1939 Patches
Steve,
First let me begin by saying I admire and respect your passion for the subject of the baseball centennial. Please know I am not trying to pick a public fight. Rather I hope you will take what I have to say in the truest spirit it is being offered in.
I ask that you might want to consider that there was no special decision on the part of MLB to change the design of the patch. I would also ask you to consider that the manufacturers of the uniforms were probably not the same organizations who produced the patches; rather they were out sourced for production and then sent to and applied by the uniform suppliers. As for a possible reason for the design change, it may have been a practical one with respect to ease in production on the part of the company(ies) making the patches as a function of time and volume of work.
If you compare the two designs, the second (batter looking to the left) would have been easy and quicker to produce as it is less intricate. In principle, it is really not a radical departure from committee design as all the basic and fundamental elements are in place so these slight changes may not have been seen as ones that required any sort of advanced approval.
The time between the 5 December 1938 unveiling and some teams wearing this patch in spring training of 1939 is not a lengthy one. This tight timeline works against a deliberate and contemplative process by MLB resulting in a decision/change of design that still supports an ordering, manufacturing, and delivery process, and even a greater need to get patches out to major and minor leagues teams post spring training.
Once again, just food for thought.
v/r
Dave Grob
|