Skip to content
 

Ranking the 2024 MLB ‘City Connect’ Uniforms

Posted in:

Good Tuesday morning, Uni Watchers. I hope everyone had a pleasant Monday.

It’s that time again: time to rank the nine new City Connect (hereafter known as “CC”) uniforms unveiled for the 2024 season. As I did in 2021, in 2022, and again in 2023, I’m back today to bring you my rankings for the 2024 MLB CCs.

The rollout of this program, when originally conceived, was to give every MLB team a CC uniform by 2023. For whatever reason, the program was delayed, with seven uniforms debuting in 2021, another seven in 2022, and just six in 2023. It was expected MLB would release CCs for the remaining 10 teams this time around, but the Yankees said “Nah. We’re good.” and the soon-to-be-vagabond A’s couldn’t legitimately lay claim to a CC for Oakland (since this is their last season playing there), thus reducing the number of teams to eight. But the Los Angeles Dodgers, who were one of the first seven teams to get a CC in 2021, were the only team to get a second generation CC; so the total number of new CC uniforms for 2024 is nine.

As in previous years, I’ve ranked them from first to worst, and tried as much as possible to divorce the uniforms from the team and Nike’s “storytelling,” and to judge them on how they look as uniforms alone. Obviously, some of the storytelling is key to certain uniform features, which explains why they were incorporated into the designs, but my rankings are almost entirely predicated on how the unis look on the field.

There’s a lot to get to, so let’s get started. Here are my 2024 CC rankings from first to worst. Please feel free to disagree with my opinions down in the comments below. If you click on the team name above the photo, you’ll see the UW review for each uniform.

__________
#1: Cleveland Guardians

The best CC of 2024 is also one of the best of the entire series. There’s a lot to like about this uniform, and I’m especially fond of the harkback feel. The navy jersey with the cream pants and tri-color caps and helmets work well together, even if the jersey racing stripes sometimes misalign with the pant stripes. The only thing that keeps this from being the best CC is a problem that plagues most CCs — the GIANT airport code for a wordmark. Had they used the same font and spelled out “CLEVELAND,” this would have challenged the White Sox for the best CC of them all.

__________
#2: St. Louis Cardinals

St. Louis kinda/sorta put their foot down with Nike when it came to their CC — they insisted on sticking to their classic red and white color scheme, and pretty much kept the storytelling to a minimum. In fact, from a distance, the CC looks a lot like their spring training uniforms from a couple years back. But there are a few big differences, including the new white pants with red stripe, as well as a new patch on the jersey. But in order to move merch, they created a new cap (which isn’t terrible) and, most depressingly, went with “The Lou” for a wordmark with their classic birds-on-bat logo. It’s not a fatal flaw, but it’s also unbecoming. Pretty much anything would have been better, and it went from a classic jersey to a fashion jersey worn on the field in one fell swoop.

__________
#3: New York Mets

Even though I’m a Mets fan, I’m not a fan of their CCs — so the fact that they’re ranked #3 on this list should tell you something about the quality of this year’s crop of CC uniforms. Following the trend of using city abbreviations, airport codes or nicknames, the Mets have a giant NYC wordmark; it’s not awful and it could have been worse. Some have speculated that the Mets might have used “QUEENS” instead of NYC, but changed to NYC when the Yankees declined to wear a CC. I don’t mind the “graphite” color of the jerseys and caps, nor even the small doses of purple. The Tuscan font has a pretty deep history in New York sports, but I wish the NOB and number were a bit more legible.

__________
#4: Minnesota Twins

When it was unveiled, I actually liked this CC a lot — and I still do — but upon seeing the unis on the field, my opinion of them went down slightly. The jersey design is good, numbers and NOB are very readable, and I like the touches of yellow (particularly when players wear yellow belts). But the sublimated “Ripple Effect” jersey is only visible as ripples up close; from a distance it looks more like sweat stains than ripples. This, combined with the fact that the pants are solid royal, just gives off too many different shades of blue — especially for the guys who go high cuffed. Just another example of something that looks great on a screen…but not so much IRL.

__________
#5: Detroit Tigers

There are a lot of problems with the Tigers CCs, and much of it stems from too much storytelling. But even with that, the one visible gimmick — the “tire tracks” — fails because even up close, they don’t look like tire tracks — regardless of the pattern, tire tracks are almost always depicted as two tracks each the width of a tire. That’s not happening here. Throw in the “MOTOR CITY” wordmark and “DETROIT” wordmark on the cap, and it’s just a mess. At least the uni numbers are quite readable from distance.

