Uni Watch Power Rankings 2013: MLB

[guest23]

"Ideally, a uniform should be viewed in a vacuum, strictly on the basis of its aesthetics."

and thats why i don't read his stuff. i'm done

Your problem is that he's judging visuals... on the visuals?

Yeah, I'd like to hear the explanation on this too. Brandon's post didn't make sense to me. Plus, I feel like Lukas doesn't simply judge a uniform on its aesthetics.

i hate to focus too much on this, but ill explain.

design isn't just decoration, which is why aesthetics are fleeting. it's mainly communication. uniforms are part of an identity, and identity is the visual representation of brand. a company's identity expresses certain brand values, ideas, and personality to it's audience.

you dont have to have a strong theme like the TB Buccaneers, or have to use a color from a state flag to make an emotional connection with an audience, though. identities never come with notes or instructions. they have to communicate clearly on their own, and over time they gain value. take even the simplest identity/uniform and think about the communication and message it's sending; how it represents that team, and what they want you to think of them.

I'll use the Indy Colts as an example, just because i know football more than any other sport. nowhere on the uniform is it written that they are what they are. the graphic language tells us they are a team that values it's Baltimore and Indy past (which is filled with championships and HoF players). They are not looking for "speed" or "energy" in their identity. they want to be a symbol of stability, consistency, and tradition. They wear gray mask, black cleats, and 1 color elements to match the uniform from the 1950s as close as possible to communicate those ideas.

BBV even explained the same kind of communication with the STL Cardinals, and other imperfect baseball scripts. Even though i would like to see a lot of baseball teams update the quality of their identities, if only to differentiate them more from other competitors (the #1 thing an identity does) it would change the communication and personality of them quite a bit.

That's why i dont read Lukas' stuff. because all he cares about is the one thing that really dosen't matter; the aesthetic

I think your argument is neglecting some huge factors in relation to the evolution of uniform design. The fact that you tie everything about uniforms back to branding exercise is a very short-sighted view that only goes back to the post WW2/tv/ad men era when roughly half of pro sports franchises were founded before that era. The modern process involves a team of marketers, designers, management, focus groups etc. that are looking to create an identity and a product completely out of thin air. They also have to take into account copyrights, merchandising potential, international implications (e.g. JAGS Fail), multimedia applicatoins etc...all the stuff right from your Branding 101 textbook.

On the other hand you have the legacy and founding pro sports franchises that often started in the infancy of their respective leagues. You essentially had a blank slate that evolved organically from uniforms to be nothing more than equipment, to slight distinguishng features of competing sides (contrasting colors), to player identification (numbers), to specific team ID (logo, monogram, crest,wordmark), to player specific ID (names) and other superficial enhancements for things like TV viewing. You had designs that evolved over time often with no cohesion or input, uniforms changing every year based on the coaches' or owners' prefence at the time which was often times limited to designs out of a manufacturers catalog.

You mention the Colts as an example but you are phrase your assessment of their brand as if that was the intended idea/message. I would argue that their organic evolution as a football team created is a complete accident that was a result of wanting consistent traditional uniforms. If you want a modern branding exercise you would never arrive at what the Colts have now, what modern branding gets you is the JAGS.

Many of the most notable brands today have followed the organic route rather than as a product of a branding exercise.

[Jungle Jim]

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/story/_/id/9545428/uni-watch-power-rankings-rates-nfl-uniforms-1-32

NFL is out and while I totally think it makes sense for Wahoo to knock the Indians down the list, I am not as sold that the Redskins name should knock Washington down the list (though in fairness it did not knock them as far down.

I thought he nailed it with the first sentence of the Bengals critique, though (similar to McCarthy's take that they are trying to dress up like actual tigers).

Yep, Bengals #31 of 32 and deservedly so. Bengals management, are you reading this?

[OnWis97]

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/story/_/id/9545428/uni-watch-power-rankings-rates-nfl-uniforms-1-32

NFL is out and while I totally think it makes sense for Wahoo to knock the Indians down the list, I am not as sold that the Redskins name should knock Washington down the list (though in fairness it did not knock them as far down.

I thought he nailed it with the first sentence of the Bengals critique, though (similar to McCarthy's take that they are trying to dress up like actual tigers).

Yep, Bengals #31 of 32 and deservedly so. Bengals management, are you reading this?

The helmet is so nice, I may bump it up a few, but from the neck down, that's about right.

[alxy8s]

Once upon a time, the Saints would have ranked much higher on this chart, but they've been docked for wearing solid black way too often. A pity, because their other uni combos are quite solid.

Nailed it. The leotard look is that much worse because the black pants have no stripe.

[Ted Cunningham]

No list is right or wrong, since they are all opinion, but his explanations are very bad. Like that one poster mentioned, he faulted the Nats for having 3 hats, when the Cardinals also have 3 hats? C'mon.

