Wednesday, January 14, 2009
HERE’S A BETTER LOGO IDEA.
I have not wanted to talk about the amateurish embarrassment that is the Commemorative Inaugural Year Of Citi Field Sleeve Patch, because Paul Lukas already said everything there was to say about it, much better than I could say it.
I mean, what could I say? That I deliberately didn’t buy a Santana jersey last year because I was going to buy one for the first year of Citi Field, but now I’m starting to scramble on eBay to find a 2008 jersey because there’s no way I’ll pay money for that? That the Mets haven’t had decent creative since 2005? That their entire visual identity (aside from the core logo) has been not just a joke, but absolutely ridiculous for a Major League Baseball team?
The Mets play baseball in the advertising capital of the world. Some of the greatest visual designers in the world live here. And given the internet, the Mets could choose to work with ANY DESIGNER IN THE WORLD. Visual identity is not cheap, but it should be a no-brainer cost of doing business for a professional baseball team.
And yet, the Mets have consistently had creative that looks like it was executed by a 13 year old who’s learning Photoshop for the first time.
Today, I got an email from a Mets fan named David Dolinsky.
I designed my own ideas for the Inaugural logo since it got such bad press. I was wondering if you could post them and see if the fans like mine better. Maybe they’ll use mine instead.
Well, what do you think?
Yes, David is a professional designer and has been doing this for years. He’s not a sports designer specifically, just a long-time Mets fan. If he could come up with this, why couldn’t the Mets?
Posted by Caryn at 09:12 AM
They’re great (much better than I did)...
BUT
The Mets could never wear them on their uniforms. They would have to take all mention of “Citi Field” off.
MLB rules don’t allow “advertisements” of any kind on a team uniform, and even though it is the name of the stadium (at least for now) the team would not be able to wear it on the uni.
Maybe they should make the patch look like the Federal bailout check.
Since thats what paid for Citibank to put their name on the place.
I know us in Phillies-land were upset with Citizens Bank being the name instead of Schmidt Park.
Maybe Mets fans have a great chance to fight to have Seavers name added. (Since who knows if “Citi” will be around for the 10th anniversary of the place.)
But what do I know, I’m a “phreaking Phillies Phan” right?
PS Andrew in 2004 the Phillies had Citizen Park’s name on logo on their sleeve s for the first year. You may be mistaken the Yankees policy for MLB rules.
MLB almost had Spider man bases a few years ago. They could careless about the purity of the game unless the words “Steroids” comes up.
The rule Andrew is referring to is 1.11(h) - “No part of the uniform shall include patches or designs relating to commercial advertisements.” This rule is intended to prevent baseball unis from looking like soccer unis or NASCAR drivers—and an exemption from the rule was granted, for example, for the Red Sox to wear an “EMC” logo patch in Japan this year, or when the Mets wore an AIU Insurance patch when they played in Japan in 2000.
However, the lawyer in me would argue that simply stating the name of the ballpark does not constitute a “commercial advertisement”, especially since no company logo is being used… but I can’t find any examples where the MLB agrees with that. (The Phillies’ 2004 patch did not say “Citizens Bank”, from what I can find.)
In any event, ALL of those logos above are gorgeous. I particularly like the third one (bottom left). And if MLB won’t let them say “CITI FIELD”, it’s an easy fix - just replace that same text with “NEW YORK METS”.
Keep in mind the Cardinals played at Busch Stadium. (a brand of Beer.)
They have their name plastered on patches on their unis over the years.
The pic of the 2004 Phillies patch on this like just says inugral season. I recall the catalog early that year it had Citizens Banks name on the top of the patch above the Liberty Bell, maybe MLB forced it off.
Kinda silly the Cardinals are allowed to buck the rules.
But your better off that Citis name is no where on it! They are one of the biggest culprits in this economic disaster.
http://www.ebaseballparks.com/patches.html
PS: If the bottom right one was shaped like a infield Diamond it would be perfect.
I do kind of have to wonder why, all day, I’ve been deleting derogatory comments from fans of other teams. I gotta tell ya, I don’t have enough time in my day to go to a fan site for another team and taunt them about their *uniform logo*.
NOt to mention it also isn’t any of my business. I’m not gonna have to wear it. I can understand having an opinion but the rest of it kind of befuddles me.
Hi everyone, thanks to this site for posting my designs. Originally I hadn’t heard that the words “Citi Field” couldn’t be used, but it does make sense. I’m hoping that my designs will at least catch the attention of those in the Mets organization. Revisions to the logo can always be made. I’m a long time Met fan going back to the days of Seaver and Agee and all those who have come after. It would be an honor for me to be involved with the team in any way possible. Thanks to all that have commented on my designs. Let’s go Mets!!!
My boyfriend got us matching black Santana jerseys with the “last season at Shea” patches for Christmas. Apparently, they were on sale at Modell’s. You may want to try searching around…Good luck finding one now that the patch sucks!
First, I have to say that I’m no fan of citigroup. I am, however a fan of Paula Scher, designer of the citi brand identity/logo, which is effective on a historic scale (as is her other work).
Note that the citi logo is understated, easy, and ubiquitous. It doesn’t say “CITIGROUP CORPORATION” in inane sans-serif all-caps set in white on a dark block background. So remind me, of how exactly this patch is supposed to be “consistent with citi branding”?
Not that I ever want to see a corporate logo on a Mets uniform, but to say that you did this for this sake of branding is weak. Epic failure. Poor excuse for a poor design - I hope it never makes it to a blue and orange uniform.
i have really hit the big time if adam from “boston” is commenting on my blog.
J.Spike - Busch Stadium, like Wrigley Field, is named after a person, NOT a company. It so happens that the Busch Family also has a company named after it (as does Wrigley), but the ballpark is not named after the company. So the analogy to Busch Stadium does not work.
Also: the Phillies did indeed have a “Citizens Bank” logo (and still do)—but that logo was never used on a uniform patch. All corporate-named ballparks have logos like that, they just don’t appear on uniform patches.
David - your work is gorgeous. You should be getting paid by the front office for it. :)
MG - you were always big time.
me likey