- Note 1: First and foremost, thanks so much to Chris Creamer's sportslogos.net. This is one of the best and most fascinating sports websites, and if you've never visited it... you should. Right now.
- Note 2: There's no real methodology to these. If I thought the logo was boring, I ranked it low. If I was particularly taken with it for any reason, I ranked it high. Cheesy cartoons from the 1970s? High. Native Americans? Low. "Clever" logos? High. Logos that don't really do anything other than say the team's name? Low.
30. Tampa Bay Rays, primary, 2008-present
Is there anything more boring than this logo? The two things that are good about this one are the light blue shadow around the diamond and the ray of light in the middle of the "R". That's still not anything that can rescue this from the bottom of these rankings, however. The dark blue is very standard, and the lettering is nothing special (is the bottom of the "R" supposed to be like a tail? it's too subtle to be commended, if so). A very weak effort for a team with such great color/logo potential, though they still have time.
29/28. Cleveland Indians, primary, 1980-present / Atlanta Braves, primary, 1972-1986
I... hrrm. Okay, so I've never had a huge problem with the Native American logos. They always seemed more playful than offensive, though that may be because I grew up in the sanitized, post-Chief Knockahoma era. Anyway, the point is that these are clearly offensive on some level, and that shouldn't be tolerated. I give the edge to the Braves' logo, if only because it has such close associations to Hank Aaron, but really. Even if these weren't offensive, they'd still be very boring, and that's quite the logo sin.
27. Chicago White Sox, alternate, 1976-1990
There's really nothing to this logo. The picture is weird, I suppose, but how is it unique to the White Sox? (Answer: it isn't.) This is just a dull logo for what was, by all accounts, a dull team.
26. Arizona Diamondbacks, primary, 1998-2006
I have fond memories of this logo based on the 2001 World Series, but it's clearly problematic. I give a huge thumbs up to the color scheme, but the gold on purple is very tough to read. Also, it's just an A. There's nothing special about it, save for the line running along the left side. Meh.
25. Kansas City Royals, primary, 2002-present
This is a typical "nice try, but still boring" logo. On the one hand, the crown over the logo is both obvious and nice. On the other hand, there's nothing interesting about this. The "KC" and "Royals" aren't well integrated--they're even in a different typeface, I believe. I'm not sure how this one can be improved. Their alternate that eliminates the "Royals" part isn't bad, but at that level it's a bit barebones. Who knows, I'm not a graphic designer.
24. Oakland Athletics, primary, 1968-1982
On the one hand, I love the colors and the hokiness of this. On the other hand, it's a bit on the busy side, no? I mean, why does it say "The Swingin' A's" but then have a picture of cleats? For that matter, why have the cleats at all? I chose this to represent this franchise because I love the green on yellow, but there's just too much going on.
23. Cincinnati Reds, primary, 1972-1992
Who is that man? Is it Mr. Redlegs? No, he has a fun moustache. Is it Mr. Met? No, that can't be. No, it's, umm... Mr. Red. According to Wikipedia, he existed in sleeve patch form in the 1950s, only to then disappear until this logo. Anyway, much as I love fun cartoons his appearance here is a bit random. He's not an iconic mascot (heck, he's not even the most well-known mascot on his own team), and just distracts from everything else. That said, all of the other Reds logos are pretty boring, and this one reminds me of the Big Red Machine. I do like how this is their only logo to actually spell out Cincinnati though.
22. California Angels, primary, 1986-1992
Again, I like it, but... meh. There's not that much to like, ya know? The California in the background is nice, but makes this logo a bit busy. Three layers might be one too many. That said, it's a fairly simple logo, and I've always been a fan of the the "A" with the halo.
21. Florida Marlins, primary, 1993-2011
I admire the Marlins' inclusion of an actual Marlin on their logo, though I still have quite a few problems with this. The lettering is way too small, and is barely able to be seen over the background (teal on light blue creates problems). Also, the aforementioned marlin is just too big; you can have a fun drawing on your logo, but it shouldn't dwarf and distract from your team name. The color scheme is too receded, though I just noticed how the baseball is lined with orange. Anyway, this is a good logo in theory, but I think the execution is just a little bit flawed. Hopefully they can flesh it out for the team's rebranding next year. This alternate isn't so bad, though I didn't count it because I've never actually seen it in use (and it also looks a bit amateurish).
I admire the Marlins' inclusion of an actual Marlin on their logo, though I still have quite a few problems with this. The lettering is way too small, and is barely able to be seen over the background (teal on light blue creates problems). Also, the aforementioned marlin is just too big; you can have a fun drawing on your logo, but it shouldn't dwarf and distract from your team name. The color scheme is too receded, though I just noticed how the baseball is lined with orange. Anyway, this is a good logo in theory, but I think the execution is just a little bit flawed. Hopefully they can flesh it out for the team's rebranding next year. This alternate isn't so bad, though I didn't count it because I've never actually seen it in use (and it also looks a bit amateurish).