__________
#6: Los Angeles Dodgers

As the only MLB team to receive a second CC, the Dodgers had a chance to redeem themselves. And to a certain extent, they did. From the front and the side, the cream base and blue elements are good looking — I don’t even mind the two-tone pants stripe. The “funfetti” design isn’t visible more than three feet away. Basically, 3/4ths of the uniform views are great. So why are they ranked so low? The ridiculous truncated numbers, which are especially difficult to read. I like the NBNOB (Name Below Number On Back), but purposefully placing it so it cuts off the bottom of the uni numbers is just terrible design. I also don’t quite get adding “0” to one-digit numbers, but that’s less of a quibble than the poorly constructed jersey back.

__________
#7: Philadelphia Phillies

Paul actually did the uniform review linked above, and he called the Philly CC’s “costumes.” I’m not sure I’d go that far, but they don’t particularly look like baseball uniforms either. At least these seemed to be well thought out, even if the results weren’t particularly good. “Philly” is probably one of the better CC wordmarks, but the royal to midnight blue gradient looks like something from the 1990s or the bargain rack at T.J. Maxx. At least their numbers are readable, although that font leaves something to be desired — and the “7”s look more like question marks than anything else. And normally I want players to go high cuffed…but not in this case.

__________
#8: Toronto Blue Jays

This is yet another example of a design that I’m sure looked great when it was created on a computer screen, but utterly fails the legibility test on the field. I’ll say two nice things about this uni — I like the cap and the fact that the jersey reads “TORONTO” (rather than some silly nickname or airport code), but even up close, the wordmark is nigh-on impossible to read. If you were to turn on an MLB game in which the Blue Jays were wearing these uniforms, you’d likely not be able to tell who was playing. Even worse are the rear numbers, which are — along with the team identifier — the two most important things a uniform must convey: IDing the team and the player. I mean, c’mon man. If you can’t ID either from the first row of the seats, you’re doing design wrong.

__________
#9: Tampa Bay Rays

If you thought Toronto’s CCs were bad, Tampa Bay’s scream Hold My Beer! I don’t mind the neon accents, but the ghosted wordmark AND numbers actually put Toronto’s to shame (and not in a good way). When the most prominent visual cues on the uniform are the swoosh and the NOB, you’ve succeeded only in making a fashion jersey. I can honestly say this is the worst CC of all 28. And it’s not really even close.

_________
And there you have it. As I concluded each year, these are my rankings for the 2024 editions of the CC uniforms. I realize the uniforms, as well as the opinions surrounding them, are diverse and one of the few areas I’ve found where Uni Watchers are not in general agreement. So feel free to tell me I’m way off base with these. Every uni has its good points as well as problems, it’s just that some are more glaring than others.

How would you rank this year’s crop of CCs? Which is the best? Which is the worst? Let’s have at it!

 

 
  
 

ICYMI: University of Hawai'i & Uni Watch Uniform Design Contest

In case you missed it, the University of Hawai’i and Uni Watch are partnering on a Women’s Basketball uniform design competition.

All the details are here.

The Grand Prize winner will receive a cash prize of $1,500, roundtrip airfare for one to Honolulu, and accommodations, for the basketball game slated for January 25, where the winning design will be worn and showcased to hundreds of thousands of fans worldwide.

 

 

Pirates CC with White Pants was a special CC weekend deal

Yesterday, my lede story focused on how the Pirates altered their standard City Connect look of gold “PGH” tops over black pants; This was actually a scheduled deviation:

H/T to Jerry Wolper for the clarification

 

 

Threads of Our Game

Got an e-mail yesterday from the great Craig Brown, who runs the fantastic Threads Of Our Game website. If you’re not familiar with it, the primary focus is on pre-1900 baseball uniforms and related ephemera.

He wrote:

New evidence on the origin of the Detroit Tigers’ nickname

Hello baseball historians,

Tigers. We know it was first used in print in Detroit on April 16, 1895 -– the thing is, we’re not sure why? Inexplicably, newspapers never offered up its origin. It just appeared on the pages of the Detroit Free Press — and it has been used in association with the baseball team ever since.

Many theories have been presented over the years. Some were merely suggestions, others have been circulated and then disproven.

Incredibly, the likely answer has been hiding in the Free Press this entire time.

See new evidence on the Tigers nickname here.

