Just the Beer Light to Guide Us...

Cleveland Baseball Rebranding

By Phil Hecken

We’ve now concluded our first “rebranding” contest, this one for the Cleveland baseball club, and I’m pleased to announce that our winner is (drumroll)…

Nate Schimelpfenig, who submitted the design you see above — his full submission is here, and after two elimination rounds, Nate outlasted all the competition to become our winner. In fact, in the final showdown, Nate collected 1,764 out of 3,107 votes cast, or 56.78% of the votes cast. Some bar/pie graphs show the results below:

finalresultsbar finalresultspie

Great job Nate, and by all who entered the contest

Following the voting, I corresponded with Nate, who gave an even more detailed explanation of the thought process that goes into contests such as this.

Phil,

I’ve attached a screen capture of my working file in illustrator for my concept. I could certainly shrink these all down into a .pdfs that you could put out if you wanted. There are 21 different jerseys, 15 different caps, 15 different sock/’rrups combos, my process of creating all the logos and the images I looked at for inspiration. … I strictly used current and past Indians uniforms for inspiration. Being from Minnesota and I know what it is like to lose a team and have new one come in with a completely different look and just not have it be the same. See Stars>Wild. I wanted to honor the franchise’s history, my mantra was if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. I kept the franchises colors, current C logo, basically team roads because if I was a Cleveland fan this would make the transition to a new (old) name much easier…

I was selected to be the graphic design intern with my Minnesota Vikings (Paul’s Nightmare: all purple, all the time.) this past season but since the internship ended in February I haven’t been able to find work. This contest has been great for me, it’s been a great confidence booster, it brought me back to the Sports Illustrated for Kids uniform contests I entered as a kid, allowed me to see that people do appreciate my work, (the comment from the guy who sat down with his 75 year old father and they picked my concept together, that was a beautiful thing.) I’m certainly putting it on my resume, I know you guys are certainly aware but industry insider’s do certainly follow and discuss what is going on at UniWatch. on a daily basis. at the lunch table. with Adrian Peterson chiming in occasionally.

Thank you so much for the great work that you do and the exposure you have given my work,

Nate Schimelpfenig

Thank you, Nate. And thanks for the look into your thought processes with this contest. I again also want to thank all the entrants for their time and effort.

~~~

I still haven’t even looked at any of the Washington contest entries as of yet, but I do know there were more of them than the Cleveland contest. I also know that a number of you who entered the Clevo contest are also in the Washington contest, so if you did not make the top 10 or the final 3, your chance for redemption is nigh at hand. I HOPE to have those contest entries up next weekend.

~~~~~~~~~~

colorize thisColorize This!

Occasionally, I will be featuring wonderful, high-quality black and white photographs that are just begging to be colorized.

I’m now reaching the end of the colorizations I received from John Turney, and I’ll be running several more today. Couple of non-G&G contributors today as well, so it’s another good one…

Based on the positive comments to the new format, I will again be running the photos in this way — click to enlarge all of the photos below (unless otherwise noted).

~~~

We’ll start with John again, and this time, he actually tweaked one of the photos that I had begun colorizing myself (back when I had some time). Correctly, John surmised I didn’t quite have the colors correct…here’s his interpretation:

Otto Graham - John Turney

This one was on the Uni Watch website a long time ago with Graham in a brown shirt . . . it may have been your work. It was a great beginning but I thought the jersey color was wrong. I think it is Orange and I brightend the Lions helemts and also turned them blue, which I think they are, since Lions wore blue helmets pretty often.

I then added a Kodachrome filter to make colors pop.

(Note: in my defense, I made the shirt orange — just not as bright and colorful as it likely was ;))

~~~

John is on a bit of an Otto Graham kick this time around:

Otto Graham - John Turney

I went ahead and made it Colts, wearing blue shirts with no stripes. It can always be changed.

~~~

Finally, John also finished another photo I had begun colorizing a long time ago. Again, he does a great job (this photo is Sept 15, 1955-Browns [Otto Graham #14] vs Bears [Ed Sprinkle #7])

Otto Graham - John Turney

Here is the finished product.

~~~

Thanks, John. I have one more from John (and it’s outstanding) so I’ll save that for the next edition of Colorize This!

~~~

Next up is another frequent colorizer, Larry Bodnovich:

Colorized Columbus Panhandles 1910's The Nesser brothers - Larry Bodnovich

This is the Columbus Panhandles, 1910’s — The Nesser brothers.

Here is some information about the Columbus Panhandles

“The Columbus outfit is headed by the Nesser Brothers. Big Huskies who are easily the equal of the best football players turned out by the biggest universities in the country.”

Knute Rockne once said of them, “Getting hit by a Nesser is like falling off a moving train.”

I learned about these brothers in the book “The Sunday Game.”

Larry Bodnovich

~~~

Shortly after Larry sent that, he followed up with this:

While looking for more about the Nesser brothers I found this image

nessers

And since they are not wearing numbers I am not positive which is the correct view. But the writing on this image in corner makes me think the correct view is in this email.