This is exactly the problem I have with Paul Lukas's writing. His opinion is one man's opinion, and I don't even think it's all that informed. I don't understand how he has had all this "uniform authority" conferred to him, especially for someone who is neither a professional designer nor an equipment manager or the like. Yet, because he's a "writer" for ESPN and he has a website with a substantial following, he comes off with this certain arrogance that his opinion is in fact authoritative in all things uniform-design. I'll certainly give him his due: he has done a lot of research/interviewing/etc. and does know his way around sports uniform history. But (even though he sometimes even states to the contrary), he writes in a manner that makes it sound like his word is the word. His writing lacks thoughtfulness and any attempt at understanding design and aesthetic opinions he does not hold. It's more "uniforms from the 50's, grilled meat, and old duck-pin bowling alleys are the best because I say so!" I don't even necessarily disagree that any of those three things are cool (as a matter of fact I like all three of those things), but it's just the way he writes it and the tone he uses. I can't take him seriously as an authority on sports aesthetics.

EDIT - I could be entirely wrong or in the dark about Lukas's qualifications as I've only been reading his stuff off and on for the past fourish years. But his bio on Uni-Watch reads more like that of a historian rather than an authority on sports uniforms aesthetics.

I don't see anywhere where he's listed as an authority or as anything other than someone giving their opinion. If you feel like he writes like "his word is the word", think about it - isn't all opinion writing like that? Or should he write "IMO" after every single sentence? He's just a guy with a strong background in journalism / writing who has interests just like most of us here and acted on them and made a career out of it. That's all.

Think about it - how can there even be an authority on this stuff? Can you "win" at design? Is this the new way that teams will be decided for a National Championship game? It's totally harmless, and frankly, I think anyone who gets worked up over this kind of stuff is an idiot. Not saying you're an idiot, unless you're really all worked up. Some others in this thread are clearly pathetic idiots.

No, I'm not worked up or anything. I also don't think he should write "IMO" or any of that. I know it's his opinion and I think he's totally entitled to it. (Hell, I even agree with a majority of his uniform-related opinions.) However, I think a lot of people get the impression that his opinion is more informed and therefore more authoritative because his website has such a following and he writes for ESPN occasionally. That makes him unlike those of us here. Sure we have similar interests. But all of us don't have websites with entire communities built around them. People should realize that his opinion is just one man's opinion. And even if he'd say it's just his opinion (which I think he has), his writing has a certain smugness or arrogance to it that doesn't correct that impression I get.

Essentially: why should we care what Paul Lukas's opinion is any more than we care what Dennis Bergman's (the guy on here who hates every NFL uniform ever) or anyone else's opinion is? And I think sadly, some people do.

Also, the quotes are working correctly for me again.

[St Louis Cardinals]

Why are the panthers #30. and there is no description. all he put is hahahahaha with a link to the best uniform poll. am i the only one that thinks the panthers are atleast within the top half of the league?

[pittsburghsports16]

I'll just re-post this for baseball:

NL Central: 1) Cardinals 2) Reds 3) Pirates 4) Brewers 5) Cubs
NL West: 1) Giants 2) Dodgers 3) Rockies 4) Diamondbacks 5) Padres
NL East: 1) Mets 2) Braves 3) Phillies 4) Nationals 5) Marlins
AL Central: 1) Indians 2) Tigers 3) Twins 4) Royals 5) White Sox
AL West: 1) Athletics 2) Mariners 3) Astros 4) Angels 5) Rangers
AL East: 1) Blue Jays 2) Orioles 3) Yankees 4) Red Sox 5) Rays

1) AL East 2) NL East 3) AL Central 4) AL West 5) NL West 6) NL Central

Top Tier (Best of the Best): 1) Cardinals 2) Blue Jays 3) Mets 4) Athletics 5) Giants 6) Indians
Upper-Middle Tier (Teams that are a few tweaks away from being in the top tier): 1) Orioles 2) Dodgers 3) Reds 4) Braves 5) Tigers 6) Mariners
Middle Tier (Average uniforms that can be seen as both good or bad): 1) Yankees 2) Astros 3) Pirates 4) Phillies 5) Twins 6) Rockies
Lower-Middle Tier (Only a few saving graces keep these from the bottom): 1) Nationals 2) Red Sox 3) Royals 4) Angels 5) Brewers 6) Diamondbacks
Bottom Tier (Worst uniforms in baseball): 1) White Sox 2) Cubs 3) Rays 4) Marlins 5) Padres 6) Rangers

1) Cardinals
2) Blue Jays
3) Mets
4) Athletics
5) Giants
6) Indians
7) Orioles
8) Dodgers
9) Reds
10) Braves
11) Tigers
12) Mariners
13) Yankees
14) Astros
15) Pirates
16) Phillies
17) Twins
18) Rockies
19) Nationals
20) Red Sox
21) Royals
22) Angels
23) Brewers
24) Diamondbacks
25) White Sox
26) Cubs
27) Rays
28) Marlins
29) Padres
30) Rangers

