This real money site caters to all players, with reviews on mobile games you can play, including slots, blackjack, and roulette.

Monday Morning Uni Watch

E7C1BC7A539C4F55A78AC4FC9693A93F.jpg

It was no surprise that those Bills throwbacks looked awesome yesterday (you can bask a bit more in their magnificence here, here, here, and here). But it was surprising, at least to me, that the throwback helmets were completely blank in the back — no NFL logo, no American flag, not even the usual warning decal. The rear helmet view was so plain that the molded lower contour on the Riddell Revolution helmets — a contour that I’d frankly never noticed before — suddenly appeared much more prominent.

After a bit of photo research, it turns out that the Bills’ throwback helmets were blank last season as well. Not only that, but the Chargers’ throwback helmets are blank on the back side too, all of which is very odd, since the throwback jerseys still have Reebok sleeve logos, the NFL Equipment collar logo, etc. How did the helmets earn a logo creep exemption?

Other NFL notes from yesterday:

• Byron Leftwich had the two-towel thing going on.

• More hosiery shenanigans from Clinton Portis: Look closely and you’ll see that he was wearing burgundy leggings over white shin pads and no socks (here’s another view).

• As if the Vikings didn’t have enough problems: purple gloves.

• Here’s something I’ve been meaning to investigate: There are always all sorts of people on the sidelines wearing garish vests — the guy with the red X, the guy with the orange K, and so on. Does anyone know which vest symbols match up with which specific duties?

Uni Watch News Ticker: In what is no doubt an NHL first, the Rangers and Panthers wore Puerto Rican flag patches for their exhibition game on Saturday, which was played in San Juan. … Latest Japanese baseball observation from Jeremy Brahm: Check out the bizarre glove worn by Osamu Hamanaka. … “Here’s the worst prep uni ever,” says Uni Watch Nebraska bureau chief Bryan Redemske. “It’s from St. Cecilia High School in Hastings, Nebraska. I challenge you to find a worse one.” … LSU, which usually wears white at home (and also on the road, natch), broke out the rarely seen purple jerseys for Saturday’s game against Tulane. … My latest eBay score: this super-cool 1928 uniform ad (better pics to follow when I actually receive the item). … Unfortunate news out of Toronto, where Brian Tallet’s totally bitchin’ stirrups are already a quickly fading memory. He was pajama-pantsed during yesterday’s game, and Mike Priest took a truly disturbing photo of him in the bullpen. Didn’t realize MLB was now offering boot-cut pants. … Latest Nike brainstorm: Outfitting the English rugby team in longjohns. Full details here. … And Nike also appears to be taking their mismatched-sleeve program to new extremes (with thanks to Seth Harris). … To give credit where it’s due: Jonathan Carone notes that Nike has actually improved the look of D-IAA Liberty, which has gone from this and this to this and this. “We no longer look like an Arena League team!” he says. … Classy move yesterday by the Nationals, who all wore their pants hiked up high in honor of teammate Nick Johnson, who broke his leg on Saturday. … The Padres ran their annual “Shirts Off Their Backs” charity promotion yesterday, marked by a special Swinging Friar right-sleeve patch. … If you didn’t check the site over the weekend, be sure to scroll down to webmaster John Ekdahl‘s Ryder Cup coverage — great stuff.

 

158 comments to Monday Morning Uni Watch

  • Gregg | September 25, 2006 at 8:58 am |

    Speaking of “logo creep exemption,” and I’m guessing this has been discussed here prior to my discovery of this site, but here goes…

    It seems like every MLB team has the Majestic logo on their uniform, except the Yankees. Interestingly, the officially licensed jersey does have the logo. Also, I noticed in a recent Subway commercial that Torre’s uniform has the logo. (And I recall an XM ad where Jeter’s uniform had it also.) Is there some on-field logo exemption for the Yankees? If so, why wouldn’t more teams take advantage of it?

  • Peter Wunsch | September 25, 2006 at 9:01 am |

    The sideline Orange K signifies the ball boy who is in charge of the special Kicker ball. The NFL mandated that only kicker balls can be used on kick-offs, FG attempts and punts because there was the feeling that some home teams were changing the pressure on certain balls so that their kickers would have an advantage.

  • Tom | September 25, 2006 at 9:02 am |

    Those guys on the sidelines are “ballboys”. The one with the red X has regular footballs, while the one with the orange K has kicking balls. The NFL decided a couple years ago to use “fresh” footballs for kicking to make it a little more difficult. Teams are allowed to break in the balls they use on offense but they cant touch the kicking balls.

  • Ethan | September 25, 2006 at 9:02 am |

    Not quite sure exactly but I image the K dude on the sideline is in charge of keeping the kicking balls separate from the regular footballs. I think it was a couple years ago when they required brand new footballs to be used for kicking because some kickers would throw balls in the washer and dryer to get them to become “beachball like” when they kicked ’em. As mentioned, no research or anything…just a quick gut feeling…

  • Jim | September 25, 2006 at 9:06 am |

    I’m pretty sure the “X” vest means the person carries spare footballs to hand to the officials in case balls go out of bounds, or far out of play. It keeps the game moving quicker, as play doesn’t have to be stopped to retrieve them. Each team uses it own balls, and there might be two players from each team stationed along each sideline.

    The “K” vest is worn on the player who holds the kicker’s footballs.

    Teams use different balls to kick than to run normal scrimmage plays. Why, I’m not sure. But the kicking balls have the circle-K logo thing stamped on them, and the referees are supposed to inspect them before the game starts, to make sure the kicking balls are the same as the scrimmage play balls. This way, there’s no chance of a kicker using a ballooned/overinflated ball.

    The guy with the “K” vest is the keeper of the K-balls, so there’s no worries about any shenanigans with substituting approved footballs for illegally inflated ones.

  • Paul Lukas | September 25, 2006 at 9:06 am |

    [quote comment=”10363″]It seems like every MLB team has the Majestic logo on their uniform, except the Yankees.[/quote]

    Much to all the other owners’ annoyance, Steinbrenner engineered his own deal with Adidas for on-field attire, but only the Majestic logo is allowed to be shown on the field, so the Yankees go logo-less. The merchandised stuff is done by Majestic, and that’s often what gets used for commercials.

  • Jill | September 25, 2006 at 9:20 am |

    About the Swinging Friar sleeve patch.

    Am I the only one that does not see a patch in this picture? All I see is the catcher grabbing the pitchers ass.

  • Jon | September 25, 2006 at 9:23 am |

    Patch is on the catcher’s right arm… blow up the picture for a better view.

  • Adam | September 25, 2006 at 9:47 am |

    I was watching the MSU-ND game and some of the MSU helmets looked oversized, especially on Drew Stanton. I thought the Revolution helmets looked pretty good compared to the oversized helmet. Anybody know the story on the MSU helmets?