Thank you for your time.

Craig

Thanks, Craig! Great work (as always) on this!

See all posts on the Threads feed here.

 

 

And finally...

… that’ll do it for the early morning lede. I’ll have at least two additional posts (and probably more as uni news breaks) today, so make sure to keep checking back in. One of those posts will be the ever-popular “Question of the Week” by Mike Chamernik. And he’s got a doozy!

Everyone have a great Tuesday, and I’ll catch you back here tomorrow!

Peace,

PH

Comments (0)

    Pretty much agree with the rankings, but those Dodgers unis drop a bit for looking sweat stained yellow.

    Did you see that the San Francisco Giants went NNOB and all wore 24 to honor Willie Mays in their first home game since his passing?

    I’d actually put Tampa #1. It’s the only one that stands out from the rest. Color scheme is unique. Not perfect, but easy fix would be all letters and numbers neon green. I was in Tampa recently and the stingray hat was very popular.
    Otherwise a dreadful year for CC.

    I agree. The Rays being one of the few teams to stick with a historical color scheme automatically ranks it above the Mets and Twins, because you KNOW its the Rays when you turn the game on. They are the only team to ever use those colors. But I put them behind Cleveland still. I think Cleveland did a good job, making them look more like a faux-back than a CC uni.

    Yeah that’s been the big problem with a numbers of these this year is that they are just functional nightmares. Simple fixes on a lot of these could have lead to a major improvement.

    To quote Groucho Marx “That’s not a scheme, it’s a conspiracy”

    I’ll show myself out

    Agreed! If they made the team name & numbers more legible then these would’ve been near perfect. The cap is by far the best out of bunch

    I think one of the best points to be taken out of these well thought out rankings is how the need to throw in so many design gimmicks, often one too many, tanked multiple decent uniforms.
    Cardinals with “the Lou”, Guardians with “CLE”, Blue Jays and Rays with unreadable wordmarks and numbers, and the Dodgers with the goofy truncated numbers.
    I think the explanation for the 0 in front of single digit players is they want the NOB to align properly with the number when truncated, so it has to be double digits.
    I also fully agree that with the Phillies, Nike did have a nickname in Philly that wouldn’t come off as forced on the uniform, but then they completely fumbled the entire rest of the design. FWIW I was at the Phillies game last Friday night and saw the red version of the CC in the crowd, didn’t get a chance to snap a photo, but it is definitely out there in the wild.

    What frustrates me about all of these is that each of them are so close to being good, but it’s like Nike/New Era didn’t know where to stop. For example, I’d like the Tampa unis way more if the numbers were legible, I’d like the Twins and Mets hats a lot more without the extra details, and I’d like the Cards unis a lot more with a different wordmark. The list goes on and on.

    I might swap one or two of these with ones ranked directly above/below, but I think this is a fair ranking overall.
    As a fan of the CC program in general, I think this year’s offerings were poor overall. There are many examples from previous years of uniforms where I wouldn’t change a single thing (think Marlins, Nationals, Royals), and yet even the top three here have glaring issues for me. “CLE” and “The Lou” are the most disappointing, as with better wordmarks each of those uniforms would be fantastic.

    Speaking of improvements, I love mixing and matching uniform elements in MLB The Show. It’s amazing how much better the Jays’ CC looks with the 2006 pants/socks:
    link

    I’d switch St. Louis and Cleveland for #1 and 2. Neither are good but their a lot better than the other 7 teams. All 7 are almost equally hideously bad. Toronto’s is the worst. Completely unreadable even close up.

    When I designed my own batch of CC uniforms, my priority was to draw on the teams’ various iconographies and make something pleasing to the eye. But now I realize I misread the program, which AFAICT was to set aside the team’s name and make a design germane to each team’s city. Using this criteria, I think Boston had the most success, with Cleveland, the White Sox, Kansas City, and Houston getting high marks. Teams bringing up the rear either misunderstood the assignment (Cincinnati, Colorado) or just made butt-ugly costumes (Toronto, Tampa Bay).

    How did the Rockies misunderstand the assignment? Because they took it as more of a “State Connect” concept rather than “City Connect?”

    Precisely. Maybe teams with a state modifier felt hamstrung into veering away from the city. You can’t get more “state” than cribbing from the license plate! Ironically, I like these uniforms; I just wish they’d leaned more into Denver.

