New patches on uniform sleeves

SharoneWright · Post #1 » by **SharoneWright** » Thu Apr 2, 2009 7:15 pm

No major changes this year buy there will be 2 new patches this year:

Right sleeve - in case anybody forgets what country Toronto is in:

Left sleeve - so no one forgets Mr. Rogers:

Nice touch.

Post #2 » by **arrpy** » Thu Apr 2, 2009 8:05 pm

Looks pretty good!

J-Roc · Post #3 » by **J-Roc** » Thu Apr 2, 2009 8:46 pm

Hmmm, "Ted" doesn't seem right to me. Maybe initials are more normal.

Post #4 » by **LittleOzzy** » Thu Apr 2, 2009 9:19 pm

Did Ted even really like the Jays?

I think he just bought them because it was a cheap team to buy and the Skydome was basically free. I'm guessing all his buddies owned a team too, so he wanted to follow suit.

I have hope that Rogers wants to get out of the real sports business and sells to MLSE or something.

evilRyu · Post #5 » by **evilRyu** » Thu Apr 2, 2009 9:43 pm

I'm not a big fan of the red Canadian leaf... Just like I'm not too big of the red leaf on the back of the Raptors black alternate. I just think it's a bit much.

Post #6 » by **arrpy** » Thu Apr 2, 2009 11:09 pm

evilRyu wrote:I'm not a big fan of the red Canadian leaf... Just like I'm not too big of the red leaf on the back of the Raptors black alternate. I just think it's a bit much.

Really? I always thought the red leaf look really nice on the Raps uniforms, and I also really like it on these.

Post #7 » by **Geddy** » Fri Apr 3, 2009 12:41 am

I don't mind the leaf and I was pissed when they got rid of it off the main logo a few years back.

evilRyu · Post #8 » by **evilRyu** » Fri Apr 3, 2009 12:46 am

arrpy wrote:
evilRyu wrote:I'm not a big fan of the red Canadian leaf... Just like I'm not too big of the red leaf on the back of the Raptors black alternate. I just think it's a bit much.

Really? I always thought the red leaf look really nice on the Raps uniforms, and I also really like it on these.

By no means am I trying to pull off a "TheRaptor!" here (with his anti-Canadianism). I love my country!

I'm just not into the whole "showing off your patriotism" kind of thing

J-Roc · Post #9 » by **J-Roc** » Fri Apr 3, 2009 1:55 am

Ted Rogers never cared one iota about the Blue Jays. It was a "property" for him. Actually, it was more his partners who set it all up. The Blue Jays were an avenue to build the Rogers brand. The Rogers Centre, too. And it was programming for Sportsnet.

Rogers ownership isn't much different than the secret MLSE board.

Post #10 » by **Alfred** » Fri Apr 3, 2009 5:09 am

I don't think "Secret MLSE Board" would make a very good patch.

Post #11 » by **arrpy** » Fri Apr 3, 2009 10:28 am

I think putting "Rogers" on the uniforms rather than "Ted" would have been better. Because who's really gonna recognize his first name...

Post #12 » by **LittleOzzy** » Fri Apr 3, 2009 1:07 pm

arrpy wrote:I think putting "Rogers" on the uniforms rather than "Ted" would have been better. Because who's really gonna recognize his first name...

They probably couldn't put Rogers as it's the name of a company and those aren't allowed on uniforms.

Damn Ted's ego...

J-Roc · Post #13 » by **J-Roc** » Sat Apr 4, 2009 12:43 am

LittleOzzy wrote:
arrpy wrote:I think putting "Rogers" on the uniforms rather than "Ted" would have been better. Because who's really gonna recognize his first name...

They probably couldn't put Rogers as it's the name of a company and those aren't allowed on uniforms.

Damn Ted's ego...

Wow, never thought of that. Good call. And we can be sure they did TRY to get the Rogers name with that red and white lettering.

s e n s i · Post #14 » by **s e n s i** » Sat Apr 4, 2009 12:47 am

J-Roc wrote:
LittleOzzy wrote:
arrpy wrote:I think putting "Rogers" on the uniforms rather than "Ted" would have been better. Because who's really gonna recognize his first name...

They probably couldn't put Rogers as it's the name of a company and those aren't allowed on uniforms.

Damn Ted's ego...

Wow, never thought of that. Good call. And we can be sure they did TRY to get the Rogers name with that red and white lettering.

They were probably lobbying to get 'Rogers' across the chest.

Post #15 » by **LittleOzzy** » Tue Apr 7, 2009 2:27 am

The red maple leaf looked very bad on the white uniforms. It stood out so much, I hate it.

I think the "Ted" is stupid too, but at least it didn't stand out like a target.

evilRyu · Post #16 » by **evilRyu** » Tue Apr 7, 2009 2:39 am

yeah, i think the red leaf was quite large... I thought it was going to be a tiny one.

Anyone else's thoughts?

s e n s i · Post #17 » by **s e n s i** » Tue Apr 7, 2009 3:06 am

evilRyu wrote:yeah, i think the red leaf was quite large... I thought it was going to be a tiny one.

Anyone else's thoughts?

Not big on it either. I'm in the same boat as you. It is larger than I thought, and bright too, really noticeable.

J-Roc · Post #18 » by **J-Roc** » Tue Apr 7, 2009 11:57 am

Too big. But that's Rogers. They are about advertising first, and everything else second. I wasn't even too sure about the video tribute to the non-baseball fan Ted Rogers. They didn't show baseball specific clips, because there weren't any.

Jatt · Post #19 » by **Jatt** » Wed Apr 8, 2009 5:24 pm

I like the Leaf, good contrast on the uni and it's long overdue, when Godfrey took over operations he wanted to hide the fact that Toronto is in Canada so he could continue to kiss American business butt, Beeston on the other hand takes pride in the Canadian aspect to the Jays, I like it.

xAIRNESSx · Post #20 » by **xAIRNESSx** » Wed Apr 8, 2009 6:29 pm

I really like the red Maple leaf. Think it's very simple and the size is just about perfect. It's always been a part of the Blue Jays history and I'm glad they brought it back.

Can't say I'm a big fan of the "Ted" tho.