  • Buckeye Mike | September 25, 2006 at 9:54 am |

    So Browns fans, I think I know why were are now 0-3. It’s easy and has been covered here. it’s the socks. but here is the new part, it’s not just the lose of the stipes. I have watched all 3 games, and i figured it was a bad pic on my tv, but yesterday, I saw the game somewhere else for part of it, and it was the same thing there. Some of the Browns Players are wearing BLACK socks. D. Jackson, the rookiw LB has on brown here, but look at Frye, our QB, he’s got what looks like ribbed almost black sock on, and I’d say Edwards is for sure sporting black. Just to make sure, here is a pic from last week, and that looks really close to black too!

  • Dane | September 25, 2006 at 9:54 am |

    Got my Eastbay catalog over the weekend, and found the NFL Shine jersey – just in case last year’s Shadow jersey wasn’t obnoxious enough.

    Who’s ready to step up and say they’re willing to wear the Be-Dazzled Chad Johnson jersey shown here:

    http://www.eastbay.c...

  • Mycoskie | September 25, 2006 at 10:26 am |

    Here’s another candidate for the worst high school uniforms, the Rock Bridge Bruins of Columbia, MO.

  • Miguel | September 25, 2006 at 10:33 am |

    The kid from St. Cecilia is wearing soccer socks.

  • allenjd | September 25, 2006 at 10:43 am |

    [quote comment=”10373″]I was watching the MSU-ND game and some of the MSU helmets looked oversized, especially on Drew Stanton. I thought the Revolution helmets looked pretty good compared to the oversized helmet. Anybody know the story on the MSU helmets?[/quote]

    I think those helmets are made by Schutt. Penn State and Texas Tech seem to wear them exclusively, bit I’ve noticed players on other teams wearing them this year including quote a few Oregon players.

  • Tim B | September 25, 2006 at 10:44 am |

    Deadspin has the DBacks and Reds uni changes…

    DBacks
    http://i23.photobuck...

    Reds
    http://i23.photobuck...

  • allenjd | September 25, 2006 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”10379″][quote comment=”10373″]I was watching the MSU-ND game and some of the MSU helmets looked oversized, especially on Drew Stanton. I thought the Revolution helmets looked pretty good compared to the oversized helmet. Anybody know the story on the MSU helmets?[/quote]

    I think those helmets are made by Schutt. Penn State and Texas Tech seem to wear them exclusively, bit I’ve noticed players on other teams wearing them this year including quote a few Oregon players.[/quote]

    More info:
    http://www.schuttspo...

  • DJL | September 25, 2006 at 10:48 am |

    In preparation of next summer’s Rugby World Cup, Nike is testing new materials for the English side designed to be impossible for opponents to grab hold of.

    Article, complete with pics is available here: http://www.dailymail...

    Congrats to England, the Oregon Ducks of World Cup Rugby.

    For those who aren’t familiar with England’s current duds, you can view them here:

    http://www.scrum.com...

    I hope this article finally puts the “Rugby” tag into use…

  • Paul Lukas | September 25, 2006 at 10:56 am |

    [quote comment=”10382″]In preparation of next summer’s Rugby World Cup, Nike is testing new materials for the English side designed to be impossible for opponents to grab hold of.

    Article, complete with pics is available here: http://www.dailymail...

    Congrats to England, the Oregon Ducks of World Cup Rugby.

    For those who aren’t familiar with England’s current duds, you can view them here:

    http://www.scrum.com...

    I hope this article finally puts the “Rugby” tag into use…[/quote]

    I linked to this same article in today’s post (which is indeed categorized under the Rugby tag, among many others).

  • ninchaku | September 25, 2006 at 10:57 am |

    Hey my uniform related brethren! I have an older patriots authentic jersey with my name on it. Is it possible to remove the nameplate by hand without it looking like crap? I don’t want my name on it anymore. Please, someone help me. I appreciate it much!!!

  • Dane | September 25, 2006 at 10:59 am |

    [quote comment=”10380″]Deadspin has the DBacks and Reds uni changes…

    [/quote]

    The alternate db logo shaped as a snakehead is sweet – I will definitely get a cap with that logo on it.

  • Brian | September 25, 2006 at 11:00 am |

    The kid wearing the one sleeved Nike shirt made these alterations himself. THis is not a Nike Product. I know it goes against everything you hold dear, but don’t blame Nike on this.

  • Jason | September 25, 2006 at 11:07 am |

    Agreed about the D’Backs snake logo. Very sharp.

  • Mark | September 25, 2006 at 11:22 am |

    Why is red such a dominant color in baseball unis? Boston, Minnesota, Cleveland, Anaheim, Texas, Philadelphia, Washington (nee Montreal), Atlanta, St Louis, Houston, Cincinnati…they all use red in their uni’s. There is such little variability I often mistake which team(s) are actually playing. Basketball also has a lot of red teams. Football is nice because of the non-traditional color schemes used.

    Speaking of which, those Buffalo throwbacks are a classic! Any rumors about switching back to them permanently? And what about the Chargers switching? It certainly says something when teams realize you shouldn’t mess with a good thing.

  • Dan from PC | September 25, 2006 at 11:22 am |

    I’m rather disappointed by the Reds new logos. Unless my eyes are lying to me, or this copy is bad, they still have the dreaded black. I thought they were going with a navy blue next year.

  • Will | September 25, 2006 at 11:26 am |

    I thought the Reds were ditching the black entirely and going back to red and blue. I think Deadspin may have jumped the gun on the Reds unis.

    The D-backs snakehead is pretty sweet.

  • Riff | September 25, 2006 at 11:28 am |

    I don’t think those Chargers throwback helmets are blank. It looks like it still has a Riddell logo on the back bumper.

  • Kim | September 25, 2006 at 11:29 am |

    What’s up with the Diamondbacks using an abbreviation on their home uni’s? It seems kind of awkward to me.

    The db snakehead is wicked cool, though.

  • Robert | September 25, 2006 at 11:44 am |

    I reallyy like the Reds’ use of the old-fashionged Running Man, but I do not like seeing the more recent version ignored, in particular in the logo in which the Running Man has the wishbone “C” behind him.

  • redemske | September 25, 2006 at 11:46 am |

    It’s probably OK that the St. Cecilia kid is wearing soccer socks. He’s running in the outfield of an old brick baseball park — might as well get another sport into it.

  • Chad | September 25, 2006 at 11:49 am |

    Hey, anyone know where those MLB logo cards(or whatever they are) come from, and if so can we see them for all the teams?

  • Ian K | September 25, 2006 at 11:53 am |

    [quote comment=”10392″]What’s up with the Diamondbacks using an abbreviation on their home uni’s? It seems kind of awkward to me.

    The db snakehead is wicked cool, though.[/quote]

    I agree, using an abbreviation is a little too bush league for my tastes. Weren’t the Devil Rays moving toward using “D-Rays” on their uniforms too?

    The colors are alright, at least there’s no other red team in the NL West (but there is an abundance of it in the MLB in general). But the typography and logos, while cool right now, seem destined to be dated in years to come.

