Ball & Glove Coming Back Full Time?

[MNBrew]

I prefer the ball & glove logo cap in navy vs. royal, but if they're going to use it, I'd rather yellow stay totally in the past: go navy & gold. I'd prefer gold over yellow 1,000 times out of 1,000 (that, along with navy replacing royal, was by far the best aspect of the '93-'94 offseason uniform switch away from the ball & glove logo!!!). The ball & glove in navy & gold is what I wished they would've done a decade or whatever ago when they brought back the ball & glove for Retro Sundays which after a couple years became Retro Fridays -- that is, if they were going to bring the ball & glove back, I was hoping they would've done so in the current colors. The Retro (at the time) Sunday uniform was and still is pretty blah, and for all of us who hoped for something innovative & cool when they were unveiled, it was highly anticlimactic. Anyway, this new alternate is something of an improvement over the pinstripe retros, but not the complete improvement it could've been.

 

All that said, I still think the current primary M/barley logo ought to remain the primary. It's classy, modern, a nicely updated version of an early '70s M-over-Wisconsin logo (which was about as exciting as, well, nothing), and it has all the needed depth & character to remain both cool & timeless. The ball & glove arguably is the most clever logo of all times -- I totally agree! But nowadays I still prefer it in its secondary role -- highly loved but still secondary.

 

This notion of sentimentality for the old block M, I just don't get that at all. I'm guessing it's because it's the only one that hasn't been overplayed and roots from the one Brewers era that probably pre-dates most posters on this board. (The "Motre Bame" one and its simplified successor are too recent and too well-remembered (and probably too disliked, in hindsight) to be included in the discussion.) As a kid, collecting baseball cards, while I loved collecting an extra Brewers team set every year, I saw more than enough of those plain block M caps that I never want to see the Brewers ever bring it back again. It was terribly plain then & it's even more boring now -- about as exciting as choosing between Pica & Elite font on my dad's mid-1970s IBM electric typewriter, old Colgate vs. old Crest when there was only one flavor in existence for each, burnt orange or puke olive green shag carpet. Some things went away for good reason and should remain gone. I think the block M is one of them.

[BradWI]

Probably the main reason to change logos is to sell more merch. Making the BiG logo the primary wouldn't really help with that because people can buy as much of that merch as they want right now. The Brewers basically have 2 full lines of merch with the 2 logos as things are now.

 

Those of us who don't like the BiG have another option which lets them sell more merch. Can't see them going back to only one logo. They'd be more likely to create something totally new.

[The stache]

I think that old logos should remain a part of things without going back in time completely.

Thing is, the Brewers never should have changed from the ball and glove logo in the first place, thus it shouldn't even be an old logo.

 

They had arguably the best logo in all of sports, a contender for the GOAT and for some asinine reason, they got rid of it (hey, if we create a garbage logo, then we'll sell even MORE of the ball and glove merchandise!). Everyone knows the old logo is the best - they should just suck it up and make the full switch.

 

I agree with this completely. The Tom Meindel-based logo is one of the greatest I've seen in professional sports, and that opinion is not born from my love of the Brewers, but rather somebody who studied advertising art. We should have never gone away from it. That logo, and the old pinstripe home uni, were things of beauty together.

 

"Two of us are going to Cooperstown, and we're going to look good doing it! Sorry, Gumby."

 

Perfection achieved. Why mess with a good thing?

[502 to Right]

I wonder if the people who love the ball in glove logo are largely of a certain age? Say, people who came of age watching the Brewers in the late 70's and into the 80's. As someone who was born in 1970 I'm definitely one of them.

 

While I want a full return of the ball in glove logo, the colors are negotiable for me. I'd be OK with the color blue they currently and more of a true gold rather than the original yellow.

[FVBrewerFan]

Use whatever cap you want, as long as Garza isn't wearing one.

[Invader3K]

This notion of sentimentality for the old block M, I just don't get that at all. I'm guessing it's because it's the only one that hasn't been overplayed and roots from the one Brewers era that probably pre-dates most posters on this board. (The "Motre Bame" one and its simplified successor are too recent and too well-remembered (and probably too disliked, in hindsight) to be included in the discussion.) As a kid, collecting baseball cards, while I loved collecting an extra Brewers team set every year, I saw more than enough of those plain block M caps that I never want to see the Brewers ever bring it back again. It was terribly plain then & it's even more boring now -- about as exciting as choosing between Pica & Elite font on my dad's mid-1970s IBM electric typewriter, old Colgate vs. old Crest when there was only one flavor in existence for each, burnt orange or puke olive green shag carpet. Some things went away for good reason and should remain gone. I think the block M is one of them.

 

I agree. Maybe it's because I was born in 1980, but I've never gotten the nostalgia some have for the old block M. It's not like there were many good Brewers teams during that era, and it's about as plain and boring a logo as you can get.