Not that anybody would tell

Larry Bodnovich

Thanks Larry.

~~~

Finally, we close today with a request, from Ben Traxel:

CBW Georgia Tech

Phil,

I know the quality isn’t great, but could you see if some of the colorizers would be interested in giving this picture a shot? It is my grandfather, Charles Benjamin Walker, in his Georgia Tech baseball uniform. He played for them back in the 20’s. I have no idea what the color scheme would have been back then. I was named after him but since he died in 1974 when I was only 4 years old I barely new him. I’m told the picture was taken on campus but would have no idea what building he’s standing in front of, or if it even still exists.

Ben

Thanks Ben. OK colorizers — think you guys can do Ben a solid and take a crack at colorizing this for him? It would be a nice challenge and a great public service. OK? OK!

~~~

That’s going to do it for this edition of Colorize This! Back with more next time.

~~~~~~~~~~

all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks Concepts

We have another new one set of tweaks, er…concepts today. After discussion with a number of readers, it’s probably more apropos to call most of the reader submissions “concepts” rather than tweaks. So that’s that.

So if you’ve concept for any sport, or just a tweak or wholesale revision, send them my way.

Please do try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per image — if you have three uniform concepts in one image, then obviously, you can go a little over, but no novels, OK? OK!. You guys have usually been good with keeping the descriptions pretty short, and I thank you for that.

And so, lets begin:

~~~

Just one today, since it’s a good one — and somewhat long (which is good, because the descriptions are excellent).

It’s from Brent Becker, who doesn’t so much have a uniform concept as he does an entire University re-branding (click on each image to enlarge):

Hi, Phil,

The recent re-name/re-design contest had me thinking about my college days – I graduated form Bradley University – a small, private institution mostly known for Basketball and Engineering. Even while attending, our “Braves” moniker came under criticism and there were several halfhearted attempts to develop a new mascot and team identity. Bradly currently has the school name, a B-U logo with script “Braves”, and… No mascot… In the spirit of your Cleveland and Washington contest I developed four unique alternate and inoffensive names to represent my Alma Mater, Bradley University:

~~~

BRAVE “Brave” – Drop the “s”, removing immediate Native American connotation in favor of an abstract notion of “bravery”… and then theme things with a “Medieval Scottish” feel, ala “Braveheart”. The main building on campus, Bradley Hall, would feel very much at home in the moors and highlands of Scotland

~~~

BulldozersCOLOR “Bulldozers” – Bradley is located in Peoria, IL, a city synonymous with machinery manufacturer, Caterpillar! A lot of BU students work for Cat during their studies and after graduation. The “B” Bulldozer alliterates with “Bradley” and has a tough, mechanical feel that would be unique in the NCAA…

~~~

Gargoyles “Gargoyles” – A popular feature of campus architecture, Bradley’s Gargoyles have a deep-rooted tradition and significance among students and alumni. The Gargoyle moniker would be very unique to BU.

~~~

Squirrels “Fightin’ Squirrels” – Hands-down, a student favorite – this was the popular choice for a mascot replacement while I was a student on The Hilltop. This is due to the abundance of abnormally large and aggressive (hence, fightin’) squirrel population dwelling on campus.

~~~

Anyhow, Phil, I realize the attached imagery has more to do with re-branding a school with no accepted mascot than uniforms per Se… But if you can use it as supplement to the Cleveland/Washington project, please feel free to share with the readers. Thanks!

-Brent

~~~

Thanks Brent. Some excellent ideas there — hopefully you’ve pitched these to your alma mater. Readers? What say you?

Back next weekend with a full set of tweaks, concepts and redesigns.

~~~~~~~~~~

Benchies HeaderBenchies

by Rick Pearson