    I agree that the majority of airport codes and crazy nicknames are just a gimmicky ploy. However, CLE for Cleveland may be an exception. I live within an hour of Cleveland and have spent a good chunk of time in the city over the years going to games and events and I can say that “CLE” or “The CLE” is a common nickname for the city by locals. It did of course stem of the airport code for Hopkins Airport, but has morphed into one of the most popular nicknames amongst locals. While I’m obviously not local to Pheonix, Portland, Charlotte or any other team that has tried this, I can say this is a good fit for Cleveland as a city connect theme.

    I see this argument with both Cleveland and Pittsburgh. But just because locals use that shorthand in conversation, doesn’t make it good for a uniform. Specifically, the way it is rendered. Three large letters across the chest just looks so gimmicky. If you are adamant about using the goofy abbreviation, render it more like a logo over the left breast, like the classical SOX for Chicago.
    Whatever the intent here, first and foremost these are products and uniforms (sadly in that order). And the CLE, PGH, WSH, etc designations as they have been rendered just don’t make for good baseball jersey design.

    I don’t feel like it’s any weirder than “PHILA” on a 76ers uniform or “PITT” on a college football helmet, though. Abbreviations have been a part of uniforms for a very long time.

    I do agree that Nikes has relied on it a little too heavily for CC, however. Again though, nothing will ever compare to the unfortunate CLT Charlotte Hornets uniforms.

    As a long time Phillies fan, these uniforms are the equivalent to Castellanos swinging at a low and away slider. It’s a big time miss.

    The hats are cool. I don’t hate the LOVE patch. The rest is just terrible. My initial reaction can be summed up with Trea Turner’s number, which looks like a question mark.

    I’m amused it takes 2 illegible uniforms to keep the Phillies out of the basement here, by the way.

    Yeah I think there should be two sets of ratings one for Functional (ie is how is it as an actual uni removed from context) and one for intent (how well does it fit the team)

    My functional list is basically the same as Phil’s, although I would drop Detroit down as it’s a rip off of a Pistons design. However my intent list is;

    1. Cleveland- Best options as it’s a great template for a new look
    2. Tampa- Love the concept and the hat, it’s just a functional mess
    3. St Louis- Cards have a solid look and besides the unfortunate nickname this fits well.
    4. Toronto- Again well within the teams design and visual cues just again a functional mess
    5. Dodgers- Non offensive just kind of there
    6. Mets- Doesn’t look like a Mets uniform and the city theme is minimal. It’s decent uniform on its own just not a Mets uni. Although the Grimace thing might change that lol. S
    7. Philly- There is precedence here as Philly has worn blue and yellow in 1938 and it is the city flag colors, but that was a one off. It just isn’t a particularly good look in general.
    8. Minnesota- This is a Brewers uni essentially.
    9. Detroit- This is a Pistons rip off. This is the worst for me because these are supposed to be creative and ripping off another team in the city that was worn just a few years ago is just the worst. This one feels like Nike was going through the motions.

    “Although the Grimace thing might change that”

    Hah! At curling last night, one of the guys was wearing a Mets CC shirsey (I know, I know). During a break — he was on a different sheet — he jokingly came over to me and said “you know what the purple (in the CC) is for, right?”

    To which, I reflexively replied, “For the 7 Line.”

    He reply: “No, it’s for Grimmace.”

    Yes, the Mets have played excellent ball since Grimmace threw out the first pitch a couple weeks ago, but seriously. This Grimmace/Luck thing needs to stop.

    Ah I dunno I feel it’s kind of humiliating to Nike that for all of their “Story” stuff they are promoting it all ends up being linked to McDonalds Mascot that has no connection to the city whatsoever. It’s sort of an “emperor has no clothes” aspect to all of their city connect rhetoric. Hopefully this will humiliate Nike enough so for next one of these they can work with Darren and co at the T7LA to get a city connect that actually feels like Mets uni. I doubt it but hope springs eternal.

    TL:DR So I’m enjoying the “Grimace Connects” concept from a schadenfreude to Nike more than anything.

    I’d love to take a crack at redesigning the entire CC lineup with this theme:

    I have to design a uniform that fits a description of the CC they already have while making it feel like it belongs to the team and making it (in my opinion, of course) a good looking uniform.

    I would call this the “team connect” uniform, and essentially I would establish a description of the uniform that accurately describes it without spelling everything single detail out, and from that, design a uniform that makes sense to me as part of that team’s wardrobe.