  • Seth | September 25, 2006 at 12:01 pm |

    Here’s another canidate for worst prep uni

    here is the Jones Falcons from Houston Texas (the yellow team…the blue team is the Friendswood Mustangs)

    and another look
    http://www.photos.rl...

  • Seth | September 25, 2006 at 12:06 pm |

    ooops messed that up

    just click both lines

    the first is a good shot, but the second offers a better view of the helmet decal.

    I suppose some would nominate The Mustangs too, but i tend to think its a good look


    road back

    http://www.photos.rl...
    road front

  • Kim | September 25, 2006 at 12:06 pm |

    Yes, there is too much red in baseball right now.

    The Phillies, Cardinals, Reds, Red Sox all have legitimate historical claim to red.

    In addition to the Diamondbacks, the Astros, Rangers, and Angels have all moved towards (and away, and back towards) it in recent years. Along with the Nats abondoning Expo blue.

    The Rangers have reverted back to blue, but that’s still 8 out of 30 teams using red, the Rangers still in our recent memory, and teams like Atlanta using it as an alternate color.

  • Scott Turner | September 25, 2006 at 12:06 pm |

    “Why is red such a dominant color in baseball unis?”

    It isn’t. First, this is only 11 of 30 teams. Second, only Anaheim and Philly wear red as a primary color for both its home and away uniforms.

    Three other teams — St. Louis, Washington and Cincinnati, switch their primary color from red to navy or black on the road. (A questionable switch, considering the color-centric names of two of the three: Cardinals and Reds.)

    Many debate whether the Astros’ “brick” is actually red, but let’s say it is.

    The rest of these teams are navy-clad (or royal, in Texas’ case).

    There’s also the Dodgers and Cubs who have a smidgen of red trim, but they hardly count as red-wearing teams.

    In short, red really isn’t a dominant color in baseball uniforms today. An oft-used trim color? Yes. But dominant…no.

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 12:13 pm |

    With Hockey season upon us, a good look at ranking all of the D1 College hockey jerseys from a right thinking writer (see Rule #2) at Inside College Hockey

    I mentioned this last week but FINALLY found the link!

  • Dan from PC | September 25, 2006 at 12:14 pm |

    Here’s a pretty terrible High School Uniform…Bellport…a long island high school

  • Joel Keller | September 25, 2006 at 12:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”10370″]
    Much to all the other owners’ annoyance, Steinbrenner engineered his own deal with Adidas for on-field attire, but only the Majestic logo is allowed to be shown on the field, so the Yankees go logo-less. The merchandised stuff is done by Majestic, and that’s often what gets used for commercials.[/quote]

    Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it. He relented when the MLB logo was put on the backs of every jersey in 2000, but I’m sure he didn’t relent without a fight first.

    If you notice, not one jersey manufacturer has ever had their logo on an in-game Yankee jersey, even before the Adidas deal went through.

  • Greg | September 25, 2006 at 12:16 pm |

    Hate to have to do this, but I’ve got to nominate my alma mater and this damn Vikingesque look they are throwing down.

    Politically incorrect mascot
    Purple
    Monochrome
    Bad striping

    Port Neches – Groves Indians (TX)

  • Dan from PC | September 25, 2006 at 12:16 pm |
  • Joel Keller | September 25, 2006 at 12:17 pm |

    Sorry about that. This will make it a little clearer:

    [quote comment=”10370″]
    Much to all the other owners’ annoyance, Steinbrenner engineered his own deal with Adidas for on-field attire, but only the Majestic logo is allowed to be shown on the field, so the Yankees go logo-less. The merchandised stuff is done by Majestic, and that’s often what gets used for commercials.[/quote]

    Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it. He relented when the MLB logo was put on the backs of every jersey in 2000, but I’m sure he didn’t relent without a fight first.

    If you notice, not one jersey manufacturer has ever had their logo on an in-game Yankee jersey, even before the Adidas deal went through.

  • Greg | September 25, 2006 at 12:21 pm |

    Didn’t post the link for some reason.

    http://pngindians.sm...

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 12:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”10370″]
    Much to all the other owners’ annoyance, Steinbrenner engineered his own deal with Adidas for on-field attire, but only the Majestic logo is allowed to be shown on the field, so the Yankees go logo-less. The merchandised stuff is done by Majestic, and that’s often what gets used for commercials.[/quote]

    Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it. He relented when the MLB logo was put on the backs of every jersey in 2000, but I’m sure he didn’t relent without a fight first.

    If you notice, not one jersey manufacturer has ever had their logo on an in-game Yankee jersey, even before the Adidas deal went through.[/quote]

    At the risk of being repetitive (because I think I asked this last week), does anyone else remember (or care?) that until the last 10 years or so, you couldn’t even BUY a Yankees pinstriped authentic jersey. You could buy road greys, but to own a home jersey you had to “earn” it

    Or is this something my parents told me a long time ago to avoid shelling out cash for a jersey?

  • Dre | September 25, 2006 at 12:34 pm |

    Very classy of the Nationals to pay tribute to their first baseman Nick Johnson, however, I would have liked to see them take it a step further and have all of the players grow the “Nick Johnson ‘stache” to go along with the high socks.

  • Forrest | September 25, 2006 at 12:40 pm |

    I’ll have to nominate my old high school, Lyons M/S High in Lyons, Colorado- they decided it would be really smart to look like the Atlanta Falcons, except with more striping on the sleeves, black jerseys on black pants, and the stupidest white stripe coming UP the pants. Homecoming game this weekend. I shall try and obtain pictures.

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 12:41 pm |

    Nomination for worst prep unis…Lake Zurich H.S. in Illinois (the purple unis)
    Bonus points for my alma mater and the socks!!! (at least for that player)

    also
    Mismatched sleeves for fans or cheerleaders?

  • Miguel | September 25, 2006 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”10411″]

    At the risk of being repetitive (because I think I asked this last week), does anyone else remember (or care?) that until the last 10 years or so, you couldn’t even BUY a Yankees pinstriped authentic jersey. You could buy road greys, but to own a home jersey you had to “earn” it

    Or is this something my parents told me a long time ago to avoid shelling out cash for a jersey?[/quote]

    I’m pretty sure you’re right, because I couldn’t get a Yankees home uniform as a kid. I remember that they weren’t even available in the old “Manny’s Baseball Land” catalogs, and they seemed to have everything, including a lot of the Cooperstown Collection hats and jerseys.

    I miss that catalog…

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 12:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”10417″]

    I’m pretty sure you’re right, because I couldn’t get a Yankees home uniform as a kid. I remember that they weren’t even available in the old “Manny’s Baseball Land” catalogs, and they seemed to have everything, including a lot of the Cooperstown Collection hats and jerseys.

    I miss that catalog…[/quote]

    Manny’s Baseball Land . . .I remember those guys. I miss those catalogs too. (They were bought and consolidated by Star Struck, Inc, in 2002) The pages in mine were always ripped and dog-eared. My sister always folded up the Toys R Us catalog for christmas . . .I folded up Manny’s Baseball Land!