~~~

“Come back, Toto, come back!”…

5-13-12 s-kansas

Click to enlarge

~~~~~~~~~~~

Rangers vs. Angels - 5-12-12Partying like it’s 1972…

Yesterday the Texas Rangers and Los Angeles Anaheim California Angels threw back to 1974 (according to their own promotional materials), turning back the clock thirty-eight years…as part of the Rangers’ season-long 40th anniversary celebration (why they didn’t throw back to 1972? I don’t know).

In fact, I’m not so sure that Ranger guide is correct — because the Angels uniforms were not from 1974…they had to be from 1972.

Let’s start with the Angels — Here’s what they wore. That’s a button-down jersey — which is what the Angels wore in 1972. However, by 1974, they had moved to a pullover. They had also moved to the upper case A along with the pullover. Indeed, this 1973 Topps card shows the 1972 button-down. So, the Angels were throwing back to 1972. But as far as getting the details correct for 1972? Looks like they nailed it pretty well:

Angels then & now - 1972 throwback

The Rangers also seemed to nail the 1974 throwback as well. If indeed they were throwing back to 1974 — since they essentially wore the same uniform from 1972 through 1974, they could have been throwing back to 1972.

Texas Rangers - Then and Now - 1974

Back in the day, both teams wore sansabelt pants, which Majestic replicated nicely, and both teams wore button-down jerseys — a rather odd mix (but not unheard of), since many teams who entered the polyester double-knit era did so sporting pullovers with sansabelts. In fact, the Angels did just that beginning in 1973 and continuing through 1978, a look some loved and some hated. The Rangers would also go to a pullover, but it was of the two-button variety from 1975-80, returning to a button-down jersey (while keeping essential the same style) in 1981.

As far as the little details — looks like they got the piping right on the Rangers, as well as NOB treatment in the throwback. They also nailed the little star in the circle on the “R” of “RangerS”. And as previously mentioned, Majestic got the lower case “a” for the Angels, plus the State of California patch, and the McAuliffe font, although it looks as though the sansabelt on the 1972 squad was a bit thinner. Still, good job all around.

You can see more photos here and here and some video here.

I’m looking forward to when the Rangers break out the powder blues (circa 1976), but that’s not until August 11th. In between, they’ll throw back to 1986 on June 16 and 1994 on July 7.

~~~~~~~~~~

OK boys and girls, that’s going to do it for today. Hope everyone has a great Mother’s Day (and don’t forget — the big leaguers will be swinging really bright pink bats today). As MLB states, “to raise awareness of breast cancer in the interest of prevention, treatment and a cure. Hundreds of MLB players are expected to use pink Louisville Sluggers, stamped with the MLB breast cancer awareness logo. To further demonstrate their support for the fight against breast cancer, players and on-field personnel will wear a pink ribbon on their uniforms along with pink wrist bands. Commemorative dugout lineup cards also will be pink.”

