MLB: Black in '00s = powder blue in '70s?

[CubsFanBudMan]

Watching Royals-Blue Jays highlights made me think about all the teams that have reverted to an old look or a modified version that removed the black that was added in roughly the 2000-2009 decade, give or take a few years. Off the top of my head, these teams are among them:

Reds

Rangers

A's

Astros

Mets

Blue Jays

Royals

Rays* (1998)

... with only the Reds' black road bill and trim and the Mets' on-the-way-out alts surviving today (assuming the Astros will drop it, too). Having so much of it cleared out by 2012-2013 is a little surprising, but it does seem that the era is over. Of course, this also conveniently excludes the early '90s expansion teams and the White Sox, but they adopted it much earlier and all still wear black to this day.

I wonder if in 20 years people will be nostalgic for the black throwback nights like us children of the 1970s that enjoy the long lost powder blue that so many teams adopted. Or if eventually that decade will be known for that, uniform-wise (accurate or not, since the powder blue really crossed decades, too).

Seeing the Blue Jays also makes me think the Marlins might someday bring the teal back, if even in the limited role it played in 1997 or even more limited 2003 championship seasons. Probably depends a lot on the success on the field (and new ownership down the road). Getting ahead of myself there. For now I hope they play up the orange.

EDIT: Removed Arizona. The '98s were last second additions. My bad. Overthought it ... obviously. Not sure how the DP happened.

[mania]

The Rangers still, inexplicably, carry it as trim on their white and grey jerseys.

[McCall]

Black is still a secondary color for Arizona and very much in use.

[John in KY]

The Reds also still use a black drop shadow on everything - it's minimized compared to the earlier set, but still there.

I don't think people will be nostalgic for this - frankly I grew up in the powder blue era and as far as I'm concerned it can stay buried in the 1970s - perhaps the Royals and Blue Jays are the only current teams that could pull it off again (note that they were '69 and '77 expansion team respectively) and you could add the Brewers if went back to their royal blue roots. However, I think the Royals and Blue Jays do look better in gray (particularly since the Blue Jays greatest teams wore gray roads), and the current navy-blue Brewers set works better with gray. I wouldn't be in any rush to see these teams revert to powder blue just because they could.

I don't see returning to black for black's sake ever becoming a nostalgic desire.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Mentioned the Reds' trim, spaced on Arizona (edited to reflect that), and did not realize the Rangers still used it.

[Kevin W.]

I didn't realize people were nostalgic for the powder blues.

[TFoA]

I didn't realize people were nostalgic for the powder blues.

I am. I think it could work for the Royals and a few other teams that I can't think of right now. That era coincided with the Pullover era, which is my 100% guilty pleasure when it comes to sports aesthetics.

[pmoehrin]

Maybe its just me but I took alot more issue with the AL teams then the NL teams.

I didn't take issue with the Astros, Mets or Reds. The Astros were going for a train motif all the way, so black would make sense for that. (I would have changed the name as well, because the Astro name I think lost all real meaning the second they did that, but I digress) The Mets I always thought could pass it off as paying tribute to the other former NL team in New York even though I don't think that's what they were going for, but still. And the Reds had featured black in their logos decades before the 90's. So I don't think it was that much of a stretch.

But the A's, Blue Jays, Rangers and Royals have always been very set in their color scheme. For them it really came off as using black for the sake of using black. I'm not going to throw the Devil Rays in the conversation because I thought they looked ugly no matter what they tried.

[zpqmaowl]

I don't get why everyone couldn't stand the Mets having black but don't care that the REDS have black outlines on everything.

[TFoA]

I don't get why everyone couldn't stand the Mets having black but don't care that the REDS have black outlines on everything.

Because the Reds got rid of their black hats, mostly black away jersey, black undersleeves, etc. Black went from being a major color in their identity to an accent, which is the best way to use black.

[Joshawaggie]

I don't get why everyone couldn't stand the Mets having black but don't care that the REDS have black outlines on everything.

Black looks better with red than blue. Especially if we are just talking outlines, I'm fine with the Reds.

[STL FANATIC]

The Met's look sharp without black, but they also looked sharp with black trim. The problem was that they almost never utilized it as simply trim. It came to dominate their identity.

[loogodude90]

You could probably make an argument for the Orioles to be added to this list. They've pretty much removed as much black as they can from their unis. About 10 years ago they had entirely black caps on both sets (other than the logo, of course), black numbers and script at home, black piping down the fronts of the jerseys, etc. I'm watching the 2131 game on MASN right now, and the Orioles almost looked like a completely different team back then (not talking about talent, but that is another discussion). Now they have all orange scripts on everything, only wear orange-billed caps, have a non-black alternate, and even wear a white front panel on the home caps. There's really no more black they can take away without the uniforms looking really weird.

[cubbies06]

I didn't realize people were nostalgic for the powder blues.

I am. I think it could work for the Royals and a few other teams that I can't think of right now. That era coincided with the Pullover era, which is my 100% guilty pleasure when it comes to sports aesthetics.

Guilty as well. Today when I see a pullover jersey, I can taste the stale gum I chewed with every opened pack of Topps cards in the 70's.

[McCall]

You could probably make an argument for the Orioles to be added to this list. They've pretty much removed as much black as they can from their unis. About 10 years ago they had entirely black caps on both sets (other than the logo, of course), black numbers and script at home, black piping down the fronts of the jerseys, etc. I'm watching the 2131 game on MASN right now, and the Orioles almost looked like a completely different team back then (not talking about talent, but that is another discussion). Now they have all orange scripts on everything, only wear orange-billed caps, have a non-black alternate, and even wear a white front panel on the home caps. There's really no more black they can take away without the uniforms looking really weird.