  • Gregg | September 25, 2006 at 12:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”10412″]Very classy of the Nationals to pay tribute to their first baseman Nick Johnson, however, I would have liked to see them take it a step further and have all of the players grow the “Nick Johnson ‘stache” to go along with the high socks.[/quote]

    My dear friend Paulie notwithstanding, it’s pretty tough to grow a ‘stache in a day.

  • Hey Whoa | September 25, 2006 at 12:56 pm |

    Ugh, this is my second attempt at my first post,, i forgot to fill in my name and stuff, oops…Ive been a huge fan of uni watch and was so pumped when i learned about it a year ago. These are some observations from the weekend. In Indiana’s hoem game on sat against uconn they wore an all red uni, but it looked terrible b/c the red of teh jersey didnt match teh red of the pants, making a really weird visual effect. This could be one of teh worst uni’s in college football, you can see this red problem in picture #45 in this photo gallery Anopther observation came in the Arizona USC game, arizona had very strange pant detail on teh bottom of their pants there was a red and white stripe that was only on the back side of the bottom of teh pant, and i’m not sure how i felt about it, their unis do already have a tons of unessecary stripes. Finally in teh sunday night football game, the Pats had “China Bowl” painted on the field, whihc looked rediculous, esp b/c the Pats field is just painted dirt.

  • Ryan Real | September 25, 2006 at 12:58 pm |

    I think the “db” snake head logo might be my new favorite current logo. Very nice.

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 1:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”10421″]Ugh, this is my second attempt at my first post,, i forgot to fill in my name and stuff, oops…Ive been a huge fan of uni watch and was so pumped when i learned about it a year ago. These are some observations from the weekend. In Indiana’s hoem game on sat against uconn they wore an all red uni, but it looked terrible b/c the red of teh jersey didnt match teh red of the pants, making a really weird visual effect. This could be one of teh worst uni’s in college football, you can see this red problem in picture #45 in this photo gallery Anopther observation came in the Arizona USC game, arizona had very strange pant detail on teh bottom of their pants there was a red and white stripe that was only on the back side of the bottom of teh pant, and i’m not sure how i felt about it, their unis do already have a tons of unessecary stripes. Finally in teh sunday night football game, the Pats had “China Bowl” painted on the field, whihc looked rediculous, esp b/c the Pats field is just painted dirt.[/quote]

    At the risk of being asked to leave the comments posting section, I believe the time has officially come to add a SPELL CHECK to the preview panel . . . .

    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .

  • Hey Whoa | September 25, 2006 at 1:05 pm |

    HAHA, Yea I’ve never claimed to be a great speller. I’m 23 and part of teh Microsft Owrd Spell Check generation, without I’m lost. And I agree Gillette is a great stadium, but as you said their turf is a wreck b/c of MLS, but reguardless I think that “China Bowl” logo is so stupid, it’s a year away and you knwo they will be shoving it down our throats with comercials and print ads as it comes closer, do we really need the logo on the field?

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 1:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”10424″]HAHA, Yea I’ve never claimed to be a great speller. I’m 23 and part of teh Microsft Owrd Spell Check generation, without I’m lost. And I agree Gillette is a great stadium, but as you said their turf is a wreck b/c of MLS, but reguardless I think that “China Bowl” logo is so stupid, it’s a year away and you knwo they will be shoving it down our throats with comercials and print ads as it comes closer, do we really need the logo on the field?[/quote]

    They announced it at halftime or at some point that night…it’s a huge event for the NFL and the Patriots are playing in it, so why wouldn’t they want to do something like that?

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 1:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”10424″]it’s a year away and you knwo they will be shoving it down our throats with comercials and print ads as it comes closer, do we really need the logo on the field?[/quote]

    The spell check comment was made in fun (and it appears you took it that way : ) (and I read my own post 5 times to make sure I wasn’t begin hypocritical!)

    Open wide (that way the NFL won’t have shove it down your throat) . .’cause here it comes. Can the TV ads with Yao or Jackie Chan be far behind? Is the NFL going to send a crew to Beijing to teach about the NFL in the ensuing year? Otherwise it’s going to be a really quiet stadium! (BTW, can anybody else wait for the “Kick-a-Football-Over-The-Great-Wall contest?)

  • Hey Whoa | September 25, 2006 at 1:12 pm |

    b/c it’s a year away? and the NFL has already played an exibition game over seas. I think it was in Japan or something, and they may have played a game in London. SO saying it’s a huge event is a bit of an overstatment, b/c again it’s an exibition game.

  • Hey Whoa | September 25, 2006 at 1:15 pm |

    “Open wide (that way the NFL won’t have shove it down your throat) . .’cause here it comes. Can the TV ads with Yao or Jackie Chan be far behind? Is the NFL going to send a crew to Beijing to teach about the NFL in the ensuing year? Otherwise it’s going to be a really quiet stadium! (BTW, can anybody else wait for the “Kick-a-Football-Over-The-Great-Wall contest?)”

    HAHA!!! CLASSIC!

  • Buckeye Mike | September 25, 2006 at 1:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”10423″][quote comment=”10421″]

    At the risk of being asked to leave the comments posting section, I believe the time has officially come to add a SPELL CHECK to the preview panel . . . .

    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .[/quote]

    Thank you, I have been asking for this for ever. Someone offered the idea of the google bar on your IE browser, but the last thing I want is more spyware downloaded on my computer. So come on EK how ’bout this?

    ore wee kan all tri to reed someting liek thise????

  • Jake K. | September 25, 2006 at 1:16 pm |

    Cabell Midland high school in Barboursville, WV has great uniforms. Simple color scheme. Great stripes/piping.

  • Dane | September 25, 2006 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”10392″]What’s up with the Diamondbacks using an abbreviation on their home uni’s? It seems kind of awkward to me.[/quote]

    Well, we have Toronto and Tampa using Jays and Rays on their home jerseys. And I would rather have an Oakland jersey with A’s instead of Athletics. (Preferably a green shirt with yellow lettering, but that’s just me.)

  • Paul Lukas | September 25, 2006 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”10391″]I don’t think those Chargers throwback helmets are blank. It looks like it still has a Riddell logo on the back bumper.[/quote]

    Actually, that’s the Chargers’ old “goalpost” logo (visible toward the bottom of this page). But in any case, while the bumper may have something on it, the helmet shell itself is still blank.

  • Terry Mark | September 25, 2006 at 1:19 pm |

    I like Arizona’s new colors, but don’t they look a little too much like Houston’s? Other than a new wordmark, what’s so different about Cincinnati — still looks like red and black.

    I also want to second Hey Whoa’s opinion of IU’s all crimson outfits. What’s the matter with crimson jerseys with white pants? The monochromatic look is way out of hand. Indiana also wears white-on-white on the road, which I like, but I’d rather see them break out the crimson pants on the road.

