouldn't get all upset over this.

Certain plurals such as singular letters (which are essentially just symbols anyway (though most other symbols don't follow this rule)) do use apostrophes so it would be correct in both instances.

[BBTV]

It's correct because the apostrophe represents missing letters. A plural letter would be something like Ds or "D"s. I'm a little skeptical of the acceptability of an apostrophe to pluralize a letter or symbol.

[Gfonk04]

It's correct because the apostrophe represents missing letters. A plural letter would be something like Ds or "D"s. I'm a little skeptical of the acceptability of an apostrophe to pluralize a letter or symbol.

I think it flies because it's a contraction like someone mentioned. We write "can't" not "cant" and use the apostrophe to represent the missing letters. "O's" and "A's" are contractions. If the teams were the Oakland Bs or Baltimore Ds (and just named after the letters themselves) then the apostrophe would be incorrect.

This thread has pretty much covered everything. It's awesome.

[TheOldRoman]

Deadspin's take on the typo brings up a pet peeve: It should be Os, not O's. It's plural, not possessive.

Likewise, it should be As, not A's. I understand that makes it look as if it's the word "as" and it is tradition. But it's wrong.

Oh, well. If Maple Leafs doesn't bother me, then I shouldn't get all upset over this.

Yes but in both instances the apostrophe is not there to show possession but rather in place of 'riole' and 'thletic' respectively. It would seem to be grammatically correct in this context because it is being used as a contraction.

Correct. People are undoubtedly dumb for using apostrophes to pluralize things, but not in this case. If it were an acronym, such as PED, we would say PEDs (not PED's). However, since it is a single letter, we must use an apostrophe to show that is isn't a word, but a plural letter.

[BigBubba]

Deadspin's take on the typo brings up a pet peeve: It should be Os, not O's. It's plural, not possessive.

Likewise, it should be As, not A's. I understand that makes it look as if it's the word "as" and it is tradition. But it's wrong.

Oh, well. If Maple Leafs doesn't bother me, then I shouldn't get all upset over this.

But then again, we live in an age where a large percentage of interwebs users insert apostrophes into every word that ends in "s". Not to mention a complete lack of understanding of word usage - "there" vs. "their" vs. "they're" among others.

How many times have we seen - on this very board nonetheless - somebody post something like this?:

"Team X unveiled there new logo's today."

"I like those jersey's."

Ack.

From Wikipedia:

The apostrophe ( ' , often rendered as ' ) is a punctuation mark, and sometimes a diacritic mark, in languages that use the Latin alphabet or certain other alphabets. In English, it serves three purposes:^[1]

• The marking of the omission of one or more letters (as in the contraction of do not to don't).
• The marking of possessive case (as in the cat's whiskers).
• The marking as plural of written items that are not words established in English orthography (as in P's and Q's, the late 1950's). (This is considered incorrect by some; see Use in forming certain plurals. The use of the apostrophe to form plurals of proper words, as in apple's, banana's, etc., is universally considered incorrect.)

So in "Orioles", they're contracting the "riole". "Os" would look so dumb because some people would read it like a word, not the plural of "O".

The second bolded one backs it up.

[Gothamite]

True enough. I hate the "O's" cap, but grammatically it is correct.

Or at least it would be, if the Orioles used an apostrophe.

[nash61]

Technically, it should be D'backs.

[Gothamite]

Yeah, the little diamond-hyphen they use is stupid.

[Trevell]

I've never had a problem with this logo and I guess I just sort of ignore the upside down apostrophe, but at this point you gotta figure the Orioles must know about this and just decide to keep it that way for whatever reason. I wonder why? It doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me one way or the other, but it looks just as good with the apostrophe the right way. It doesn't look right with that space blank though, feels like something is missing.

[-kj]

I've always wondered why people hated the "O's" cap so much... but I guess I never looked closely at its apostrophe catastrophe. Now, no matter how much I think the cartoon bird is dumb, I'm obliged to think it's better than "O-notanapostrophe-s".

[BBTV]

It's correct because the apostrophe represents missing letters. A plural letter would be something like Ds or "D"s. I'm a little skeptical of the acceptability of an apostrophe to pluralize a letter or symbol.