 

I hope the Brewers keep the current barley M and use the ball & glove occasionally. The current color scheme is great. It's very classy and looks good. Everything else can stay retired, as far as I'm concerned.

[brewmann04]

I am 51 love the Ball and glove logo like others I would not mind uniform tweaks.

[DocLuna7]

I was born in the early 80's so I get the love for the ball and glove logo (and I do love it too). That being said, there is a part of me that really likes the idea that the team's history is pretty clearly divisible into these different eras that all of our uniforms represent. Since I think that last season's trade deadline activity definitively marked the end of the last wave of Brewers baseball a new uniform that brings us into a new era might be a cool thing.

[StearnsFTW]

I was born in 1971 and I'm not a fan. Giving it more though, I really do think it's the colors more than the logo, particularly that bright blue.

 

I don't know. I never was a fan and I still dislike it quite a bit. Squarely in the minority obviously.

[Point Beer Is Best]

 

3. The usage of the All Star Game royal ball and glove instead of the M with barley or the alternate navy ball and glove signifies to me this is a soft opening of the return of the ball and glove full time.

 

I think the people advocating for the full time return of this logo are also more inclined to read way too much into things like this, because it's what they want to see.

 

Instead of making an assertion about others reading too much into things, perhaps you should question why the Brewers are the only team in MLB to not use their current primary logo on any of the hats.

 

I did, and then came to the conclusion that what you pointed out isn't conclusive of anything. The Cleveland Indians, despite their own efforts to somewhat distance themselves from this logo, have Chief Wahoo as an arm patch on the MLB Stars and Stripes jersey as one example. I'm not going to jump to the conclusion that this signifies a "soft opening" to returning to that logo. I really don't care either way, I like both logos and the Brewers have freedom to use either one in merchandising and special hats/jerseys ordered by the MLB. I just find it a little funny how conspiracy theories like this start because of something that likely means nothing.

 

From a marketing standpoint, why would they ever go back full time to the ball & glove logo (or ever limit themselves to just one)? They use both logos prominently, and both are available for purchase on every incarnation of apparel in existence. They are getting the best of both worlds by appealing to supporters of both logos. That would be an incredibly poor business decision to extinguish one logo in favor of another. You will sell much less merchandise by eliminating one of these logos.

[BuckyBrewer61]

I don't understand the people that think we have to "move on" from the ball-and-glove or that going back to it would be "living in the past." I was born after the '82 World Series, grew up with the god awful green and blue stick-letter logo, and my "good old days" are those of the 2008 and 2011 Brewers and the most generic logo and uniform set in baseball. I still wish they would go back to the old uniforms.

 

We should go back to the old logo and uniform set because it's a freaking great logo and uniform set. Period. The Astros and Blue Jays figured it out, and they were widely and rightfully applauded for it - here's hoping we do too. The only reason not to is money, which is why I feel like we're unlikely to essentially go back to the way things were. Maybe they can come up with a decent modernization, but I would hope not much would change.

 

Also, for the record, while I love the logo I think the navy blue and yellow looks terrible. Maybe it's because they look like all the cheap knockoff uniforms in the past 15 years I've seen people in the stands wearing that they bought off eBay from China for $4. Bring back the royal blue, yellow and pinstripes and do it right. I'd also vote to bring back powder blue - while it was an 80's trend, it actually worked and looked great for the Brewers unlike teams like the Phillies, Cardinals, and Twins.

[BuckyBrewer61]

From a marketing standpoint, why would they ever go back full time to the ball & glove logo (or ever limit themselves to just one)? They use both logos prominently, and both are available for purchase on every incarnation of apparel in existence. They are getting the best of both worlds by appealing to supporters of both logos. That would be an incredibly poor business decision to extinguish one logo in favor of another. You will sell much less merchandise by eliminating one of these logos.

 

I don't disagree at all and this is why I think both logos will coexist for some time. But I do wonder why, if this is so obvious then why did the Blue Jays and Astros go back to one, old primary logo (with very minor tweaks)? And maybe I'm not paying close enough attention, but why do teams that don't have a classic untouchable type logo - like the Rays, Marlins, Nationals, or Rockies - have multiple hats this season to sell more? Not counting the Spring training or novelty ones that every team, even the classic teams, have.

 

Are we missing something, or are these teams somehow missing something that we and the Brewers marketing department have figured out? Again, not disagreeing, but other teams are doing it, why can't we?

[MrTPlush]

I think most of us can at least agree that the current font they use HAS to go. It just has to. It isn't horrible by any means, but I feel it is so easy to make something better. Personally I like the glove logo as an alternate and would want to keep it that way.

 

I know most are really welcoming of the glove logo on the navy uniform, but I am just not feeling it. It just does not look right to me. I also do not like the yellow either and prefer the gold. In all honesty I really don't like the navy jerseys in general though.