So what better way to kick off mother’s day than with this…

Have a good one everyone!

~~~

I liked the striped sansabelts, too, but I’m not married to them. — Jim Vilk

 

104 comments to Just the Beer Light to Guide Us…

  • Steve D | May 13, 2012 at 7:44 am |

    Great column today Phil…hit lots of great topics. Congrats Nate!

    One minor correction…you state in the fine section about the throwback game “They also nailed the white baseball on the “R” of “RangerS”…it wasn’t a baseball…it was a little star in a circle…this represents a Texas Ranger Crest:

    http://en.wikipedia....

    • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 9:19 am |

      thanks…now fixed

  • Daniel Fontenot | May 13, 2012 at 8:06 am |

    I have always that it would be a great idea for the St.Louis Cardinals to wear the female cardinal’s colors for Mothers Day.

    • Jeff P | May 13, 2012 at 12:14 pm |

      You could just change the cardinal on the bat to a brown one. It would be a unique little touch, I suppose. Certainly less intrusive than slapping a Los on there for cinco de mayo.

  • James Hoppes | May 13, 2012 at 8:21 am |

    Nate,
    Congratulations! I am the guy who sat down with his 75 year old father and chose your concept. I am very pleased that you won. I have to admit that my father thinks this whole contest was “crap” and the team name and logo should never change, but he’s an old dog. What can I say? I would be first in line to buy this gear. I wish you luck in your hunt for employment as you are obviously talented!
    James

    • chuck | May 13, 2012 at 6:07 pm |

      I will admit that I am like your father also James (stuck in my old school ways), and I like Nates concepts! The batting practice cap would sell like hotcakes! great job Nate!

    • Nate Schimelpfenig | May 14, 2012 at 1:26 am |

      HA! That’s great, James. Thanks for your kind words, the common bond that sports can create for generations of family really is a beautiful thing.

      • Chris K | May 14, 2012 at 2:15 pm |

        Awesome work Nate. The Vikings need you. Somehow they veered off the road a few years ago, as far as their uniforms go. Give me their throwbacks and never look back.

  • Connie | May 13, 2012 at 8:49 am |

    Brent and Bradley. Larry and the Panhandles. Terrific work in two different realms that provided a lot of pleasure to good ol’ Dad facing the prospect of all that Mother’s Day treacle.

    • LarryB | May 13, 2012 at 12:59 pm |

      Thanks,

      Here is the image that may be the correct view of the Nesser brothers from the Panhandles

      http://img.photobuck...

  • The Jeff | May 13, 2012 at 8:54 am |

    Having also colorized that first Otto Graham vs the Lions image http://thegreatktulu... (and, admittedly, screwing up the Lions by leaving their helmets silver)I have to question the brightness of the colors. They look a bit too vibrant for a night game from that era. Those games weren’t really very well lit, thus the reason for the white ball.

    /and congrats to Nate
    //and thanks to everyone that voted for mine… being completely self taught, I’m happy to be 3rd

    • timmy b | May 13, 2012 at 9:53 am |

      You got to remember that the flashbulbs used in the cameras of that era probably overcompensated the images a bit.

      From my layman’s point of view, of course.

  • Rob S | May 13, 2012 at 8:59 am |

    I think you mean “Partying like it’s 1972″, Phil…

    • Rob S | May 13, 2012 at 9:05 am |

      Unless it’s a placket pun.

      • The Jeff | May 13, 2012 at 9:17 am |

        It’s a typo. (Phil’s not that clever)

        /hi Phil! *waves*

      • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 9:22 am |

        i’m not that clever…

        now fixed

  • Greg B. | May 13, 2012 at 9:06 am |

    I wonder if the public or the ownership would accept the “spiders” name? Seems like a name with a lot of baggage that some people have a phobia about. I know about the historical connection but just have my doubts that people would accept it.

    • The Jeff | May 13, 2012 at 9:20 am |

      I think that may depend on how a change occurs. If the Indians are eventually forced to make the a change by the league, people aren’t going to be happy. If the team were to come out on their own and do it, fans will probably be more accepting.

      • Steve D | May 13, 2012 at 9:30 am |

        How will announcers refer to the past? Will they say something that happened in 2008 for example happened to the Indians or the Spiders? Have the Spiders gone since 1954 without a championship or was that the Indians?

        It would almost be helpful to do a franchise reset…but Baseball especially is not a game where we can make a clean break with history.

        • The Jeff | May 13, 2012 at 9:40 am |

          How will announcers refer to the past?

          Probably the same way that the announcers in the NFL handle the Houston Oilers/Tennessee Titans or the NBA deals with the Washington Bullets/Washington Wizards. The name change doesn’t delete the history.

          “Speaking of championships, the Cleveland Spiders haven’t won it all since 1954, when they were still known as the Indians”

        • Gusto44 | May 13, 2012 at 10:38 am |

          Since the Indians wouldn’t be relocating, there wouldn’t be any need for resetting the history of the franchise, in terms of this proposed nickname change. Everyone in Cleveland and beyond would know we’re talking about the same franchise.

          In the Oilers/Titans situation, that was a major change, which involved relocation and nickname alterations. So while technically it was the same franchise, it’s always felt differently. I would be willing to bet anyone announcers haven’t made nearly the same amount of historical references about the Oilers/Titans as they have about other teams like the Bills, Patriots, etc.