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 1:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”10429″]b/c it’s a year away? and the NFL has already played an exibition game over seas. I think it was in Japan or something, and they may have played a game in London. SO saying it’s a huge event is a bit of an overstatment, b/c again it’s an exibition game.[/quote]

    The NFL has played exhibition games in London, Tokyo and Mexico City (off the top of my head) already, but anytime you’re talking about exposing the world’s most populated country to our National Obsession (Baseball’s still the National Pasttime in my book!) it’s a big deal. It’s also a big deal because Bejing is hosting the Summer Olympics in 2008 and the date of the Pats-Seahawks game marks the “One Year to Go” countdown to the opening ceremonies of the Olympiad.

    I agree it’s early, but it really is a big deal!

  • Paul Lukas | September 25, 2006 at 1:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”10405″]Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it.[/quote]

    Oh, please. Last September, which team wore a Salvation Army sleeve patch, for Hurricane Katrina relief? I’m not saying it was bad to wear the patch; I’m just saying let’s not get carried away with the myth of the “pristine” Yankee jersey.

  • Andy | September 25, 2006 at 1:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”10436″][quote comment=”10429″]b/c it’s a year away? and the NFL has already played an exibition game over seas. I think it was in Japan or something, and they may have played a game in London. SO saying it’s a huge event is a bit of an overstatment, b/c again it’s an exibition game.[/quote]

    The NFL has played exhibition games in London, Tokyo and Mexico City (off the top of my head) already, but anytime you’re talking about exposing the world’s most populated country to our National Obsession (Baseball’s still the National Pasttime in my book!) it’s a big deal. It’s also a big deal because Bejing is hosting the Summer Olympics in 2008 and the date of the Pats-Seahawks game marks the “One Year to Go” countdown to the opening ceremonies of the Olympiad.

    I agree it’s early, but it really is a big deal![/quote]
    Big deal or not, the big ugly logo looked stupid on the field.
    Which reminds me…what is that strange gray space-ship looking thing on that field is supposed to be?

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 1:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”10436″][quote comment=”10429″]b/c it’s a year away? and the NFL has already played an exibition game over seas. I think it was in Japan or something, and they may have played a game in London. SO saying it’s a huge event is a bit of an overstatment, b/c again it’s an exibition game.[/quote]

    The NFL has played exhibition games in London, Tokyo and Mexico City (off the top of my head) already, but anytime you’re talking about exposing the world’s most populated country to our National Obsession (Baseball’s still the National Pasttime in my book!) it’s a big deal. It’s also a big deal because Bejing is hosting the Summer Olympics in 2008 and the date of the Pats-Seahawks game marks the “One Year to Go” countdown to the opening ceremonies of the Olympiad.

    I agree it’s early, but it really is a big deal![/quote]

    Thank you!! I mean yes they have played games outside the US before, but not in the fastest growing market in the world

    China Bowl 2007

  • John Ekdahl | September 25, 2006 at 1:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”10437″][quote comment=”10405″]Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it.[/quote]

    Oh, please. Last September, which team wore a Salvation Army sleeve patch, for Hurricane Katrina relief? I’m not saying it was bad to wear the patch; I’m just saying let’s not get carried away with the myth of the “pristine” Yankee jersey.[/quote]
    And they wore the “Ricoh” patch in Japan for the opening series against the D-Rays two years ago….

    And on the helmets.

    Yes, those were real games, not the exhibition games against the Hanshin Tigers or Yomiuri Giants.

    Here’s another view.

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 1:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”10439″]
    Big deal or not, the big ugly logo looked stupid on the field.
    Which reminds me…what is that strange gray space-ship looking thing on that field is supposed to be?[/quote]

    Which is also a comment on the Patriot’s offense last night . .

    Can’t find a picture, but the “space-ship looking thing” could be a lighthouse. It’s part of the New England theme that surrounds the stadium . ..

  • redemske | September 25, 2006 at 1:42 pm |

    Lake Zurich and St. Cecilia need to get together for a friendly. Those two on the same field is an epileptic’s worst nightmare.

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 1:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”10443″]Lake Zurich and St. Cecilia need to get together for a friendly. Those two on the same field is an epileptic’s worst nightmare.[/quote]

    Lake Zurich used to have something like this too…more of a blue color

  • Av Doomchin | September 25, 2006 at 1:50 pm |

    Can you people please stop posting pictures of high school uniforms. For most of you im sure your only putting the pictures up because it was your rival high school back in the day but please most of those uniforms are not that outlandish and dont deserve to be chastized here. After seeing some of the “worst high school jerseys off all time” pictures put up im assuming that the only uniforms that would meet your quota would be plain white jersey plain white pants, no logo, no name, no numbers. Stop this madness, and move on with your life.

  • Kim | September 25, 2006 at 1:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”10423″]
    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .[/quote]

    Please. MLS has nothing to do with the sad state of the field. The rather large men that stand around the center of the field do. Belicheck reportedly likes having the lumpy, uneven surface, so the Gillette stadium ground crew doesn’t need to do much in the fall.

    If MLS were a problem, I’m sure the field at RFK for Nationals games would be all torn up, too. Or Arrowhead would show ill effects.

  • Nastykjn | September 25, 2006 at 1:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”10437″][quote comment=”10405″]Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it.[/quote]

    Oh, please. Last September, which team wore a Salvation Army sleeve patch, for Hurricane Katrina relief? I’m not saying it was bad to wear the patch; I’m just saying let’s not get carried away with the myth of the “pristine” Yankee jersey.[/quote]

    First, I’m totally stoked about my boys returning to the Superdome tonight. Big night for that area. I just wish we could get some Archie Manning Era throwbacks going.

    Second, doesn’t the “99” on that helmet look like it’s placed a little close to the lightning bolt?

  • ninchaku | September 25, 2006 at 1:55 pm |

    The spaceship was actually the Gillete Stadium logo. Those Broncos jerseys are very ugly. Why did they go to that from the Orange Crush. The are stupid, and represent all that you guys depise. And, was I the only one who noticed that Brady was scared to step up in the pocket? Is that why he stunk up the joint? Is he sad about crazy Uncle Deion? I’m not. He is stupid. Brady’s my boy, but he sucked ass. I hate to lose.

  • bluenoser | September 25, 2006 at 2:01 pm |

    While I acknowledge the new Diamonbacks unis are a marked improvement, actually what wouldn’t be, I must ask how long is it going to take for the “phallic” jokes to start, in reference to the “db” logo that is receiving so much love?…….Or maybe they just did!

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 2:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”10446″][quote comment=”10443″]Lake Zurich and St. Cecilia need to get together for a friendly. Those two on the same field is an epileptic’s worst nightmare.[/quote]

    Lake Zurich used to have something like this too…more of a blue color[/quote]

    They aren’t a rival school at all…just noticed it when I was looking at my high school’s website, just though I would share the purple jersey with everyone knowing how much the color is loved around here

  • Fraser | September 25, 2006 at 2:10 pm |

    Paul,

    I understand that you are a purple hater. But what other colour could the vikings use for their unis? Are they really that bad? The pant lines echo the viking horn, and the purple gloves are a formality much like all of the other teams gloves. Not every team can be Blue or Red, so we have to accept their attempts, especially if they are embracing their own colour.