[Warning Track Power]

Honestly, I think the Brewers lack brand identity and that is problematic. Who are the Brewers? The M with Barley, the ball and glove, something else...? Even we as fans cannot seem to agree on what the Brewers are.

 

Some think that the ball and glove crowd like myself are living in the past, which couldn't be further from the truth for me. I was born the year the Brewers went to the World Series and have vague recollections of the "glory years" of the late 70s to mid to late 80s. My first real solid memories are of the Motre Bame Jaha-Vina-Valentin-Cirillo Brewers and I am loathe to even think the Brewers are bringing those uniforms back for a game this season. I think about teams with classic logos/uniforms and how I long for the Brewers to be one. Fans of all Wisconsin teams are fortunate that we have one of those teams in the Packers. Think of the uproar if the Packers were to change the yellow to gold or the forest green to a lighter green. Similarly, the simplicity of the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox uniforms are so wonderful and their look is so timeless that any modification to the logo and/or uniform is met with severe resistance.

 

This brings me back to the Brewers and their lack of brand identity. I think the majority of fans who want the ball and glove aren't thinking of years gone by and the "glory years." Rather, they recognize the logo for what it is...a classic in the vein of the Packers, Yankees, Dodgers & Red Sox. This is why we long for a permanent return to this logo. Uniforms are debatable and the design of which is something that certainly can be modernized like the Astros and Blue Jays have done so wonderfully.

 

It's not about the uniform, it's about the logo and the brand identity associated with it.

[Jimbo]

Think of the uproar if the Packers were to change the yellow to gold or the forest green to a lighter green.

 

It happened. When Ron Wolf first came to Green Bay, one of the first things he tried to do was change the color schematic to Notre Dame colors. That didn't go over well.

[patrickgpe]

Think of the uproar if the Packers were to change the yellow to gold or the forest green to a lighter green.

 

It happened. When Ron Wolf first came to Green Bay, one of the first things he tried to do was change the color schematic to Notre Dame colors. That didn't go over well.

 

personally i think it would have been an improvement, but i admit you don't mess with history

[pacopete4]

Think of the uproar if the Packers were to change the yellow to gold or the forest green to a lighter green.

 

It happened. When Ron Wolf first came to Green Bay, one of the first things he tried to do was change the color schematic to Notre Dame colors. That didn't go over well.

 

personally i think it would have been an improvement, but i admit you don't mess with history

 

 

This would be an improvement not only jersey wise but just wearing the gear. Green is my favorite color but the Packers colors don't look good on many.

[1992casey]

Can't the Brewers just leave their uniforms alone for awhile? Why do they have to tinker with them every single year?

We think of four "main" uniforms in the Brewers' history, generally from 1970–77, 1978–93, 1994–99, and 2000–present. But year to year tweaks are common for all teams.

 

Stripes on the sleeves change, logo placement changes, commemorative logos are added for a season, etc. In the early era, the team went to double-knits. In the middle of the Ball & Glove era, the team ditched the double-knits and changed the road uniforms from blue to gray. The Brewers recognized that the 1994 uniforms weren't very popular and made significant changes early on. Caps have changed frequently throughout the team's history. Except for alternates, the current era of Brewers uniforms has been as stable as any. There've been few changes to the home whites and road grays.

 

Think of the uproar if the Packers were to change the yellow to gold or the forest green to a lighter green.

It happened. When Ron Wolf first came to Green Bay, one of the first things he tried to do was change the color schematic to Notre Dame colors. That didn't go over well.

Yeah, the dark green and "real" gold didn't go over. But it did show up on merchandise like sweatshirts.

 

Still, the Packer uniforms have had a significant number of tweaks since the team settled into green and gold mustard yellow and introduced the "G" logo around 1960. Uniform numbers have been on the sleeves and shoulders. Stripes on the sleeves and shoulders have changed. At times, the "G" logo has appeared in the jerseys. The one constant has been the "G" logo; that hasn't changed.

[patrickgpe]

Probably the main reason to change logos is to sell more merch. Making the BiG logo the primary wouldn't really help with that because people can buy as much of that merch as they want right now. The Brewers basically have 2 full lines of merch with the 2 logos as things are now.

 

Those of us who don't like the BiG have another option which lets them sell more merch. Can't see them going back to only one logo. They'd be more likely to create something totally new.

This argument doesn't make much sense. People buy the "barley M" uniform because they want to own what the brewers wear on the field. These people would switch to the new logo and probably replace all of their old merchandise over time. I don't think if the brewers went "retro" full time their uniforms would look just like they did in 1992, so it would still be the best of both worlds.

 

The brewers know that the average fan has only so much they can spend on merchandise, so even though the brewers do a great job on capping it with new and special uniforms and merchandise each season, the best way to get people to buy new stuff is a full change.