  • Frank from Bmore | May 13, 2012 at 9:21 am |

    I love that Scarlett Johansson (as Black Widow) was somehow related to the development of the new Spiders brand. I think the majors could do with some unique mascots and loved your design.

    • Nate Schimelpfenig | May 14, 2012 at 1:35 am |

      Thanks Frank. I needed a muse because Boog Powell in all red uni wasn’t doing it for me and what better way to get a look at that Black Widow logo.

  • Jet | May 13, 2012 at 9:31 am |

    Wow, another example of teams doing a great job with throwback uniforms this year. What’s gotten into major league baseball? Do ya think perhaps some of them are reading UniWatch and they know they’ll be raked over the coals if they don’t get it right???

    -Jet

    • Terry Proctor | May 13, 2012 at 10:14 am |

      I don’t care how accurately MLB teams do their throwbacks if they continue to let the spoiled-brat players wear those damn pajama pants. They look like crap, especially in some of the classic uniforms. Why bother?

      • Alan | May 13, 2012 at 12:55 pm |

        I totally agree! What’s the point of trying to replicate the past if the players don’t give a shit how stupid they look? Look at any photo of a MLB game prior to 1990 and tell me the players did not look so much cooler and neater then? Don’t mind the baggy jerseys much but the pants look like utter shit. Standards could be set but God forbid if you get the players union all bunch up in a twist.

        • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 1:05 pm |

          The problem is, with 162/2430 games in a season, nobody wants to police all that times 50 guys at once. So management says “oh why should I care how they wear their socks? It’s a comfort thing, and the player’s comfort is the most important thing”, which makes me sick. It’s MLB’s fault for not nipping this in the bud & establish sock & stirrups code when they should have decades ago. Tho I bet you, enough bitched about having to wear stirrups at all is why we almost never see them. It’s just as bad as coaches & idiot managers who don’t even bother to wear a uniform & have a windbreaker on. It looks so tacky & bush league.

        • Ricko | May 13, 2012 at 8:34 pm |

          What are going to do, write a stern letter and backdate it to 1960 or so, asking Ford Frick to tell Frank Robinson and Willie Mays to stop pulling their stirrups up so high?

      • Le Cracquere | May 13, 2012 at 5:44 pm |

        Well said. Somehow it reminds me of the overwhelming player sentiments in favor of bulldozing Fenway Park and Wrigley Field … because the locker rooms are less than 21st-century comfy and lack amenities like a putting green. Every time I see a player in pajama pants, it reminds me how seldom the men who play the game are actual FANS of the game. Shameful, and the shame rests equally on the highers-up who countenance it.

    • BurghFan | May 13, 2012 at 2:57 pm |

      According to Nate in the lead item, there are front offices where they’re aware of Uni Watch. (Congrats, Nate.)

  • Paul Lukas | May 13, 2012 at 9:42 am |

    My nitpick of the day: It’s not a “button-down” jersey — it’s a button-front jersey.

    “Button-down” refers to a kind of collar. When referring to jersey formats (pullovers, henleys, zipper-fronts, etc.), the proper term is “button-front.”

    But everyone says, “button-down,” so I suspect this may be a losing battle on my part….

    • Arr Scott | May 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm |

      No, preach it, brother. This is an important point. “Button-down” is a kind of collar, and also a metaphor for a kind of personality. It is not a type of jersey. I’m a button-down guy, and I prefer button-front jerseys, though I regard button-down shirts as a Friday-only affair.

  • Jim Vilk | May 13, 2012 at 9:43 am |

    Congrats, Nate! I’d wear that.

    Despite the alliteration, Bradley Bulldozers is an awesome choice. Reminds me of another name I love: the Steamrollers. Providence isn’t playing pro football these days, so someone else should use it.

    I miss the California Angels. Bring that back, along with those unis from yesterday. Actually, I’d prefer the ’74 pullovers with the capital A, but I’ll take either one.

    • Jet | May 13, 2012 at 10:05 am |

      I miss the CALIFORNIA Angels too, because that’s what I’m used to. But California is a mighty big place. What do y’all think of teams using the state name versus a city name? Maybe this could be a topic of discussion one day this week.

      -Jet

      • scott | May 13, 2012 at 10:13 am |

        Teams should use city names. The Miami Marlins should have been known as such all along.

        • The Jeff | May 13, 2012 at 10:35 am |

          You must hate “New England” and “Golden State”, eh?

        • BurghFan | May 13, 2012 at 2:56 pm |

          Foxborough Patriots? Arlington Rangers? Auburn Hills Pistons? Exit 16W Jets?

        • Le Cracquere | May 13, 2012 at 5:46 pm |

          For my part, yeah: they ought to be the Boston Patriots and the Oakland Warriors. “New England” and “Golden State” are even clunkier on the ear than the aforementioned.

        • scott | May 13, 2012 at 10:51 pm |

          Providence Patriots. :)

    • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 11:33 am |

      +1.

      They had a much better sounding name & regional names lend itself to nice graphics & I miss their use of the McAuliffe font. They still don’t look right to me in red & that halo needs to be gold.

  • Steve | May 13, 2012 at 10:19 am |

    Nate, congrats. One question…what font did you use for “Spiders?” I like it, and would to add it to my font library.

