Worst number fonts ever?

[BrandMooreArt]

I was never a fan of the Phillies font. It's unique but it always seemed very out-dated to me.

thats an interesting one. i dont mind it so much, but feel it dosent gel right with the rest of the type. the word mark has varied line weights and the numbers dont. if the word mark were built to have consistant weight like the numbers, i would like it more. then, the NOB type could just be a light version of that same font

[andrewharrington]

It seems Adidas does a horrible job with quality control at least with their NBA uniforms, because stuff like this has happened with the move to Rev30:

Eh, that happened very few times (mostly during the launch period) and was quickly remedied. I like the fact that there are innovative ideas moving things forward, but as a result, it feels like nothing can ever be perfect. There's always an "improvement" to be made somewhere. Breathable numbers are a great idea, but how unimportant do aesthetics become as a result or how much can/should they be sacrificed for the sake of performance and innovation? With all that said, I don't buy into gimmicks that seem like nothing more than marketing buzz, but the weight reduction of a Rev30 compared to its predecessor is mind-boggling. You really have to feel it to believe it.

I'm still convinced the big hole 6s and 9s in those Lakers pics are a mistake, though. That's how the league supplied artwork looks, but it definitely seems like the purple stroke just got flipped to the wrong side of the edge of the number.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

The Expos numbers, as far as I know, has only ever been used by the Expos on a national level (pro, NCAA, etc.).

I think the KC and/or Oakland A's used them on the front--but not the back--early on.

The Expos numbers, as far as I know, has only ever been used by the Expos on a national level (pro, NCAA, etc.).

You're right, they are not the same.

Oakland A's wore those fine numbers, somewhere in the 70's.

Right. The A's wore them in 1972 on the front:

...but not on the back:

Before that year, they wore the Red Sox number font on front and back; after that year they removed the front number (and went to green-on-white numbers on the yellow jerseys).

My nominees for worst number fonts:

[BrandMooreArt]

It seems Adidas does a horrible job with quality control at least with their NBA uniforms, because stuff like this has happened with the move to Rev30:

Eh, that happened very few times (mostly during the launch period) and was quickly remedied. I like the fact that there are innovative ideas moving things forward, but as a result, it feels like nothing can ever be perfect. There's always an "improvement" to be made somewhere. Breathable numbers are a great idea, but how unimportant do aesthetics become as a result or how much can/should they be sacrificed for the sake of performance and innovation? With all that said, I don't buy into gimmicks that seem like nothing more than marketing buzz, but the weight reduction of a Rev30 compared to its predecessor is mind-boggling. You really have to feel it to believe it.

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

[IceCap]

You sure got us pegged.

[-kj]

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Thank you for your condescension.

[Tygers09]

Any team that chooses to shadow their numbers; such as the NY Rangers, Tampa Bay Lightning, and the 49ers (late90's- 2011?).

The Gretsky-era of the St.Blues are also bad just like those of the Gordon fisherman Islanders of the 1995 season.

[Ted Cunningham]

Right. The A's wore them in 1972 on the front:

...but not on the back:

Before that year, they wore the Red Sox number font on front and back; after that year they removed the front number (and went to green-on-white numbers on the yellow jerseys).

Ah, brilliant. I was wondering if there were pictures somewhere as I wasn't able to find any yet.

EDIT: And this is why I didn't see them when I looked through Dressed to the Nines:

[BrandMooreArt]

You sure got us pegged.

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Thank you for your condescension.

i never mentioned anyone specific. guilty conscious?

[-kj]

You used "they"; since you didn't name anyone specific, I can only presume you meant to say "the unwashed masses".

[Lights Out]

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Adidas hasn't really made things better. Sure, the uniforms are lighter, but it comes at the expense of uniqueness (i.e. forcing everyone to pick from a small selection of generic collar designs), function (numbers peeling off), and detail (Lakers' number font getting messed up, Atlanta's beveled numbers and Memphis' inline numbers being replaced by plain numbers that don't look as good).

[IceCap]

You sure got us pegged.

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Thank you for your condescension.

i never mentioned anyone specific. guilty conscious?

What do I have to feel guilty about? You're the one making broad, general statements.

So yeah, not apologizing for my aesthetic tastes here.

[BrandMooreArt]

You sure got us pegged.

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Thank you for your condescension.

i never mentioned anyone specific. guilty conscious?

What do I have to feel guilty about? You're the one making broad, general statements.

So yeah, not apologizing for my aesthetic tastes here.

you shouldnt apologize for what you like. but the broad general statement in the broad general scope of the board is true. weather you include yourself in it or not is your own choice i suppose

[IceCap]

You sure got us pegged.

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Thank you for your condescension.

i never mentioned anyone specific. guilty conscious?

What do I have to feel guilty about? You're the one making broad, general statements.

So yeah, not apologizing for my aesthetic tastes here.

you shouldnt apologize for what you like. but the broad general statement in the broad general scope of the board is true.

No, not really. Preferring classic looks does not equate not liking advances in uniform technology. We'd just prefer that it was done well. Breathable numbers are a fantastic idea, and if they make the uniforms lighter then all the better. It's still a technology that needs a lot of work. They need to fine-tune it so as to not nullify teams' unique fonts and number designs. Pointing out that a lot of these advances aren't there just yet isn't hating inovation. It's just expecting that the people involved in this innovation fine tune it before debuting it.

weather you include yourself in it or not is your own choice i suppose

Whether I include myself in what group? You're imagining a sentiment that just isn't there.

[hockey week]

Let's add the Columbus Cottonmouths to this list

[-kj]

I didn't like those numbers on the St. Louis Vipers (RHI) either:

[IceCap]

That V/snake logo looks like a P.

[Lights Out]

Those snake numbers are ugly but still cool as hell.

[BrandMooreArt]

You sure got us pegged.

careful talking about innovation and making things better. they dont like that

Thank you for your condescension.

i never mentioned anyone specific. guilty conscious?

What do I have to feel guilty about? You're the one making broad, general statements.

So yeah, not apologizing for my aesthetic tastes here.

you shouldnt apologize for what you like. but the broad general statement in the broad general scope of the board is true.

No, not really. Preferring classic looks does not equate not liking advances in uniform technology. We'd just prefer that it was done well. Breathable numbers are a fantastic idea, and if they make the uniforms lighter then all the better. It's still a technology that needs a lot of work. They need to fine-tune it so as to not nullify teams' unique fonts and number designs. Pointing out that a lot of these advances aren't there just yet isn't hating inovation. It's just expecting that the people involved in this innovation fine tune it before debuting it.

weather you include yourself in it or not is your own choice i suppose

Whether I include myself in what group? You're imagining a sentiment that just isn't there.

i never mentioned personal taste in visual design. but yes, there is a strong preference to "leave things the way they are or go back to something old". the rest i agree on, but as Andrew said, how often do you really see numbers falling off? serious question, because im not much of a basketball fan. but even Andrew said that was remedied.

you seemed to take offense to my comment that i never mentioned you in.

back on topic, it was mentioned before but i didnt see a photo. the Dolphins number font is very high on my list. in NFL history, this is easily a top 2 worst-font-ever. its 2 ideas crammed together with a bad taste for varied widths, terrible consistency and a double stroke is the cherry on top. (or black olive. i hate black olives)

[oldschoolvikings]

Let's add the Columbus Cottonmouths to this list

Good Lord. Did someone get paid to design this, or was it some kind of student-donation-charity work? vomitous.