    1. Rays: Awesome color scheme, awesome logos, awesome city connection.
    2. Guardians: A nice nod to the guardians of traffic with a good color scheme. The racing stripes are also a nice touch. The hat is a tad boring though.
    3. Twins: I was skeptical at first of a team wearing royal blue from head to toe but it actually worked out really well. The number font is meh but the overall jersey is pretty solid. It would’ve been awesome to see a Purple Rain uniform like the wolves had a few years back instead though.
    4. Mets: The overall jersey is fine. It does have some nice touches though like the bridge on the hat which looks great. I wish the hat was a little darker though. The gray seems too light for me. I like the hints of purple they put throughout the jersey to give it some color. Imagine if they replaced this uniform next season with a Grimace themed uniform? That would be the best city connect immediately. Also, how is the NOB and number difficult to read? It’s perfectly legible.
    5. Phillies: So close, yet so far. The Phillies city connect has a lot to like but a lot holding it back. The storytelling is good, the cap is good and I think the word mark is cool, but there’s just too much navy blue. If the teams jerseys were entirely light blue and the pants were white with a yellow stripe then these would challenge Tampa for the best city connect uniform.
    6. Cardinals: The cardinals city connects aren’t bad but they get docked points for playing it safe. There’s so much you could do for a St. Louis themed uniform. I like the rover pinstripes and the fleur de lis patch but I hate the cap. It is way too generic looking. They could have at least made the letters interlock. Also, if the cardinals are going to get red jerseys they just need to make it a standard alternate not a city connect. As for “The Lou” it’s kind of dumb since it sounds like the British word for bathroom but if you look at where it came from it’s not as bad. I do appreciate the fact that they kept the birds on bat though. They needed to keep that but beyond that? Go wild.
    7. Dodgers: It’s a vast improvement over their previous city unis simply because they actually tried. In a vacuum though it’s pretty mediocre. The navy hat doesn’t look good and the mashup logo looks forced. I don’t mind the cutoff numbers that much but the NBNOB is weird. In the end, while it’s not bad it’s also not the Hollywood themed uniform that every person in their right mind wants to see from the Dodgers. I can’t fathom as to why the organization wouldn’t do that. It makes the most sense.
    8. Tigers: I like the motor city moniker and the uniform is pretty close to being really good. But the hat is waaay too boring and the overall uniform just doesn’t look very good. There’s room for improvement but this uniform isn’t it.
    9. Blue Jays: The cap is fine. The rest? A disaster. You know it’s bad when even I complain about the legibility. This just looks like a weird blue blob of lines even when it’s in a team store. And when you do get close enough to see it all you see is what looks like a knockoff jersey from an unlicensed airport vendor. Terrible.

    The Jays are illegible and you rank them last.
    The Rays are illegible and you put them at number one.
    Yeah, no fan bias here…

    Everything else you said I’m okay with, but you need to put your fandom aside when you rank things. They might be popular sellers to the local fans, but to the rest of the world they’re just as bad as the other illegible jerseys.

    I don’t believe the Rays have the exact same issue as the Blue Jays. You can make out the words on the rays jersey but the blue jays jersey is illegible as you can possibly be. It’s not even a good concept. You’d have to look under a microscope to see that the jays jersey says Toronto. I can see that the rays jersey says Tampa Bay. If the rays Jersey were as illegible as the Jays I would definitely have not ranked them much higher.

    I will say this: Toronto’s is worse by far. Almost as bad as Cincinnati’s.
    But they all should be lumped near the bottom. Tampa Bay’s is the best of the worst.

    I couldn’t agree more with Jim. How can you possibly rank the Jays and Rays so far apart? Sure, there is an argument that out of the two, the Rays’ is better, but given that they suffer from the exact same issues, it makes no sense to rank them at opposite ends of the scale, and even less to penalize the Jays but not the Rays.

    Also, why are you calling uniforms “jerseys”?
    “The overall jersey is fine. It does have some nice touches though like the bridge on the hat.” Seriously?

    Agree with the legibility issues even if the Rays are a smidge better than the Jays but overall I think the Rays CC is miles ahead of the Jays. This is coming from a Canadian/Jays fan. Better colour scheme, connection to the city, and overall aesthetics. Only thing I like is the Jays cap but even then the Rays one is better. That bridge/ray logo is awesome.

    I agree with Cleveland being the best of this bunch and also agree with the “CLE” being potentially its downfall. I’ve always been a bit irrationally fond of racing stripes. (All hail the 1987 Mets!) So that’s a huge plus in my book.