    As for the rebranding of sorts for Bradley…wow! I typically can’t stand when people send in hand drawn “concepts” since they are usually drawn in crayon or something, but these are amazing! I especially love the Fighting Squirrels and Bulldozers logos. The Bulldozers would lend itself to a great looking shield-like logo, and the Squirrels, well, I don’t know what it would lend itself to, but I know I am jealous of your drawing skill! If I cold draw/render like this, I would be a much better graphic designer.

    • Nate Schimelpfenig | May 14, 2012 at 1:19 am |

      Steve, it is a slightly modified version of a font called Blessed Day by Billy Argyl. Here is the link: http://www.dafont.co...

    • BWBecker | May 14, 2012 at 9:28 am |

      Thanks for the kind words re: hand drawing skills – I’m pretty sure I’m one of the last working professional marker marker sketch artists left in the universe… Starting to mix it up w/digital work lately, but drawing remains at the heart of my work… Glad the “Squirrels” and “‘Dozers” were enjoyed!

  • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 11:28 am |

    Congratulations Nate! I voted for yours despite your excessive template background trim. Concepts should be good enough to stand on their own & do not need fancy fringe or glossy enhancements.

    • Nate Schimelpfenig | May 14, 2012 at 1:38 am |

      Fair enough. Thanks for the vote.

  • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 11:46 am |

    If I was a MLBer, there is not enough money in the world to pay me for the aggravation of swinging a pink bat. They didn’t use to do this kind of crap before. Enough with this special interest group preferential treatment – your charity is no more special or better than all the other ones.

    • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 11:56 am |

      “the aggravation of swinging a pink bat”

      ~~~

      what aggravation?

      though i do tend to agree with your sentiments that, while horrible, breast cancer is just one of many diseases out there, and while breast cancer detection and prevention is very important, i hope other cancers (and diseases) aren’t relegated or diminished in the fight to save the breasteses

      but as far as swinging a pink bat? how is that any more aggravating than swinging a natural one (or a black painted one)?

      • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 12:24 pm |

        Would you swing a pink golf club? Or curl with a pink rock? Or wear pink shoes or drive a pink car? I’m not here to put down the cause, I’m putting down the smug self-importance & superiority complex the people behind that particular charity. The only reason why we’re even seeing pink bats & ribbons on MLB players is because of their bullying lobbyists made the loudest noise & Fuhrer Selig bought into it.

        Thing is (with tongue firmly planted in cheek) I’ve had the same thought for any Kansas City Royal, Baltimore Oriole, Pittsburgh Pirate whom thought “There is no way they’re paying me enough money for this kind of aggravation….” If only a salary cap & floor with real revenue sharing…

        • The Jeff | May 13, 2012 at 12:37 pm |

          Swinging a pink bat because the league wants me to for breast cancer and everyone else is doing it? No.

          Swinging a pink bat just for the hell of it on a random day in July? Yes.

        • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 12:46 pm |

          “Would you swing a pink golf club? Or curl with a pink rock? Or wear pink shoes or drive a pink car?”

          ~~~

          golf club? sure

          curling stone? um…i’ve never seen them in anything but red, gold (yellow) or blue…but i suppose if there were ever such a beast, sure — probably look more hot pink than pastel though

          pink shoes? what makes you think i haven’t?

          pink car? meh…only if it were a ’59 caddy with the mother of all fins

          ~~~

          not arguing with you about the “cause” — there are lots of causes, and why is this one any more important than all the others

          but as far as swinging a pink bat (golf club, curling stone, shoes, driving car) … got no problem with that at all

        • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 1:08 pm |

          “Swinging a pink bat just for the hell of it on a random day in July? Yes.”

          And that is why Cole Hamels beaned Bryce Harper. MLB is not about individualism or “look at me” egocentric type players. If you want to be noticed on the field, you better earn it.

        • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 1:18 pm |

          “but as far as swinging a pink bat (golf club, curling stone, shoes, driving car) … got no problem with that at all”

          Well aesthetic-wise, like olive green or teal, pink is an ugly-ass color. I wouldn’t wear a pink shirt or shoes, or ride a pink bike or swing a pink bat. Even plenty of women think pink is ugly. Pink itself has a ditzy persona to it. Even painted black baseball bats still look strange to me.

        • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 1:41 pm |

          “pink is an ugly-ass color”

          ~~~

          for me, that depends upon the shade…i don’t mind the “hot” pink (with much more red than white), but that’s gotta be in limited quantity…i don’t think pink, per se, is ugly ass, any more than i find certain shades of any color ugly…

          purple is a classic example (sorry paul) — not a fan of the deep, dark purple seen here, but i don’t much mind this redder shade seen here — and i don’t particularly like a pastel lilacish color, but this redder/solid lilacish shade is great

        • concealed78 | May 13, 2012 at 5:06 pm |