    I enjoy your work and I think you are a great read, I just have to go the other way on this because I find that a lot of people are way too eager to echo what you have to say than to bring up new ideas or create discussion. I think that most writers are at their best when people are contantly challenging them and giving them new ideas to work with than just repeating everything they have to say. But that’s just my two cents.

  • Josh | September 25, 2006 at 2:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”10370″][quote comment=”10363″]It seems like every MLB team has the Majestic logo on their uniform, except the Yankees.[/quote]

    Much to all the other owners’ annoyance, Steinbrenner engineered his own deal with Adidas for on-field attire, but only the Majestic logo is allowed to be shown on the field, so the Yankees go logo-less. The merchandised stuff is done by Majestic, and that’s often what gets used for commercials.[/quote]

    When Russell Athletic had the MLB contract the Cardinals unis were made by Rawlings (a St. Louis based company). You will never see a Russell Athletic R on the sleve of any Cardinals action photo. Russell still had the license to market the jerseys, so the ones sold in stores had the Russell R on the sleeve, but the Cardinals’ gamers were logoless.

  • Andy | September 25, 2006 at 2:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”10451″]The spaceship was actually the Gillete Stadium logo. [/quote]
    Ahh, right. I see it here on the stadium website.
    I found it explained on a Patriots forum:
    What were those things painted on the 50-yard line at Gillette Stadium in Game 1, against the Raiders?
    Frank Baldwin
    Frank this isn’t your fault. You must be new to this forum, but for the last time, that is the Gillette Stadium logo. It is the bridge and lighthouse that stands as the stadium’s signature marking.

    On TV it’s upside down on the top of the field, which makes it look even more silly than it does when viewed right-side up (and also makes it look like some sort of spaceship thing).

  • Matt | September 25, 2006 at 2:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”10448″][quote comment=”10423″]
    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .[/quote]

    Please. MLS has nothing to do with the sad state of the field. The rather large men that stand around the center of the field do. Belicheck reportedly likes having the lumpy, uneven surface, so the Gillette stadium ground crew doesn’t need to do much in the fall.

    If MLS were a problem, I’m sure the field at RFK for Nationals games would be all torn up, too. Or Arrowhead would show ill effects.[/quote]

    The Rochester Red Wings (baseball) & Rhinos (soccer) used to share the same field up until this year… the field was torn to shit by the soccer team… there were all these patches of turf all over the place to replace where the soccer tam tore up the field… this year, now that the soccer team has its own field, the baseball field is in much better shape…

  • Jeff | September 25, 2006 at 2:19 pm |

    so the Arizona DoucheBags it is?

  • Kim | September 25, 2006 at 2:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”10454″]Paul,

    I understand that you are a purple hater. But what other colour could the vikings use for their unis? Are they really that bad? The pant lines echo the viking horn, and the purple gloves are a formality much like all of the other teams gloves. Not every team can be Blue or Red, so we have to accept their attempts, especially if they are embracing their own colour.

    I enjoy your work and I think you are a great read, I just have to go the other way on this because I find that a lot of people are way too eager to echo what you have to say than to bring up new ideas or create discussion. I think that most writers are at their best when people are contantly challenging them and giving them new ideas to work with than just repeating everything they have to say. But that’s just my two cents.[/quote]

    I loved the old Vikes unis. Classic look, and like you said, a unique color combo. Especially since it originated in an era when purple wasn’t cool.

    But the new edition of the uniforms are just too busy. Fine the pants have a swishy bit that is reminicent of a viking horn. Does there need to be some sort of viking horn reminder on every inch of the uniform? If they do the pant thing, then they should have a simpler shirt.

    You’re right that there’s not too many options for gloves, the players can probably go purple, white, or black. And there’s probably some lame NFL rule (or there will be after this post) that the team needs to declare what color gloves they’ll use.

  • MetsfanAZ | September 25, 2006 at 2:23 pm |

    Anopther observation came in the Arizona USC game, arizona had very strange pant detail on teh bottom of their pants there was a red and white stripe that was only on the back side of the bottom of teh pant, and i’m not sure how i felt about it, their unis do already have a tons of unessecary stripes.

    This game was a great example of what Nike can do good and bad. USC’s uni’s looked classic. Not much different than the Simpson or White days. Upon closer inspection you could see the seams/piping between the performance fabric panels that PL mentioned last week. But they kept those seams/piping white. Arizona (my alma mater) on the other hand looked like just any other Team Nike school with piping, haphazzard stripes, panels, bibs, etc. U of A has no real uni tradition but like we often argue, less if more.

  • Chris Coleman | September 25, 2006 at 2:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”10402″]”Why is red such a dominant color in baseball unis?”

    It isn’t. First, this is only 11 of 30 teams. Second, only Anaheim and Philly wear red as a primary color for both its home and away uniforms.

    Three other teams — St. Louis, Washington and Cincinnati, switch their primary color from red to navy or black on the road. (A questionable switch, considering the color-centric names of two of the three: Cardinals and Reds.)

    Many debate whether the Astros’ “brick” is actually red, but let’s say it is.

    The rest of these teams are navy-clad (or royal, in Texas’ case).

    There’s also the Dodgers and Cubs who have a smidgen of red trim, but they hardly count as red-wearing teams.

    In short, red really isn’t a dominant color in baseball uniforms today. An oft-used trim color? Yes. But dominant…no.[/quote]

    Scott, Thanks for bringing some sanity to Uniwatch!

  • Bill | September 25, 2006 at 2:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”10401″]Yes, there is too much red in baseball right now.

    The Phillies, Cardinals, Reds, Red Sox all have legitimate historical claim to red.

    In addition to the Diamondbacks, the Astros, Rangers, and Angels have all moved towards (and away, and back towards) it in recent years. Along with the Nats abondoning Expo blue.

    The Rangers have reverted back to blue, but that’s still 8 out of 30 teams using red, the Rangers still in our recent memory, and teams like Atlanta using it as an alternate color.[/quote]

    The Rangers should go BACK to the red…the only years they made the playoffs were when they wore the red uni’s and shoes…

  • Kim | September 25, 2006 at 2:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”10458″][quote comment=”10448″][quote comment=”10423″]
    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .[/quote]

    Please. MLS has nothing to do with the sad state of the field. The rather large men that stand around the center of the field do. Belicheck reportedly likes having the lumpy, uneven surface, so the Gillette stadium ground crew doesn’t need to do much in the fall.

    If MLS were a problem, I’m sure the field at RFK for Nationals games would be all torn up, too. Or Arrowhead would show ill effects.[/quote]

    The Rochester Red Wings (baseball) & Rhinos (soccer) used to share the same field up until this year… the field was torn to shit by the soccer team… there were all these patches of turf all over the place to replace where the soccer tam tore up the field… this year, now that the soccer team has its own field, the baseball field is in much better shape…[/quote]

    But the Gillette field was fine until the Pats showed up in August. If the Revs had really torn up the field, that would have shown up early in the season like May or June….or even July. The MLS season is long enough that it should have made it’s impact long before the big racks of meat came back for the fall.