    In theory, I would rank the Dodgers #2, but the glitches in how the cream jersey displays in action (as discussed in Jim’s post) are really really bad.

    “…one of the few areas I’ve found where Uni Watchers are not in general agreement.”

    I think you’ll see more of this now under your leadership. I suspect that diversity of opinion has always existed, on many uni-related topics. But because Paul could be so harsh and heavy-handed with his opinions and people didn’t want to piss off the boss, it forced an environment of artificial agreement to an extent.

    Only time will tell if my hypothesis is correct, but I am definitely enjoying the atmosphere around here a little better now, so thanks for that.

    I find it hard to disagree with your evaluations, Phil. Frankly, this exercise provides further evidence of how this program is not about baseball, but lifestyle retail. I actively avoid watching most CC games when I can (except, you know, when my only chance to see my first Mets game falls on a day when they wear their CC uniforms).

    Phil just absolutely did the Rays dirty saying it’s the worst of the 28 CC’s and it’s not even close. Yes I get that the numbers and wordmark are hard to make out from a distance, but as a commenter mentioned already these colors have been in the (Devil) Rays DNA from their inception. When you’re watching a game on TV, there’s no question as to the Rays identity. The cap is also a huge win managing to incorporate the Skyway Bridge, a devil ray, and the letter “T”. My biggest gripe is that the “sun faded” acid washed black denim look feels a little too gimmicky and is not aesthically pleasing. The Rays CC has more pluses than minuses and I would probably rank 3 or 4 in this year’s crop and somewhere in the teens overall, but to say these are the worst of all 28 and it’s not even close is a (Skyway) bridge too far to cross.

    That commenter previously admitted to being a biased Rays fan over the weekend, and that bias is really shown here. He scorched the Blue Jays for looking like a blob, but his team also looks like a blob from a distance and yet somehow that’s okay.
    It’s not. And Phil did not do the Rays dirty. They did it to themselves.

    To me if both uniforms were perfectly legible, I would still choose the Rays over the Jays every time. More creative, better colours, better logos (bridge/ray & skateboarding ray) and more connection to the city. The skyline thing is just lazy. Jays have a good cap logo but that’s about the only thing I like.

    Actually I agree with you there. Phil *slightly* did Tampa Bay dirty by ranking them below Toronto.

    Look I like the concept too, it’s a really solid idea. The thing is as uniform it is a functional mess. You simply can’t read the numbers or text on the field. That’s the point here. It’s not a t-shirt there is a purpose. If they simply used the gradient for the numbers and text it would probably shoot back up the ranks.

    That’s why I split intent vs Functionality. Intent wise it’s an 8 or 9 out of 10. It’s a great concept and with small tweaks it would be a great template going forward. Functionally it’s a 1 or 2 since you simply can’t read anything on the field..

    I do agree the Rays should have used their rainbow gradient on the numbers and wordmark, but as I’ve already stated you automatically know it’s the Rays on TV or the ballpark just by the vibrant color scheme in colors the Rays have already incorporated, and that can’t be said for a majority of the costumes, and yes this Rays uniform is definitely a costume. They do get bonus points for having
    the NOB so bright hey can be seen from the last row of Tropicana’s upper deck (if they were to ever let fans sit in it’s upper deck). I really just take issue with the and it’s not even close remark of them being dead last when there are far more aesthetacslly and functionally worse CC jerseys. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree, and this was what makes our comUNIty great

    Cleveland is by far the best CC this year and in my opinion the best of the entire program.

    St. Louis would be next. The Lou isn’t great but for me the worst part is the cap, which looks like something you would find at a gas station beside the internet. The T should not be the size of the S and L.

    Dodgers if for no other reason than the somewhat look like the Dodgers.

    Although not readable I may put Tampa next. No doubt not a uniform that should be worn by an MLB team, the colors aren’t bad.

    Mets which are somewhat blah, would be next.

    Detroit would be the worst.

    Though they have decent caps the Twins, Blue Jays and Phillies are tied for next to last.

    Also, very disappointed for the Pirates to plan to continue wearing the black pants

    Whenever I see the Cleveland City Connect look I think they just stole the jerseys from the 2021 All Star Game and changed the orientation of the CLE. They look uninspired, but I also dislike every one of them jus like I dislike the NBA looks every year.

