Version 2.0 of the Dodgers city connect jerseys are here (2024)

Who wants a blueberry Pop-Tart?

On Valentine’s Day this year, we all rejoiced in blissful ignorance from the announcement that the Dodgers had retired their awful city connect jerseys after the 2023 season. Never forget that the Dodgers dragged venerable actor Edward James Olmos into their efforts to market these jerseys, going through multiple edits to no avail.

Moreover, the Dodgers announced that the team would take another crack at the city connect enterprise sometime this year.

I had the following to say at the time:

“Watch [City Connect] version 2.0 be just as terrible as version 1.0, but for today, let us bask in the glow of hope that comes with the advent of a new jersey...”

After seeing the parade of city connect jerseys that have come out this year ranging from “How earth is anyone supposed to see this?!? (Toronto Blue Jays)” to “That is sure is a lot of gray! (New York Mets)” to “Wow, did that team decide to copy the Dodgers’ badly done homework?!? (St. Louis Cardinals)“ to “Were hallucinogenics involved?!? (Tampa Bay Rays),” anticipation built for Version 2.0 of the Dodgers city connect jerseys.

Around May 12, images of what was believed to be Version 2.0 emerged from photos taken at a store in Japan. As said images reminded everyone of a “confetti” cake, the anticipation for Version 2.0 widely turned to ridicule and disbelief. Paul Lukas of Uni Watch had mixed observations but believed that the images were genuine, wondering if the jersey looked like that or had been dotted with a Tide pen.

While the Dodgers were in Queens, Version 2.0 was sighted in the wild, answering the question Dodgers fans had: yes, Version 2.0 indeed did look like that.

Phil Hecken of Uni Watch saw these photos and gave his thoughts. First, these jerseys were indeed the city connect jerseys based on the lettering and the logo. He was excited about the storytelling behind the design choices made but could not identify what or how the jerseys were supposed to connect to the city of Los Angeles.

On June 7, images of the back of the jerseys appeared online, which show that the jerseys made some bold decisions about the style of the numbering on the front and back of the jersey as well as the placement of the player name.

The original poster was quite succinct as to his original thoughts on Version 2.0.

Before the jerseys were unveiled, I thought that the jerseys looked like a cross between a DirecTV logo and a blueberry Pop-Tart. If one is going to look like a Pop-Tart, it’s cherry or nothing, unless you have the most viral mascot of any college football game in the past twenty years. That said, while easy to mock now, had these jerseys come out three years ago, I think I would have been far more inclined to wear this jersey — until I saw the numbers in the final jersey.

Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Abandoning the iconic Dodgers script is a bold choice. Abandoning the traditional color palette is a bold choice. Fusing the D of the Dodgers script and the interlocking LA logo into a single design is a choice. Going with that number style is a bold choice. All that remained was an explanation of the iconography, which would only come with the official release.

Lazy iconography

On Monday morning, the team finally unveiled these jerseys to the world, explaining the rationale. In the interim, and under the maxim, there is literally a classic Simpsons clip for everything, I present my honest reaction to the unveiling.

Gone is the video introduction with murals and scenes narrated by Edward James Olmos. Instead, we have a slide show with Will Smith, Freddie Freeman, and Shohei Ohtani with the same energy one would have when being dragged to family portrait day for the promise of ice cream that just will not come. The pants are the same color as the jersey with a blue stripe down the sides.

Version 2.0 is a mish-mash, to be generous, of various iconography that has, at best, a tangential relationship to the City of Los Angeles and the Dodgers. The font for the numbers is inspired by a typeface that was popular when the team moved to Los Angeles. Apparently, all numbers will be two digits with zeroes in the tens spot, so Freeman’s jersey number will be 05 versus 5.

Moreover, the numbers at the bottom are cut off for some avant-garde, non-sensical reason. For Betts’ 50, it’s bold and could work if the numbers were the same color. For someone like Kershaw, the results sadly speak for themselves.

Courtesy of MLBshop.com

The jersey’s script is inspired by the LA Coliseum, which was the original home of the Dodgers, even though said script did not look like the DirecTV logo. The color palette for the new jersey is a “new take” on the Dodgers’ traditional color palette, except for leaning into the cream white, which was the source of much ridicule earlier this year.

The funfetti is not funfetti at all, there is iconography that claims to “represent the brilliance and diversity of Los Angeles.” To paraphrase someone I deeply respect, you do not pretend that you are being noble by doing random stuff; you have to do things to actually help someone if you want to honor them. Moreover, these details are likely too small to be seen unless you are up close, which defeats the purpose and does not even match the stadium seats.

I originally thought that the funfetti was supposed to be confetti and a flex about winning titles in Los Angeles, which is bold to the extreme with only a single championship in the past thirty-five years.

If you have made a jersey that made affable men such as Freeman and Smith make the faces below, you have botched the execution of a jersey design. Phil Hecken of Uni Watch reviewed the jersey, commenting on some of the baffling design choices, but ultimately being indifferent as a whole to the final product. A panel at The Athletic rated Version 2.0 12th out of 29 (with the panelists individually ranking the jersey 25th, 15th, 8th, and 5th) and the originals 29th out of 29 (with three panels ranking the jersey 29th and one ranking the jersey 16th) (paywalled).

Final thoughts

While being deeply annoyed by some of the iconography decisions, I feel that Version 2.0 barely succeeds on the whole as being better than the original. If the first jersey was striking out on three center-cut 88 mph fastballs with the bases loaded and the World Series on the line, this jersey is a dying quail that got lost in the sun that barely touches outfield grass and manages to make both fielder and hitter look silly in the process.

Considering that this jersey is the second attempt, one would question the motivation behind the design, i.e. is this design truly the best attempt that could have been designed? Allister Annear, the Dodgers’ vice president of merchandise spoke to the Los Angeles Times on Monday and acknowledged the first jersey “didn’t really knock it out of the park” and stated that using any Hollywood symbology was ruled out immediately as it had been “rammed into the ground by everybody and their mother.”

I imagine that Version 2.0 will be tweaked over the next three years. I would shocked if the Dodgers do not switch to blue pants with a stripe at some point while these jerseys are active. With the debut of Version 2.0, the 2024 city connect calendar is complete.

Only two teams have skipped this process: the New York Yankees and the soon-to-be-leaving Oakland Athletics. The Athletics decision to opt out makes sense because they are engaged in the slowest move out after a breakup in human history and making a jersey celebrating the departure would likely sell and fare poorly.

Perhaps the Dodgers could have learned something from the Yankees. The Yankees’ decision makes sense as they have an iconic uniform that already connects to their city. If only the Dodgers had remembered that fact about their own jerseys before subjecting us all to these experiments.

Version 2.0 debuts Saturday against the Angels.