    Football/Lacrosse cleats tear up fields much worse than soccer cleats. Think about it, a football player is supposed to dig his feet in to hold ground or push through an opponent.

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 2:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”10460″][quote comment=”10454″]Paul,

    I understand that you are a purple hater. But what other colour could the vikings use for their unis? Are they really that bad? The pant lines echo the viking horn, and the purple gloves are a formality much like all of the other teams gloves. Not every team can be Blue or Red, so we have to accept their attempts, especially if they are embracing their own colour.

    I enjoy your work and I think you are a great read, I just have to go the other way on this because I find that a lot of people are way too eager to echo what you have to say than to bring up new ideas or create discussion. I think that most writers are at their best when people are contantly challenging them and giving them new ideas to work with than just repeating everything they have to say. But that’s just my two cents.[/quote]

    I loved the old Vikes unis. Classic look, and like you said, a unique color combo. Especially since it originated in an era when purple wasn’t cool.

    But the new edition of the uniforms are just too busy. Fine the pants have a swishy bit that is reminicent of a viking horn. Does there need to be some sort of viking horn reminder on every inch of the uniform? If they do the pant thing, then they should have a simpler shirt.

    You’re right that there’s not too many options for gloves, the players can probably go purple, white, or black. And there’s probably some lame NFL rule (or there will be after this post) that the team needs to declare what color gloves they’ll use.[/quote]

    Agreed…and with these jerseys came one of the best nicknames in all of sports…The Purple People Eaters!!!

  • Josh | September 25, 2006 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”10461″]Anopther observation came in the Arizona USC game, arizona had very strange pant detail on teh bottom of their pants there was a red and white stripe that was only on the back side of the bottom of teh pant, and i’m not sure how i felt about it, their unis do already have a tons of unessecary stripes.

    This game was a great example of what Nike can do good and bad. USC’s uni’s looked classic. Not much different than the Simpson or White days. Upon closer inspection you could see the seams/piping between the performance fabric panels that PL mentioned last week. But they kept those seams/piping white. Arizona (my alma mater) on the other hand looked like just any other Team Nike school with piping, haphazzard stripes, panels, bibs, etc. U of A has no real uni tradition but like we often argue, less if more.[/quote]

    I hate to break it to you but as a fellow UofA grad, I must.
    I was at the mall and I saw a new UofA basketball jersey. I took a pic with my phone since I was so disturbed by the development.
    They only had one blue and one red, so I don’t know if the Cats are actually going to these or if they are some sort of prototype. They are not womens’ jerseys either since they have the silver Nike Elite tag on the neck.
    Here’s the pic:

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 2:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”10465″][quote comment=”10458″][quote comment=”10448″][quote comment=”10423″]

    Football/Lacrosse cleats tear up fields much worse than soccer cleats. Think about it, a football player is supposed to dig his feet in to hold ground or push through an opponent.[/quote]

    This is true, but I think what Michaels and Madden were talking about during the game was that there were certain spots on the field that were torn up mostly because of soccer…I think around the 30’s where most of the soccer games take place close to the net

  • Josh | September 25, 2006 at 2:43 pm |

    Oops! The link didn’t work. New Arizona Basketball jersey :(

  • Paul Lukas | September 25, 2006 at 2:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”10461″]This game was a great example of what Nike can do good and bad. USC’s uni’s looked classic. Not much different than the Simpson or White days. Upon closer inspection you could see the seams/piping between the performance fabric panels that PL mentioned last week. But they kept those seams/piping white.[/quote]

    I’ve been meaning to say this for a while: I think the type of shoulder striping used by USC and the Houston Texans is a great example of how to mordernize without looking ridiculous. It’s particularly well executed in USC’s case, because it’s an update of the old design that’s true to the spirit of that design while also incorporating the functionality of today’s tailoring templates. It looks like a natural, organic design evolution that honors aesthetics and performance in equal measure.

  • Nastykjn | September 25, 2006 at 2:55 pm |

    I just see on ESPN that unfortunately a DB for Rice died during a workout. I’m sure we’ll see a memorial patch or helmet sticker in the near future.

  • Nastykjn | September 25, 2006 at 2:57 pm |

    what wonderful English. Correction…I just “saw” on ESPN.

  • Forrest | September 25, 2006 at 3:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”10448″][quote comment=”10423″]
    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .[/quote]

    Please. MLS has nothing to do with the sad state of the field. The rather large men that stand around the center of the field do. Belicheck reportedly likes having the lumpy, uneven surface, so the Gillette stadium ground crew doesn’t need to do much in the fall.

    If MLS were a problem, I’m sure the field at RFK for Nationals games would be all torn up, too. Or Arrowhead would show ill effects.[/quote]

    Or Mile High Stadium, but it always looks good. The only way you know soccer is played there are the yellow soccer lines, and they’re hardly noticeable.

    And, can everyone please take a second to spell ‘the’ correctly? It makes the world just a little bit of a nicer place.

  • Matt | September 25, 2006 at 3:06 pm |

    for those who want a hat with the snakehead DB on it… if you read underneath it, it says “Jersey Sleeve Emblems”… up in the top right is where the hat logos are… its the same ones they have had but in their new color scheme..

  • MetsfanAZ | September 25, 2006 at 3:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”10470″]Oops! The link didn’t work. New Arizona Basketball jersey :([/quote]
    SHUDDER… I only say this out of sheer desperation but that looks like the women’s B-ball jersey even though you say it’s not. Since we’re on the topic (sort of) kudos to Coach Olson for always keeping the shorts length reasonable.

  • Mike from Queens | September 25, 2006 at 3:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”10405″]Also, Big Stein has said that he doesn’t want any other logo on the jersey than the “interlocking NY,” as Michael Kay used to call it.[/quote]

    Too bad they don’t worry about who they put the uniform on in order to maintain their uni-purity. A list of behavioral all-stars: JasonI’m Sorry, So SorryGiambi, GaryThat Had Better Be Flaxseed OilSheffield, KarimBullpen BrawlGarcia, DocJust One More Chance” Gooden, SidneyJudge Punching DrunkPonson, JeffWhat Happened to My CareerNelson, DarrylI Was Just Driving Drunk so I Could Get Home and Beat My WifeStrawberry, and, of course, DavidThey Call Me ‘Boomer’ Because that’s the Sound I Make When I Hit the Floor DrunkWells.

    Not to mention anything Reggie Jackson may or may not have done to his wife years ago. And this is all off the top of my head without looking anything else up. Point: the Yankee uniform is dirty enough already just from what’s been inside of it.

  • Chris | September 25, 2006 at 3:20 pm |

    Add Lofa Tatupu to the list of those switching from the revolution helmet to the original.

  • Jon in SLC | September 25, 2006 at 3:26 pm |

    Did anyone else notice this on the Gillette Stadium site? Looks to be for sale in the team shop for the China Bowl. Sad.