    I don’t get this at all. Were they supposed to go with non-team colors? The fact that they stayed inside the franchise colors is one of the selling points to me, actually. It would have been weird if they rolled out a Browns-themed CC.

    I think the issue for me is just doing another three letter city abbreviation dump. The fact that their normal color identity just happens to align with the 2021 All Star Game jerseys is coincidental, but when I see it I think “what the rest of the AL wore a few years ago if they knocked the vertically stacked abbreviation on its side”. In a time when most went the direction of gaudy, CLE brought out something that should be a batting practice look.

    I think it’s interesting that most casual uniform observers really like the Rays CC entries. My problem with them is the same as Phil’s: you can’t actually read anything on the jersey. They’re just a blur of muted neon colors, which feels like a contradiction. Like if you’re going big and bright, go BIG AND BRIGHT. Make the numbers and letters pop.

    The Guardians could(and should) remake their entire uni set around their CC. The CLE should become “Cleveland” or “Guardians” of course, and they should make a white, gray, and red version IMMEDIATELY (so 2027 in Nike time)

    Also, I’d rank the Rays so much higher if they filled in the numbers and letters. It really is a great design, but the ghosted numbers and letters hold it back big time

    Just my opinion, but…

    TIER 1 (aka “I’d buy this.”) – White Sox, Nats, Rockies, Angels, Braves, Guardians

    TIER 2 (aka “I’d buy this at 3:00 AM after 15 beers.”) – Marlins, D-Backs, Royals, Pirates, Dodgers 2

    TIER 3 (aka “Meh.”) – Red Sox, Cubs, Giants, Dodgers 1, Astros, Brewers, Padres, Rangers, M’s, Phillies, Mets, Cards, Twins

    TIER 4 (aka “Kill it with fire.”) – Reds, O’s, Rays, Tigers, Jays

    On the Cleveland TV broadcast, when discussing the unveiling of the City Connect unis to the players in the locker room, they stated Josh Naylor asked if those were the new everyday uniforms. The other players laughed and he said, “No, I’m serious!”

    I agree. Of all of the MLB CC unis, these could be worn everyday…no Cleveland fans would complain.

    Nike has clearly run out of ideas. Now it’s just messing with us.
    And what does “City Connect” even mean? Doesn’t having a uniform that says “CLEVELAND” on the front indicate a connection with that city? We already have that.
    The Toronto and Tampa Bay “CC” unis especially look as though they were designed by designers for other designers (“Look how we made everything dark and illegible! Is that edgy or what?”
    Paul is absolutely correct in his characterization of these as “costumes.” They are “uniforms” only in the sense that each player’s on-field clothing is very similar to his teammates’.
    And let’s not get started again on the visuals of sweat-soaked jerseys with miniaturized wordmarks and nameplates.
    Looks like FANatics took MLB’s money, sloughed off the work to interns and used their fee to set up an executive retreat in Fiji.

    “Looks like FANatics took MLB’s money, sloughed off the work to interns and used their fee to set up an executive retreat in Fiji.”

    That would be Nike who did that. Nike tried to fix something that wasn’t broken, did so without properly testing the final product, didn’t solicit proper feedback from the teams or players, and basically said “we know what you want”. Only they didn’t.

    You may be able to legitimately blame Fanatics for a lot of things, but not the 2024 unis. That’s entirely Nike’s fiasco.

    All these comments on baseball unis which are meant to push the envelope of what is acceptable… And nobody is asking for a throwback of those 1895 Detroit Tigers sweaters???

    (You could make up the colours… maybe they had borrowed the Leicester Tigers rugby shirts as they had already been around for 15 years by then)

    For each CC uniform, Somebody, somewhere loves it and wears it with pride.

    It really is that simple.

    For every opinion on anything ever, there exists its equally valid opposite.

    Its weird how liking anything means shitting on something else. Why do those go hand in hand?

    I think it goes with how much our country has gone to red/blue or black/white and really struggles with purples or grays. For some, just the concept of a blend of ideas is seen as a weakness and has spread beyond politics to most facets of our lives.

    Curious to see how Phil or Jim Vilk would rank all of the CC uniforms in one big rank. How do the older ones compare to the newer ones?

    It’s coming at some point this summer.

    Dealing with them in blocks per year was a lot easier than doing a 28-uni ranking will be. But my explanations will be a lot shorter. Probably only one or maybe two sentences per CC.

    Can just all agree that CC is a pointless moneygrab we can all do without after this season?

Comments are closed.