“Players are always a little reluctant to change,” remarked Andrew Miller, a retired All-Star pitcher, highlighting a common sentiment in baseball. This reluctance has recently manifested in a significant controversy surrounding the redesigned Major League Baseball (MLB) uniforms, specifically concerning allegations that they are see-through. While Nike spearheaded the redesign and MLB gave its approval, the brunt of fan criticism has landed squarely on Fanatics, the manufacturer. This is despite the fact that the uniforms have been produced in the same factory since the early 2000s, with no prior reports of transparency issues.
Michael Rubin, the founder of Fanatics, addressed the backlash at a sports analytics conference at M.I.T. this month. “[We’re] purely doing exactly as we’ve been told, and we’ve been told we’re doing everything exactly right,” Rubin stated, defending his company. He acknowledged the disproportionate criticism directed at Fanatics, adding, “So that’s not fun.” Fanatics’ role extends beyond MLB, as they manufacture and sell on-field apparel and licensed merchandise for most major professional sports leagues in the U.S. This prominent position has made them a frequent target, facing multiple lawsuits alleging monopolistic practices in sports memorabilia. The MLB gear, designed by Nike and manufactured by Fanatics, also comes with a hefty price tag. A standard 2024 jersey retails for approximately $175, with certain premium editions reaching nearly $400. Similar high prices are seen for Nike/Fanatics replica jerseys in the NFL and NBA.
According to Matt Powell, a senior advisor at BCE Consulting with extensive experience in sports retail, the primary issue with the new MLB uniforms isn’t necessarily the design or manufacturing itself, but rather the marketing and communication surrounding the changes. “They did a poor job of selling it,” Powell observed. He pointed out the lack of explanation regarding the benefits and development process of the new jerseys when players encountered them during spring training. Powell argued that better communication from Nike could have prevented the controversy from escalating.
This uniform debacle underscores a broader trend in sportswear: a shift towards prioritizing performance over aesthetics and traditional quality. Interestingly, Nike is not alone in facing “see through” apparel issues. In 2013, Lululemon, a popular athletic wear brand, faced a class-action lawsuit and a stock price drop following a recall of their sheer black yoga pants. This earlier incident serves as a stark reminder that the current MLB uniform transparency concerns are part of a recurring pattern in the performance apparel industry, where design choices sometimes compromise on aspects beyond pure functionality.