          From memory, I’d call that LSU shade “violet” since it has a blue tint. The Vikings I would call purple or “grape”; lack of a better term. That pastel is “periwinkle” and I would almost call that balloon shot “magenta”.

          I’m sure Ricko has a better set of terminology, tho.

        • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 7:43 pm |

          i think that LSU shade would be called forum blue

        • Tony C | May 13, 2012 at 10:04 pm |

          you don’t think many of the players that opt to do wear the pink armbands, bats, cleat etc etc have had people that have been afflicted with breast cancer or just see this as a good cause? Breast Cancer is one the most common forms of cancer, so the odds are you know someone close to you that has been touched by this disease. I am really baffled with how people can see this is a bad thing. it promotes awareness for women and men(we need to worry about this too) and raises money for a good cause. I would proudly use any sporting equipment of any shade of pink,purple or any other color that’s not traditionally used by a male if it promoted a great cause.

          @concealed plunking Harper no matter how cocky the dude is was still a dick move

        • concealed78 | May 14, 2012 at 12:11 am |

          “Breast Cancer is one the most common forms of cancer, so the odds are you know someone close to you that has been touched by this disease. I am really baffled with how people can see this is a bad thing.”

          What makes breast cancer so superior over other forms of cancer? It’s not – and the only reason why they’re doing such tacky things like pink bats, gloves & shoes in MLB games is because they have the most money & the loudest & most obnoxious lobbyists. There are other tasteful & more subtle ways to raise awareness & money. But no, they have to meddle about it into the game (which btw, manufacturing pink bats, batting gloves & shoes isn’t free, either). Since when have sports become some special interest group showcase? If they’re going to single out breast & prostate cancer, then other cancers should get the same exact recognition & awareness treatment – THAT’S the issue.

          Didn’t we spend the past few Octobers bitching this same crap going on in the NFL?

    • Patrick_in_MI | May 13, 2012 at 10:29 pm |

      Wow, I hope you die of a really special form of cancer.

      • concealed78 | May 14, 2012 at 12:02 am |

        We’re ALL going to die of something. I’m *so* glad me thinking that pink bats are stupid made you wish that I would die of cancer. Asshole.

    • Attila Szendrodi | May 14, 2012 at 11:53 am |
  • pushbutton | May 13, 2012 at 12:01 pm |

    Check the photo of Rudy May from 1972 above. Specifically his waistband. In the great sansabelt revolution of 1972, the Angels, along with the Cardinals in the NL, chose a narrower waistband than most teams — and this was not correctly replicated by the Angels yesterday.

  • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 1:03 pm |

    marlins orange caps held hostage day ____ (fill in the blank, movi)

    back with the orange tops again, but still…black caps

  • M.Princip | May 13, 2012 at 1:21 pm |

    Nice job Brent Becker! Diggin’ the “Fightin’ Squirrels” the most, although they’re all are pretty damn good.

    • BWBecker | May 14, 2012 at 9:32 am |

      Thank you so much!

  • Y. Dargomot | May 13, 2012 at 1:51 pm |

    Ah shit, what the hell, all these Cleveland uniform samples suck! It’s 2012 did chrissakes!

  • DJ | May 13, 2012 at 2:24 pm |

    Gordon Beckham going with knee-length pants today, revealing that his red socks do not have the white sock logo as they did in 1972. He should’ve consulted with Will Ohman, who has theore accurate socks.

    • Tim E. O'B | May 13, 2012 at 5:05 pm |

      Ohman was wearing the proper *STIRRUPS*. I don’t know of any players who just wore socks back in the 70s, but it seemed much less common than today.

      • DJ | May 13, 2012 at 7:28 pm |

        Yes, I knew he wears stirrups. Pedantism ill suits you.

        • Tim E. O'B | May 13, 2012 at 9:18 pm |

          It’s not pedantism.

          I meant that the 70s stirrups had the logo, therefore modern red sock (probably not worn by anyone back in the day because the uniforms socks back then were white combined with the popularity of stirrups at the time…) don’t have the logo because the ’72 Sox didn’t have red socks, they had red stirrups.

          It’s like saying that Stillers got their ’33 helmets wrong. While sorta true, helmets then and helmets now are so different, why bother?

          Sorry if that came off pedantic, but I was just trying to make the point that the stirrups are accurate and the socks are a modern twist on the uniform.

        • concealed78 | May 14, 2012 at 12:39 am |

          “I agree as well – shallow & pedantic.”

  • Arr Scott | May 13, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

    Great job, Nate! I feel personally validated, because after going back and forth, I settled on voting for your Spiders concept, and stuff I vote for NEVER wins.

    And hello, design studios of the world, hire this guy. This concept has a couple of miscues on execution, but that’s a matter of pure craft and thus easily corrected. The conceptual work – the true design – is just pitch-perfect. The attentiveness to known and anticipated client need on display here is extraordinary. As a sometime design client, Nate is exactly the guy I want on the team delivering work to me.

    I have a bit of a spider phobia myself, but one of the things a good design does is allow fans to overcome any negative associations with the terms of a team’s identity. If I lived in Cleveland, I could get 100% behind the Spiders as Nate has designed them, personal willies and all.