- Both caps are predominantly black. (more black than any other color on each cap)

- Piping is black/orange/black (more black than orange.

- Lettering/numbers still outlined in black

- Black jersey.

- Black socks.

Black is still a primary color, orange is just a little more even now. Nowhere near being considered a near removal of the color. Only a slight reduction.

[loogodude90]

You could probably make an argument for the Orioles to be added to this list. They've pretty much removed as much black as they can from their unis. About 10 years ago they had entirely black caps on both sets (other than the logo, of course), black numbers and script at home, black piping down the fronts of the jerseys, etc. I'm watching the 2131 game on MASN right now, and the Orioles almost looked like a completely different team back then (not talking about talent, but that is another discussion). Now they have all orange scripts on everything, only wear orange-billed caps, have a non-black alternate, and even wear a white front panel on the home caps. There's really no more black they can take away without the uniforms looking really weird.

- Both caps are predominantly black. (more black than any other color on each cap)

- Piping is black/orange/black (more black than orange.

- Lettering/numbers still outlined in black

- Black jersey.

- Black socks.

Black is still a primary color, orange is just a little more even now. Nowhere near being considered a near removal of the color. Only a slight reduction.

Yeah, but you are missing the point. They've removed all the black they can without looking ridiculous. They are not going to wear entirely orange caps because that would look hideous. They need black as a base color because orange can't stand on it's own. It's almost like they need black in their identity, but they have done a good job of reducing black as much as possible and embracing the orange enough but not to the point where they are an eyesore.

The piping on their pants appears mostly orange, which is what really matters. Again, if it were JUST orange, it would look weird. They need some black in there to keep things grounded.

[McCall]

You could probably make an argument for the Orioles to be added to this list. They've pretty much removed as much black as they can from their unis. About 10 years ago they had entirely black caps on both sets (other than the logo, of course), black numbers and script at home, black piping down the fronts of the jerseys, etc. I'm watching the 2131 game on MASN right now, and the Orioles almost looked like a completely different team back then (not talking about talent, but that is another discussion). Now they have all orange scripts on everything, only wear orange-billed caps, have a non-black alternate, and even wear a white front panel on the home caps. There's really no more black they can take away without the uniforms looking really weird.

- Both caps are predominantly black. (more black than any other color on each cap)

- Piping is black/orange/black (more black than orange.

- Lettering/numbers still outlined in black

- Black jersey.

- Black socks.

Black is still a primary color, orange is just a little more even now. Nowhere near being considered a near removal of the color. Only a slight reduction.

Yeah, but you are missing the point. They've removed all the black they can without looking ridiculous. They are not going to wear entirely orange caps because that would look hideous. They need black as a base color because orange can't stand on it's own. It's almost like they need black in their identity, but they have done a good job of reducing black as much as possible and embracing the orange enough but not to the point where they are an eyesore.

The piping on their pants appears mostly orange, which is what really matters. Again, if it were JUST orange, it would look weird. They need some black in there to keep things grounded.

The Orioles can wear as much black as they want since orioles are black. That's why they don't ditch black altogether. They're one of the few teams in which black makes sense being in their color scheme. Unless they're dressed in head to toe, monochrome, they can't really looks ridiculous in black.

[TheOldRoman]

I don't get why everyone couldn't stand the Mets having black but don't care that the REDS have black outlines on everything.

As was already mentioned:

1) The Reds use minimal red in their uniforms currently.

2) Black goes better with red than blue. Black and red are used by a whole bunch of sports teams. Very few have used black and royal blue because it doesn't work together. If you are going to use black and blue, you have to go with a brighter shade like the Orlando Magic. Royal blue is not bright enough to stand out against black.

also:

3) The Reds never had a black jersey or solid black hats.

4) Even when the Reds went overboard with black, they still only used two colors and everything was still legible. As I said, red and black work, blue and black don't. Now, throw in orange and you have huge mess. It muddied the script on the home and road jerseys, and it became their primary color (based on their numerous black hats and jerseys, but no blue or orange jerseys). The team which had always been a red team was still red, but the team which had always been a blue and orange team was now black and blue, with a little bit of orange.

So basically, the Mets had black jerseys and wore black hats almost exclusively, nearly eliminating their iconic blue hats, The black didn't work with their color scheme, as it was too close to the blue chromatically. The black looked like it was thrown on haphazardly (which it was) and muddied everything, messing up the existing jerseys. The Mets lost their identity and looked bad in doing so. The Reds' look could have worked for an expansion team, but that Mets looked like hot garbage.

[John in KY]

Mentioned the Reds' trim, spaced on Arizona (edited to reflect that), and did not realize the Rangers still used it.

Sorry - just missed the "trim" part of your post and only caught the "black bill" part for the Reds.

And the Reds had featured black in their logos decades before the 90's. So I don't think it was that much of a stretch.

Actually the old Reds logos weren't black; they used that extremely dark navy like the Yankees or Red Sox use. It was used from the late 30s until the early 50s, was dropped during the "commie scare" period of the 50s when they really changed their name to the "Redlegs" instead of the "Reds"; then the dark navy came back in the early 1960s when they became the "Reds" again.

[Trevell]

I was never a big fan of teams without black in their color scheme wearing black jerseys or caps. Glad this trend seems to be fading away.