Differentiating the Red, White, and Blue Teams in MLB

[rebelx]

There is, as everyone knows, a great proliferation of teams using red, white, and blue in sports. Where it really becomes problematic is in baseball, where there are several teams with more or less the same color scheme. I often think of ways that MLB teams that wear some shade of blue, combined with red and white, could differentiate themselves from other such teams. Here are ideas.

I should note that the Blue Jays don't need to be dealt with here, as they use two different shades of blue along with red and white, making them unique in baseball.

Navy, red, and blue teams (yes, there are both regular navy and midnight teams, but it's hard for many to tell those colors apart):

Angels: They can stay as is; their use of silver in the halos is what sets them apart.

Braves: They could make the tomahawk black again, which would effectively add that color to the scheme (the tomahawk is prominent enough on uniforms that I would consider whatever color it is to be part of the overall scheme).

Cardinals: They don't need to change anything, mainly because they already use so much yellow in the main logo and uniform that it almost acts as a third non-white color for them, working similarly to how a black Braves' tomahawk would work.

Indians: They should switch to cream full-time, and not use regular white anymore. Hey, it worked for the Giants, so it could work here.

Nationals: They need to re-adopt metallic gold. I was pretty pissed off when they got rid of it.

Red Sox: No need for the BoSox to do anything. Doesn't seem like another color would work for them anyway.

Twins: They could probably try using some sort of gray or slate color, like the one used for the drop shadow in their logo, for accents and such. It would actually be cool if any team used gray in a non-road uni capacity, and it could just as well be them, since it's already there in the logo.

Royal, red, and blue teams (again, I know two different shades of royal are used by these teams, but they look pretty similar at a glance):

Cubs: Keep things as they are.

Dodgers: Believe it or not, I wouldn't mind seeing my Dodgers either get rid of the red front numbers (which weren't even there in the Brooklyn days), or better yet, add touches of silver kind of like they used on that blue alt jersey and alt cap they used very briefly, but MUCH more tastefully and sparingly. If the rival Giants can do it with gold, why couldn't the Dodgers with silver?

Phillies: They actually might try to work cream into their identity more, and in fact even have it juxtaposed with regular white, with the cream being used for accent purposes on their regular homes (maybe not the roads, though, as it might clash a bit with the gray). Would this be too odd and/or blasphemous? Frankly, the color is somewhat evocative of parchment, bringing to mind things like the Declaration, which would fit their identity pretty well.

Rangers: Keep black drop shadows, add black accents to other parts of the unis, and put some accents in the main logo (I tried making the stitches on the baseball and the blue outer ring black using Photoshop, and it looked pretty nice). And no, I don't think black would ruin their identity if it's used just for those purposes.

I'd be interested in your feedback.

[McCall]

Quick note: the red numbers WERE there in the Brooklyn days and were, in fact, the first ever front numbers on a jersey. Thus, in the realm of baseball historia (is that a word? Don't care), they are classified as untouchable, approaching Yankees' pinstripes and Birds-on-the-Bat status.

[kevinmets]

This has been discussed to death in the concepts forum. Here's my opinions (many which I have gone back & forth on in the past, and probably will continue to do so in the future.)

Angels: Keep the red & navy, though I'd like to see them go back to using a navy cap with a red brim, and yellow halos.

Braves: Don't change.

Cardinals: Actual cardinals' faces are black, not navy blue. Scrap the navy blue cap and use the red cap for home & road. As blasphemous as it may be, make all the navy outlines black. Problem solved.

Cubs: Don't change.

Dodgers: Don't change.

Indians: I would love to see them rebrand as either the Cleveland Spiders or Cleveland Blues. Spiders in either black/red, brown/red, or brown/orange. Blues in some two-tone blue combo, not unlike the Rays (who need to switch back to green, but I digress.)

Nationals: The gold trim on their old set would have been great if it were done properly.

Phillies: GO BACK TO MAROON. Problem solved.

Rangers: Again, I go back & forth with them. I made a Rangers concept a while back using graphite/gold, I think it worked nicely. But I'd be just as happy to see them in a cleaned-up version of their current blue/red look.

Red Sox: Switch from navy blue with red accents to red with dark green accents. Red should be the primary color since it's in their name. Navy blue is the rival Yankees color. The iconic Green Monster at Fenway is green. The Boston Celtics wear green.

Twins: Nothing about their identity, to me, NEEDS to be navy and red. Scrap it, use either Vikings purple/yellow, or Timberwolves blue/green.

[McCall]

This has been discussed to death in the concepts forum. Here's my opinions (many which I have gone back & forth on in the past, and probably will continue to do so in the future.)

Angels: Keep the red & navy, though I'd like to see them go back to using a navy cap with a red brim, and yellow halos.

Braves: Don't change.

Cardinals: Actual cardinals' faces are black, not navy blue. Scrap the navy blue cap and use the red cap for home & road. As blasphemous as it may be, make all the navy outlines black. Problem solved.

Cubs: Don't change.

