A story in today’s New York Times reveals the uniform patches that the Mets and Yankees will wear for the inaugural season at their new stadiums.
Regardless of your feelings about the teams themselves, the Yankees patch is quite classy, a mix of old and new as one would expect from an organization that prides itself on tradition.
The Mets’ design, on the other, looks like crap.
Seriously, it looks like something I would have done in high school. “I started to write ‘Inaugural Season’ straight across, but ran out of room and was too lazy to redo it, so I put it at an angle.”
I got a “C” in art, by the way.
Let us annotate the Times‘ article, written by Tyler Kepner.
In comparing the 2009 logo to the original, which was created in 1961, “The Mets’ most recent design has not been as warmly embraced.”
This is a surprise? Unless it needs a special light to reveal the name “Mets,” this logo could be for absolutely anything.
“The Mets’ patch seems to take minimalism to the extreme,” Kepner writes. “Baseball forbids teams putting corporate names on uniforms, but Citigroup wanted the patch to evoke the company’s general branding. The Mets did not object. Citigroup itself is in financial distress and is planning to dismantle part of its corporate empire. But the patch remains the patch, for better or worse.”
Worse, imho.
Kepner quotes Dave Howard, the Mets’ executive vice president for business operations: “[Citibank has] more of a minimalist style to their brand and their logo. Obviously, as our partner for Citi Field, we’re going to give substantial deference to their design and graphic treatment.”
I can just see the Mets brass rolling their eyes when the art director showed them their grand design, which must have taken hundreds of man-hours and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce. (And I mean that almost literally: they pluck out their eyes in disbelief and roll them across the table in protest.) At that point, I would have called Sterling Cooper to get some of the boys to brainstorm; Don Draper would have straightened those Citigroup knuckleheads.
And I’m sorry, but I must have missed the announcement that Citigroup actually bought the team. They’re paying $400 million over 20 years for the naming rights, which doesn’t seem like a whole lot (relatively speaking). Was Fred Wilpon that desperate for cash that he had to sell the Mets’ soul like this? This is New York, for cryin’ out loud, not Kansas City.
“The official Citi Field logo has been widely panned as drab and too evocative of the Domino’s Pizza logo,” Kepner observes.
Why not kill two birds with one stone? Have a “day” at the ballpark and hand out cards with the new logo on one side and a coupon for a personal pan pizza on the other.
” Howard said the Mets were flattered that Citigroup designed a logo that incorporated the team’s blue and orange colors.” Thank heaven for small mercies.
“The Mets do have an alternate inaugural season logo that features the windows of the distinctive rotunda at Citi Field. But Howard said that logo would be available only on merchandise sold at the ballpark. [emphasis added].”
On the other hand, with the old logo retired, the Mets can charge more for it, based on the nostalgia factor.
See this Uniwatch entry for another take on the situation.
is available on Amazon.com,
Comments on this entry are closed.