NL Playoffs: 1) Cardinals 2) Mets 3) Giants 4) Dodgers 5) Reds
AL Playoffs: 1) Blue Jays 2) Athletics 3) Indians 4) Orioles 5) Yankees

After Tiebreaker:
NL Playoffs: 1) Cardinals 2) Mets 3) Giants 4) Dodgers
AL Playoffs: 1) Blue Jays 2) Athletics 3) Indians 4) Orioles

After NLDS:
NLCS: Cardinals vs. Mets
ALCS: Blue Jays vs. Athletics

World Series:
Cardinals vs. Blue Jays

Winner:
It goes to game 7, and the Blue Jays are at home. Unfortunately for St. Louis, they wear their red caps on the road. Blue Jays win!

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

I'll forgive the fact that he has the Lions at 27, although they should be higher. But this guy has the Redskins at 19 and SURPRISE, bases it on their nickname.

[BigBubba]

NHL up. He puts Pittsburgh in the top-10, which is pretty surprising.

[guest23]

Why is eveyone so upset over a totally subjective editorial piece?

If you've read any of the guy's articles or posts he makes his tastes very obvious so any of his rankings should not come as a shock.

[mmajeski06]

For the NHL ones I disagree with the Pens being ranked that high. No way their paint by number edge is better than the Oilers, who I still think are ranked far too low.

But -50 pts to him for linking to a knockoff site for the Blue Jackets jersey!

[The_Admiral]

He has the Panthers awfully high for a team with a flimsy Edge design. The red/navy letters/numbers are kind of boring. Throw some of that yellow in there!

See how all the colors in his headdress totally pop on the white jersey but look dull and diminished on the red jersey? Even the chief's skin tone gets overwhelmed by the red background.

I have never seen this

[OnWis97]

At number 10, I'll say he overrated my team, the Wild. A decade ago they were a legitimate top-10 (depending on how important you feel the terrible number font was), but now they have (until 9/1, anyway), three mismatched jerseys and for some reason they keep marginalizing the logo. I was surprised by his comment that he is optimistic about the new road jersey since the Wild always have great changes. I'd argue that every change they make has downgraded the overall set.

But, as a few people have tried to remind us...it's one person's opinion; fun to discuss but nothing to get upset about.

[The_Admiral]

That terrible number font would worked have well for the Panthers. Three layers, you can go red/yellow/navy with it. It looks fierce, I guess.

I've wanted to do a parallel-universe NHL concept where the northern casualties all hung around but various new design elements popped up with other teams. Maybe a quasi-patriotic Dallas expansion team that ends up looking like the Blue Jackets, for instance. The North Stars would have ended up like the 2004 ASG design, obviously.

[-kj]

The original Wild number font is awesome. You're crazy.

The block they chose is clunky. There are far, far better block fonts out there.

[Lights Out]

Lukas' rankings make less and less sense with each sport he ranks. The Indians and Redskins get dropped in the rankings but the Blackhawks are #8? And for someone who doesn't like the vast majority of non-traditional uniforms, he sure does overrate horrible color-by-numbers Edge sets like the Penguins and Panthers. Not to mention - the Senators use the same exact templated design as the Penguins, yet they're 26th whereas Pittsburgh is 7th. I get that we all have our preferences but there doesn't seem to be much logic behind his choices.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

Pens at 7?????????????? It's just a generic template. Yes, they have an awesome logo (there's different opinions on that), but this is a uniform ranking. Their uniforms are among the worst.

Blackhawks should be top 3. Their red is the nicest in pro sports.

The rest I cant really argue much with.

[BBTV]

Lukas' rankings make less and less sense with each sport he ranks. The Indians and Redskins get dropped in the rankings but the Blackhawks are #8? And for someone who doesn't like the vast majority of non-traditional uniforms, he sure does overrate horrible color-by-numbers Edge sets like the Penguins and Panthers. Not to mention - the Senators use the same exact templated design as the Penguins, yet they're 26th whereas Pittsburgh is 7th. I get that we all have our preferences but there doesn't seem to be much logic behind his choices.

Well the Indians have a derogatory logo and a respectful name, the Redskins have a derogatory name and (imo) a respectful logo, the Black Hawks have a respectful name and a respectful (again, imo) logo.

There doesn't need to be logic behind choices. I have "rules" that I feel like all uniforms should adhere to, but every now and then, there's one that breaks the rules that I just like, for no other reason than I just do.

[BBTV]

He has the Panthers awfully high for a team with a flimsy Edge design. The red/navy letters/numbers are kind of boring. Throw some of that yellow in there!

I don't understand how anyone - a designer, a client, a child, a blind person - can think that the horizontal stripe behind a vertical stripe is a good look and a sound design choice.

Anyone.

[The_Admiral]

It's sort of interesting on Winnipeg's white because of the overlap, but doesn't work when the shoulder stripe interrupts the traditional stripe, as with the Panthers, or the old Bruins.