Dodgers: Don't change.

Indians: I would love to see them rebrand as either the Cleveland Spiders or Cleveland Blues. Spiders in either black/red, brown/red, or brown/orange. Blues in some two-tone blue combo, not unlike the Rays (who need to switch back to green, but I digress.)

Nationals: The gold trim on their old set would have been great if it were done properly.

Phillies: GO BACK TO MAROON. Problem solved.

Rangers: Again, I go back & forth with them. I made a Rangers concept a while back using graphite/gold, I think it worked nicely. But I'd be just as happy to see them in a cleaned-up version of their current blue/red look.

Red Sox: Switch from navy blue with red accents to red with dark green accents. Red should be the primary color since it's in their name. Navy blue is the rival Yankees color. The iconic Green Monster at Fenway is green. The Boston Celtics wear green.

Twins: Nothing about their identity, to me, NEEDS to be navy and red. Scrap it, use either Vikings purple/yellow, or Timberwolves blue/green.

Why do the Cardinals need to switch to black? Tiger stripes are black and not navy. Does Detroit need to switch? Or purple and gold. Maybe LSU should change.

The Cardinals have always been red and navy basically, and the road cap has been used since 1992 and has history as the primary cap long ago, so it's not going anywhere either.

[The_Admiral]

This thread is going to devolve into "MY team has to change a color?!? no YOU'RE team has to change a color!!!!" [sic] like any sort of suggestion is some personal affront.

Perhaps it already did!

[HighCheese]

i wish the red sox would bring this hat back in some capacity

no team in this division wears red. why not differentiate?

yanks, rays and red sox are navy caps

o's wear black on the road and just now the jays went back to royal

[rebelx]

This thread is going to devolve into "MY team has to change a color?!? no YOU'RE team has to change a color!!!!" [sic] like any sort of suggestion is some personal affront.

Perhaps it already did!

Hey, just for the record, I actually suggested changes to my own team. Guess that means I've got kind of a moral high ground here .

[rebelx]

This has been discussed to death in the concepts forum. Here's my opinions (many which I have gone back & forth on in the past, and probably will continue to do so in the future.)

Angels: Keep the red & navy, though I'd like to see them go back to using a navy cap with a red brim, and yellow halos.

Braves: Don't change.

Cardinals: Actual cardinals' faces are black, not navy blue. Scrap the navy blue cap and use the red cap for home & road. As blasphemous as it may be, make all the navy outlines black. Problem solved.

Cubs: Don't change.

Dodgers: Don't change.

Indians: I would love to see them rebrand as either the Cleveland Spiders or Cleveland Blues. Spiders in either black/red, brown/red, or brown/orange. Blues in some two-tone blue combo, not unlike the Rays (who need to switch back to green, but I digress.)

Nationals: The gold trim on their old set would have been great if it were done properly.

Phillies: GO BACK TO MAROON. Problem solved.

Rangers: Again, I go back & forth with them. I made a Rangers concept a while back using graphite/gold, I think it worked nicely. But I'd be just as happy to see them in a cleaned-up version of their current blue/red look.

Red Sox: Switch from navy blue with red accents to red with dark green accents. Red should be the primary color since it's in their name. Navy blue is the rival Yankees color. The iconic Green Monster at Fenway is green. The Boston Celtics wear green.

Twins: Nothing about their identity, to me, NEEDS to be navy and red. Scrap it, use either Vikings purple/yellow, or Timberwolves blue/green.

The problem I have with some solutions listed here is that they fly in the face of tradition. The Red Sox getting rid of their navy or the Twins completely changing their color scheme would eliminate old, well-established looks, and no fans of either team would go for that. To me, changes that are much more subtle and would not destroy or upend the overall appearances of teams can easily be made. I'm kind of with you on the Phillies thing, though; I wouldn't mind seeing them going back to the maroon. It's perhaps somewhat perplexing that they even switched back to red and royal in the first place, seeing as how those colors saw them through many horrible losing seasons and the maroon represented their first championship. The only problem is that their red and royal are now associated with winning as well, seeing as how they've gone to three World Series and won another title since readopting those colors.

For the record, it would be cool if Cleveland's team was the Spiders once again, but I guess that's in a different universe.

By the way, McCall, you're absolutely correct about those red Dodger numbers; had completely forgotten that they were indeed used for a time in Brooklyn. I guess I was kind of thinking more of the really old Brooklyn days, before they had numbers whatsoever. Wonder what year it actually was that they put the numbers on the front. Anyway, the reason I suggested the silver-related change right after mentioning the front numbers was because I realized pretty quickly that I'd really miss those numbers if they were gone. As you've now reminded me, they're also too engrained to be let go of just like that.

[rebelx]

DP

[tBBP]

Since I don't have the time to concept any of this stuff out, I'll just quickly run down my list of ideas for each of these...

L.A. Angels (of Anaheim) - primary red and gold, with navy blue trim if necessary. Why? Because the team is now forever associated with red, and one of California's names is the "Golden State". Plus, most renditions of halos tend to be gold. Make it work.