    • Ricko | May 13, 2012 at 3:55 pm |

      “attentiveness to known and anticipated client need”

      There ya go.
      Commercial design is not (despite what designers might fantasize) about saying, “Throw it all out and do everything new my way…which naturally will be better, of course.”

      Well, unless you work at Nike or UA or…

      • Nate Schimelpfenig | May 14, 2012 at 2:26 am |

        Thanks for your words.

  • Mike Engle | May 13, 2012 at 3:26 pm |

    Can anybody get pictures or screen shots of Marlins catcher John Buck’s mask? Pretty intricate paint job–never seen anything like it in the bigs before!

  • Michael Emody | May 13, 2012 at 4:12 pm |

    The White Sox have outfitted the team in red jackets to match the Sunday alt’s. Previously, the Sox wore the black jackets over the red. I can’t tell if they’ve done anything to fix the cap logo, though.

  • nobody | May 13, 2012 at 4:15 pm |

    The Diamondbacks are wearing their Saturday black alts today.
    No pics yet.

    • Jim Vilk | May 13, 2012 at 10:13 pm |

      Bleah.
      http://cache.daylife...
      I miss the purple and copper. Yeah, I said it.

      • scott | May 13, 2012 at 10:52 pm |

        And Giants in their gray alts.

      • nobody | May 14, 2012 at 12:40 am |

        I agree on the purple and copper (and teal). I refused to buy/wear any red Diamondbacks gear for the longest time, but I outgrew all of my purple stuff.

  • Dustin | May 13, 2012 at 4:38 pm |

    With all of the soccer dominating my tv this morning, I couldn’t help but wonder:

    With teams in two different cities, playing at the same time, having a chance to win the English Premier League title today, did the Premier League make two trophies for this year? If Manchester United had won, would they have had a trophy-less celebration?

    • LI Matt | May 13, 2012 at 7:55 pm |

      They may have gone with the two trophies. I know they had two of those midfield platform things ready.

      When Scotland has faced this situation in the recent past, they had the trophy in a helicopter, so they could get it to the right place ASAP.

      • Tim E. O'B | May 13, 2012 at 9:23 pm |

        Thanks to Real Madrid, we now know they have replicas of these trophies.

  • Coleman | May 13, 2012 at 7:49 pm |

    Brent, just wanted to give you some props for all those designs. I really like the “Brave” concept most. Keep up the nice work!

    • BWBecker | May 14, 2012 at 9:36 am |

      Thanks – anything beats that block-letter-and-script-font “non-mascot” we currently have…

  • LI Matt | May 13, 2012 at 7:55 pm |

    Like a leper messiah…

    • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 8:02 pm |

      FINALLY!

      • StLMarty | May 13, 2012 at 8:42 pm |

        Interesting that you used the phrase partying like it’s 1972. That’s when Ziggy Stardust was released.

      • StLMarty | May 13, 2012 at 11:43 pm |

        Oh, and I didn’t know you were a Bauhaus fan, Phil.

  • John | May 13, 2012 at 10:01 pm |

    Does anyone know where I can find the exact font that the Texas Rangers use? It would be helpful if it was a website that I could print the letters from

    • Phil Hecken | May 13, 2012 at 10:34 pm |

      here

      not sure of the exact name, but i believe it’s called “thunderbird SB”

      if it’s not thunderbird, it’s close

  • Pete Puma | May 13, 2012 at 11:05 pm |

    Another Bradley alum here (Class of ’96), and I also remember the big student support for the “Squirrels” nickname. ISTR it came up for a student council vote, which was controversial because the deck was stacked with members predisposed to keeping the Braves name. Love Brent’s concepts and really wish we had something with more pizzazz than the current BU logo.

    • BWBecker | May 14, 2012 at 9:41 am |

      I started in ’97 – there were still many reverberating grumbles and factions in place through my years there… So, Pete… How do think we can get these concepts in front of the right people?

  • Bromotrifluoromethane | May 14, 2012 at 12:24 am |

    Love that Fightin’ Squirrels one!

  • J. Mussa | May 14, 2012 at 12:36 am |

    What’s this with the “Continue Reading” click?

    • hello_diddy | May 14, 2012 at 12:48 am |

      It’s so you’ll click on more things, and Paul can make more money for Big Lead Sports. Be nice.

  • hello_diddy | May 14, 2012 at 12:46 am |

    Kings v Coyotes, Game 1 of the NHL semis, they do a “white out,” which was amusing like once back in the Aughts when the Heat did it that one time or something, because it reminded everyone of old people from Florida, so now every team must do it. Only problem is, they’re in Phoenix. And the Kings are wearing white. The Kings are so massively intimidated by looking up and seeing their sweater color everywhere, they win the game 4-2.

    Did anyone think this through? (Considering the NHL owns the Coyotes right now, I’m gonna guess no, but didn’t this sort of thing just also happen with the Mavs vs. Thunder?)

    • learn your NHL history | May 14, 2012 at 6:29 am |

      The WHITE OUT is part of the Phoenix Coyotes history…when they were in Winnipeg is where it started…and since this is the furthest the team has made it in its NHL history, it’s nice to see a nod to it’s past…

  • Nate Schimelpfenig | May 14, 2012 at 10:50 am |

    For those of you (if any exist) who somehow aren’t sick of seeing my Cleveland Uniforms and want a better look at those those 21 unis that were mentioned I’ve posted them here: http://25.media.tumb... Some are laughable and embarrassing but some you might like more than what I chose to go with. Many sincere thanks to my fellow entrants, voters and commenters these past few weeks, this has been a great experience for me.