[MrTPlush]

Probably the main reason to change logos is to sell more merch. Making the BiG logo the primary wouldn't really help with that because people can buy as much of that merch as they want right now. The Brewers basically have 2 full lines of merch with the 2 logos as things are now.

 

Those of us who don't like the BiG have another option which lets them sell more merch. Can't see them going back to only one logo. They'd be more likely to create something totally new.

This argument doesn't make much sense. People buy the "barley M" uniform because they want to own what the brewers wear on the field. These people would switch to the new logo and probably replace all of their old merchandise over time. I don't think if the brewers went "retro" full time their uniforms would look just like they did in 1992, so it would still be the best of both worlds.

 

The brewers know that the average fan has only so much they can spend on merchandise, so even though the brewers do a great job on capping it with new and special uniforms and merchandise each season, the best way to get people to buy new stuff is a full change.

[StearnsFTW]

Think of the uproar if the Packers were to change the yellow to gold or the forest green to a lighter green.

 

It happened. When Ron Wolf first came to Green Bay, one of the first things he tried to do was change the color schematic to Notre Dame colors. That didn't go over well.

 

personally i think it would have been an improvement, but i admit you don't mess with history

 

Agree. Packers uniforms are really ugly, but you can't change em.

[AZBrewCrew]

Can't the Brewers just leave their uniforms alone for awhile? Why do they have to tinker with them every single year? I don't buy much Brewers apparel but if I'm going spend $60 or whatever on a jersey I want to make sure it's not going to be outdated by next season. The ball and glove logo is fine but I don't like it enough to go back to full time. Using it as an alternate logo or patch on the uniforms is good enough for me.

 

You wouldn't last long in the marketing department with that mentality. Lol

[davego]

The Brewers need to add capes to their home alternates.

[dlk9s]

My kid is wearing his royal blue and yellow 1980's ball-and-glove cap to his elementary school's 80's dance today.

[MNBrew]

We should go back to the old logo and uniform set because it's a freaking great logo and uniform set. Period. The Astros and Blue Jays figured it out, and they were widely and rightfully applauded for it - here's hoping we do too. . . .

 

Also, for the record, while I love the logo I think the navy blue and yellow looks terrible. Maybe it's because they look like all the cheap knockoff uniforms in the past 15 years I've seen people in the stands wearing that they bought off eBay from China for $4. Bring back the royal blue, yellow and pinstripes and do it right. I'd also vote to bring back powder blue - while it was an 80's trend, it actually worked and looked great for the Brewers unlike teams like the Phillies, Cardinals, and Twins.

The current Astros cap is fine but the uniform itself is plain, ugly, & boring. It gets some props because it's retro, but retro & good aren't synonymous. It's basically what they had from the mid-'60s to mid-'70s -- the team wasn't good, the uniform wasn't good -- nothing about that era of Astros baseball was much good . . . just like the first 8 years of Brewers teams & uniforms!

 

The Blue Jays' return to a subtly modernized version of their original got it right in a big way because it's sharp & classy in a way that's far more timeless than the curvy/swooshy '70s fonts/etc. They kept trying other things from '97 to '11 but none of the ideas were good (IMO they got worse the longer they went), and they kept changing every couple years -- overplaying the Canadian maple leaf in the logo comes to mind, as especially do the uniforms that were heavy on black & gray (because those colors are part of a blue jay -- well, yeah, but yuck!).

 

BuckyBrewer61, of course it's fine that you dig the powder blues -- we all have a right to our opinions. Here's mine: As one who lived through the era when so many teams had powder blue uniforms (it wasn't an '80s trend but a '70s trend that gradually -- thankfully!!! -- went away in the mid/late '80s), it was SO nice to see teams finally get rid of them & go back to gray. The Royals still pull off the powder blue alternate jerseys okay (current version with navy outlining white lettering, as opposed to the previous version of navy "Royals" lettering with white outlining juxtaposed with white numerals outlined in royal). The Rays don't. The Twins never did. Nor did the Braves, Cardinals, Phillies, Blue Jays, Brewers, Rangers, Mariners, Cubs, or Expos.

 

I don't care to see the pinstripes come back any more than they have. (I also don't get why they've taken the navy/gold stripe off the side of the pant legs this year. There goes an easy touch of character!) I liked the button-down version of the Brewers' pinstripe uniforms in the early '90s (not nearly as well as I like the current uniforms, but...) far better than the original version of those ('78-'89) -- that logo actually had a little character -- but I'd still prefer no more pinstripes at all.

 

I think the current script "Brewers" is just fine and should be left alone -- as with all of the current primary uniform's features. For those who clamored to have "Milwaukee" brought back onto road uniforms, it ends up being more skinny lettering, and thus shorter (height) and longer (width), which lacks character IMO.

 

I don't mind the BiG logo on the sleeve, but I'd still prefer that they'd do it in gold rather than yellow.