Jump to content

CCSLC Baseball Uniform Rankings


New_Member

Recommended Posts

I was curious to see how sportslogos.net members ranked MLB jerseys when using scoring, as opposed to explicitly placing the uniforms in order from best to worst. These rankings are from the uniform rankings at sportslogos.net. I weighted the uniforms as .4(home rating), .35(road rating) and .25(alternate rating). The alternate rating is the average of the team's alternate jerseys. If the team had no alternates the weighting for .53(home rating) and .47(road rating).

Obviously, these ratings are not statistically significant. The number of responses were usually somewhere between 25 and 200. It's interesting to see that members consistently, with only a few exceptions, prefer home to road jerseys. There also seems to be higher rankings for new uniform changes than longer standing uniforms. I gave the Mets two rankings. The first includes their black alternates, which they still officially use but have yet to see the field this year. The second omits the black jerseys. I also gave the Angels two rankings. The 2012 jersey had an unexpectedly high score compared to the rankings for home jerseys of previous years, which are basically identical. The second score for the Angels therefore uses a lower score for the home jersey.

MLB_uni_ranks.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My top five:

Blue Jays (no homer. Their new set is a perfect update of their old uniforms... they kept all the good, ditched all the bad, and the subtle number font update was genius)

Tigers (the home jersey is a classic, and the road is pretty nice as well)

White Sox (a far superior version of the Yankees' pinstripes, awesome logo, tons of class)

Braves (always liked their uniforms, no specific reason)

Athletics (excellent colour choice, with two rare colours in one uniform set)

My bottom five:

Rays (so blah, and I hate double-blue)

Marlins (what the f*** were they thinking with the wordmarks, number fonts, etc? I like the orange, but the jerseys themselves suck)

Red Sox (the road uniform sucks so bad that it almost brought this entire set to worst overall in my books. I HATE that a team called the RED Sox would even consider using navy blue as such a significant colour)

Padres (they wouldnt be on this list if they had kept the sand-coloured roads- consider this sour grapes)

Rockies (they need a full return to purple and a more cohesive identity... I'm not even sure which uniforms are the home and road and which are alternates, or which alternates are even still in use this year, without looking it up first. That's definitely the sign of a bad set of uniforms in my book)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, I'm surprised the White Sox were that low. I think they have one of the classiest sets in the league.

Can't complain about Toronto at the top, though. In fact, I applaud it. One of the best uniforms not just in baseball, but in all of sports. I can't think of a better rebrand in recent memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With so few responses for uniform ratings on the sportslogos.net website, there are bound to be skewed results. If those reading this thread are interested, it only takes a few minutes (and if we are posting on uniform boards we apparently have time) to click through the uniforms with ratings you find wrong. Maybe in a few weeks time, the number of response rates will be closer to 1,000, giving more reliable results if I or someone else redoes the calculations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That list got Cleve'jacked. They belong nowhere near the top half, let alone in the top 5 above Tigers, Dodgers, Yankees, and Giants.

I think the rating system isn't accurate to the kind of study you are using it for. For example, people weren't rating the new Blue Jays against the Dodgers or Royals uniforms... they were rating them against those previous graphite monstrosities, so obviously people will be inclined to vote a higher number; because in their mind, that is the best look for the Blue Jays. It also works the opposite way. The new Red Sox uniforms are really nice compared to Padres and Rockies, but fans are rating those lower because more people like the previous uniforms as a better look for the Red Sox.

Perhaps it would just be better to interpret the data a little differently. Instead of directly comparing the data to one another, it would be better to say: "This is how close a team is to their optimal look on a scale of 1-10 based on the CCSLC rankings."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this to be a very interesting look into the individual team ratings, though I do agree the results are probably skewed in some manner. For starters, it isn't scientific (as you said) because it is a voluntary voting poll. Those who have very strong opinions are more likely to go complain/highly compliment something than those who are indifferent towards it. For example, if you have a a horrible experience in a shopping store, you are much more likely to complain than someone is to simply acknowledge a good experience. On the flip side, if the previous object (in this case uniforms, such as why the Jays' ratings are so high) was so bad or widely hated, when something better comes out, people will be more likely to applaud it, regardless of how it should be rated on its own (even though the rebrand was great). As GFB said, many people probably rated highly on the basis that it is way better than the previous uniforms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFB and Andrew Wagner both make great points. I actually think the ideal way of determining ratings would be a series of randomized head-to-head match-ups, like that facemash website that Zuckerburg created in the beginning of the Facebook movie. But alas, I don't have his development abilities...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As often as I've had to defend my dislike of the Miller unis, I'm especially surprised that the Brewers are so low. Although it's vindicating to know the only unis that got a high rating (a 7.4!) are the throwbacks. It's not my favorite look from the royal blue era by any means, but they're a drastic improvement over the dull navy they wear now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am shocked that the Padres are a high up as they are. Navy and White make for incredibly dull unis (getting duller by the year) and the camo alts are UGLY. Not even in a retro Ozzie Smith era way, more of a "why would anyone willingly wear this?" sense.

Personally, I've grown more accustomed to the Marlins' new look. I think the teal looks better, but the Loria era unreleived black was starting to wear thin... (though they still wear their black alts more than any of their other jerseys).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.