Atlanta Braves - at the risk of pissing off tradition, and in keeping with that gorgeous throwback look of theirs, I think they'd look good in a midnight navy (think Chicago Bears) and red, with a touch of gold trim (since that color was also in the old tomahawk).

St. Louis Cardinals - no changes needed. They're good the way they are.

Cleveland Indians: Some of you may already know my opinions on this team here, so in order to help avoid an impending Clevejack, I'll just keep them to myself this time.

Washington Nationals - They should've kept what they had. (Yes I know this now makes three teams in my list that'd use red, navy, and gold...but they'd all three be in different applications.)

Boston Red Sox - rediscover RED on the away uniforms. Oh, and that hat in the Jim Rice card posted above should find its way back into their set.

Minnesota Twins - my own personal opinion, this is the one team in the bigs that would look good in red and green...but again, I'll just leave that one alone as well.

Chicago Cubs - Eh, I guess they're alright.

L.A. Dodgers - No changes needed.

Philadelphia Phillies - while part of me wonders how the present-day Phils would look in the old burgundy and powder blue scheme, I don't even think I'd want to see that. They're red, with just a touch of royal blue; they should probably stay that way.

Texas Rangers - as stupid as this sounds, I think they should actually darken their royal blue, not quite to navy, just just dark enough to distinguish it from a regular royal. It'd bring their colors closer to the Texas flag (I know it's cliche, but then look at their name), but it'd also be fitting. Oh, and keep the silver trim. Just lose the black. Quickly.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

That's my list. Feel free to rip it to shreds.

[OnWis97]

I would go so far as to say there is no problem. I'll start with the low-hanging fruit: the royal teams. There is no pair of teams I consider remotely alike. The Phillies are easy to remove because blue is so secondary. Same with the Dodgers and Red. That leaves Texas and the Cubs. Two teams is less of a big deal in addition to the different leagues, Cubs pinstripes, Rangers' font, etc.

Admittedly, navy's a bit harder to make a case for.

Angles, Cards, and Nats are Red dominated. Angels use the silver trim. That leaves Nats and Cards...Birds on bat sets that apart enough.

Then we have Atlanta, Cleveland, Boston, Minnesota. This is the toughest group. While there are certainly uniform traits that separate them (Twins have pinstripes, Atlanta has tomahawks and the thick piping, etc.), I cannot separate the color scheme.

So I think we have:

• Cubs, Rangers
  
• Cards, Nats
  
• Atlanta, Cleveland, Boston, Minnesota
  

I can live with this. The bottom group is a bit large (and two in same division). Bottom line is that blue/red is a very "baseball" scheme. These four teams are all old franchises that I think have been using these schemes at least since the 1940s (or before).

So while I cannot refute all of the color similarities cited, I just don't see a problem. The closest thing is the Nats, a new franchise that could have gone in a different direction, but with that nickname in that city, it made the most sense.

[McCall]

I would go so far as to say there is no problem. I'll start with the low-hanging fruit: the royal teams. There is no pair of teams I consider remotely alike. The Phillies are easy to remove because blue is so secondary. Same with the Dodgers and Red. That leaves Texas and the Cubs. Two teams is less of a big deal in addition to the different leagues, Cubs pinstripes, Rangers' font, etc.

Admittedly, navy's a bit harder to make a case for.

Angles, Cards, and Nats are Red dominated. Angels use the silver trim. That leaves Nats and Cards...Birds on bat sets that apart enough.

Then we have Atlanta, Cleveland, Boston, Minnesota. This is the toughest group. While there are certainly uniform traits that separate them (Twins have pinstripes, Atlanta has tomahawks and the thick piping, etc.), I cannot separate the color scheme.

So I think we have:

• Cubs, Rangers
  
• Cards, Nats
  
• Atlanta, Cleveland, Boston, Minnesota
  

I can live with this. The bottom group is a bit large (and two in same division). Bottom line is that blue/red is a very "baseball" scheme. These four teams are all old franchises that I think have been using these schemes at least since the 1940s (or before).

So while I cannot refute all of the color similarities cited, I just don't see a problem. The closest thing is the Nats, a new franchise that could have gone in a different direction, but with that nickname in that city, it made the most sense.

The only thing I fault with the Nationals is that they had a separation from the others with the gold, but went away from it and right into similarity.

[winghaz]

I used to wonder what the Twins would look like with Viking colors. Then I saw some concepts in here, and guess what? I loved them. Yes, the Twins would look great in purple and gold.

But they shouldn't change. How in the name of Harmon Killebrew do you dare change from red, white and blue? There's just too much tradition in the red, white and blue.

As for other teams, I'd leave them the way they are with some tweaking in some areas. A hint of gold or a hint of silver, or something like that, never hurts. For a team like the Nationals, for example, a hint of gold would be appropriate since the trim on the American flag is gold.

And I agree that the Phillies should go back to maroon.