I think it flies because it's a contraction like someone mentioned. We write "can't" not "cant" and use the apostrophe to represent the missing letters. "O's" and "A's" are contractions. If the teams were the Oakland Bs or Baltimore Ds (and just named after the letters themselves) then the apostrophe would be incorrect.

This thread has pretty much covered everything. It's awesome.

I think that Os and As is also OK, because you could say that the O and A represent Oriole and Athletic - not even like an abbreviation, but an actual (can't remember the word for it, but like a symbol or something.)

So I stick by my argument that both O's and Os is OK... though both are dumb.

[loogodude90]

So I stick by my argument that both O's and Os is OK... though both are dumb.

Huh? You must not be from B-more. Everyone calls them the O's around here. It makes perfect sense to have an O's cap. Now that the "correct" bird is gone, the O's cap is officially my favorite.

[Gothamite]

Who cares if people call them that? Not every casual fan nickname deserves to be enshrined on the uniform.

"O's" on a cap is every bit as stupid as "Sens" across the front of a hockey sweater.

[Gfonk04]

Who cares if people call them that? Not every casual fan nickname deserves to be enshrined on the uniform.

"O's" on a cap is every bit as stupid as "Sens" across the front of a hockey sweater.

Not really. The O's logo is a good, compact, visually distinct logo. It also ties to the team nickname and the local accent (you may not think this matters, but talk to someone from "Balmer" or "Dundak" or "Elcot Ciddy" and you'll hear it). Not every nickname has a cultural connection to it, most of them exist because people are too lazy to say "Diamondbacks." It also looks better than a "Sens" wordmark would (non-apostrophe aside).

[Gothamite]

Is it part of the Baltimorean dialect to reduce plural nouns to the first letter and an "s"? Or is that just the casual fan nickname?

People in Milwaukee call their ballclub the Crew, fans in the Bronx call theirs the Bombers, and in Queens their boys are known as the Amazin's. That's all local influence, but I don't want to see that any of those on a jersey either, no matter how pleasing the design might be.

It was bush-league when the Mariners tried it, and it's bush-league now. Especially since the Orioles' approach makes them appear semi-literate.

[Eye]

Weren't the Orioles the last team to wear pullovers on a regular basis (as opposed to wearing a pullover BP in a game or series) in 1993-94?

Of course, the Reds were the final team to wear pullovers throughout their entire set (1992).

While the pullover "look" with the v-neck may never make a comeback, didn't Adrian Gonzalez supposedly have a faux-button-down jersey this past season that might have actually been a pullover but with the button-down front permanently connected? And, if this was the case and catches on, might this address the issue of wordmark interruption?

's made in China, right?

The Orioles need to pick a ing bird.

[The_Admiral]

If you really want to represent Baltimore jargon on the uniform, it shouldn't say "O's" but "aaeuuooouu's," which is hard to fit on a cap!

[McCall]

Angels uniforms don't say "Halos". Rockies don't say "Rocks" (or Rox). Twins don't say "Twinkies". Cardinals don't say "Redbirds". The aforementioned Brewers not saying "Crew" or "Brew Crew". Indians don't say "Tribe". Red Sox don't say "Sawx". The Yankees have been mentioned. Phillies don't say "Phils". Nationals don't say "Nats". Pirates don't say "Buccos".

D'Backs is shortened due the length of the name and A's was actually an official name at point I believe. But like the others, O's is simply a nickname people call them, like a shortened "headline" name. They're not something that really should appear on the official uniforms. Brooklyn never had "Bums" on their uniforms, though that'd be a good name if the Brooklyn Cyclones ever rebranded.

[The Mojo Maniac]

It was bush-league when the Mariners tried it, and it's bush-league now. Especially since the Orioles' approach makes them appear semi-literate.

Thankfully for the Mariners the "M's" motif never appeared on the jerseys (except for the BP jerseys in the late '80s-early '90s, which were never seen anywhere outside BP anyway). But I agree it looked bush-league. That whole '87-'92 set was the worst in team history: