The Diamondbacks revealed their new look early this offseason, and the general reaction to Arizona's new duds fell somewhere between "meh" and "oh god oh god why?" Most of the negative reaction focused on the busy shoulders, which feature a Microsoft Power Point-inspired gradient. The uniform was apparently designed with player input, which is fine, because baseball players are well known for their impressive fashion sense.
So, sure. Those aren't great, but there's nothing particularly offensive about them. I could do without the whole deal going on up top but it's not th-
Oh. Oh no. What...what are those?
No. No no no.
Why do the Diamondbacks look like they're wearing tampons for pants?— Stacey Gotsulias (@StaceGots) February 18, 2016
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Apparently, the feminine hygiene product look is not a new piece of flair added late to the D'Backs wardrobe. It was there all along, hiding on the reverse of the picture from the Diamonbacks' official Twitter account above; we just didn't notice it until players took the field wearing their new pants this week. The reaction to this quasi-new information was overwhelmingly negative -- the most positive reaction came from Lookout Landing, SB Nation's Mariners blog, who said that the pants were, "fine," which is a mild, if incorrect, take. When pressed, however, LL went from 0-100, real quick:
@travis_mke The Brewers have had worse uniforms than this.— Lookout Landing (@LookoutLanding) February 18, 2016
OH NO YOU DIDN'T.
Now, when you come at the king, you best not miss. Let's run down the list of some of Milwaukee's best and worst looks, and defend the honor of our local nine:
Oh baby, those are some sweet looking duds. This isn't here as a comparison to the abomination that is the Diamondbacks' new look; this is here to present the gold standard in Milwaukee baseball fashion. Pinstripes and baseball go together like Italian sausages and Secret Stadium Sauce; it's fine if you just have the one, but you really ought to put them together. You've also got a beautiful hat featuring the greatest logo in sports history. These fellas look good. You almost certainly recognize Paul and Robin left and center -- that's Gumby on the right, if you're stumped.
Look, it's not great. It's pretty boring. But there's nothing offensive about this. The scripts is hard, the piping unnecessary, and the green, gold and navy blue color scheme feels like they were probably shooting for something like what the Milwaukee Bucks look like now and put up an air ball. Not pictured here are the pants, which are a clean white and definitely do not make Jeff Cirillo look like he just stepped in a puddle of beet juice.
We knew this was coming. My feelings about this jersey are reflected in the demeanor of the recently departed Khris Davis here. And yeah, it's bad. Someone in the Brewers marketing department had some Grey Poupon squirt out of his bologna sandwich and onto his shirt, tried to clean it up but just ended up spreading it around and said, "You know what then? Screw it. This is what the Brewers look like now." It's bad and we know that, and we're relieved that they're gone for good, replaced by a massive upgrade in the alternate jersey department. But is it worse than the D'Backs current look? No. The pants still look fine -- they're a clean white with team color piping, and they're not trying to remind anyone of Curt Schilling's bloody sock with them. Obviously the top is a bad color, but they didn't make it worse by adding any nonsense to the shoulders. It's ugly, but it's not notable.
Is Lookout Landing correct in saying the Brewers have had worse looks that Arizona's? Technically, yeah. Milwaukee participated in Turn Ahead the Clock night on that fateful July evening in 1999, and everyone looked horrible that day. But if you don't count one-off crimes against humanity, Milwaukee's uniform history is untarnished by anything as bad as Arizona's tampon pants.