  • Mike from Queens | September 25, 2006 at 3:32 pm |

    Correction… Strawberry never drank and drove… I got it confused with his car accident due to painkillers. Him and Doc merge in my brain as the shining example of an unfinished Mets dynasty…

  • Double J | September 25, 2006 at 3:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”10471″][quote comment=”10461″]This game was a great example of what Nike can do good and bad. USC’s uni’s looked classic. Not much different than the Simpson or White days. Upon closer inspection you could see the seams/piping between the performance fabric panels that PL mentioned last week. But they kept those seams/piping white.[/quote]

    I’ve been meaning to say this for a while: I think the type of shoulder striping used by USC and the Houston Texans is a great example of how to mordernize without looking ridiculous. It’s particularly well executed in USC’s case, because it’s an update of the old design that’s true to the spirit of that design while also incorporating the functionality of today’s tailoring templates. It looks like a natural, organic design evolution that honors aesthetics and performance in equal measure.[/quote]

    Is it just me or does the Nike USC jerseys: http://www.trojanwir...
    look just like the Adidas template jerseys that are worn by UCF, Northwestern and others?
    UCF: http://www.orlandose...
    NW: http://graphics.fans...

  • Jonathan | September 25, 2006 at 3:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”10483″]Did anyone else notice this on the Gillette Stadium site? Looks to be for sale in the team shop for the China Bowl. Sad.[/quote]

    It’s a little disturbing, but you have to remember, the Patriots are pioneers on this . . .they were the first to have a Chinese language version of their website.

    Makes them a natural fit to play in the China Bowl. Belichick is a notorious preparation fanatics. Methinks he’s not going to be too happy about having to interrupt his training schedule to participate in this game.

  • Double J | September 25, 2006 at 3:50 pm |

    oops heres the links

    USC

    UCF

    Northwestern

  • Chad | September 25, 2006 at 3:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”10478″][quote comment=”10470″]Oops! The link didn’t work. New Arizona Basketball jersey :([/quote]
    SHUDDER… I only say this out of sheer desperation but that looks like the women’s B-ball jersey even though you say it’s not. Since we’re on the topic (sort of) kudos to Coach Olson for always keeping the shorts length reasonable.[/quote]

    This is the same template the USA mens team wore for the worlds
    lebron

    carmello

  • BCrisp | September 25, 2006 at 3:53 pm |

    Someone help me understand what is different about Texas A&M QB’s Stephen McGee’s jersey.
    Here is his jersey that looks like he does not have elastic sleeve cuffs.McGee
    Here’s an example of Chris Harrington with sleeve cuffs Harrington
    You may thingk that McGee is wearing normal sleeves, if so what happened to the white stripe around the bottom? It looks like he may have cut out the elastic(white stripe)
    What do y’all think?

  • Chad | September 25, 2006 at 3:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”10490″][quote comment=”10478″][quote comment=”10470″]Oops! The link didn’t work. New Arizona Basketball jersey :([/quote]
    SHUDDER… I only say this out of sheer desperation but that looks like the women’s B-ball jersey even though you say it’s not. Since we’re on the topic (sort of) kudos to Coach Olson for always keeping the shorts length reasonable.[/quote]

    This is the same template the USA mens team wore for the worlds
    lebron

    carmello[/quote]

    Florida wore them last year too: Noah

    I think other teams such as Ohio state did aswell

  • redemske | September 25, 2006 at 4:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”10447″]Can you people please stop posting pictures of high school uniforms. For most of you im sure your only putting the pictures up because it was your rival high school back in the day but please most of those uniforms are not that outlandish and dont deserve to be chastized here. After seeing some of the “worst high school jerseys off all time” pictures put up im assuming that the only uniforms that would meet your quota would be plain white jersey plain white pants, no logo, no name, no numbers. Stop this madness, and move on with your life.[/quote]

    Hey, thanks for your input, unfortunately, I don’t care. I saw a nasty, nasty uni in our photo archive and thought I’d pass it along. It really wouldn’t matter what level it came from. The point was its nastiness. And several others joined the fray — truly nasty unis all. For the record, I enjoy smart, consistent designs — classy, if you will. A plain white uniform would look like practice, which is what a lot of prep teams use for practice apparel.
    Again, thanks for your input.

  • John Ekdahl | September 25, 2006 at 4:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”10492″]Florida wore them last year too: Noah[/quote]
    I knew that was going to be a picture of him screaming.

  • joe | September 25, 2006 at 4:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”10388″]Why is red such a dominant color in baseball unis? Boston, Minnesota, Cleveland, Anaheim, Texas, Philadelphia, Washington (nee Montreal), Atlanta, St Louis, Houston, Cincinnati…they all use red in their uni’s. There is such little variability I often mistake which team(s) are actually playing. Basketball also has a lot of red teams. Football is nice because of the non-traditional color schemes used.
    [/quote]

    There wouldn’t be so much red if the Phils went back to burgundy. Maybe Atlanta needs to go back to baby blue and Houston to sunrise orange. Say what you want about the 1980s and elastic waist ball-jerseys, but at least there was some creativity and differentiation between the clubs.

    And those Buffalo throwbacks are awesome. They should make those the permanent unis.

  • Pedro | September 25, 2006 at 4:15 pm |

    Here we go again with people fighting..why does everyone take comments about their particular team unis so PERSONALLY. Instead of getting mad come back with a valid counterpoint.

  • SaveFarris | September 25, 2006 at 4:22 pm |

    Matt,

    the Batting Practice logo is To Be Announced. Who wants to make a wager?

    The current BP cap is this: a reworking of their current sleeve patch, which the ‘db’ logo is in line to replace.

  • Miguel | September 25, 2006 at 4:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”10501″]Here we go again with people fighting..why does everyone take comments about their particular team unis so PERSONALLY. Instead of getting mad come back with a valid counterpoint.[/quote]

    Sup, Pedro? Good to see another Hispanic Uni-freak on here…

  • Kyle | September 25, 2006 at 4:43 pm |

    Are there any updates on the gravatar yet?

  • Talon Lardner | September 25, 2006 at 4:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”10483″]Did anyone else notice this on the Gillette Stadium site? Looks to be for sale in the team shop for the China Bowl. Sad.[/quote]

    I’m not sure if it is sad, I think it looks pretty cool! Though I do wonder if there are any more examples of non-Hindu-Arabic numerals on jerseys out there.

  • Matthew | September 25, 2006 at 4:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”10464″][quote comment=”10401″]Yes, there is too much red in baseball right now.

    The Phillies, Cardinals, Reds, Red Sox all have legitimate historical claim to red.

    In addition to the Diamondbacks, the Astros, Rangers, and Angels have all moved towards (and away, and back towards) it in recent years. Along with the Nats abondoning Expo blue.

    The Rangers have reverted back to blue, but that’s still 8 out of 30 teams using red, the Rangers still in our recent memory, and teams like Atlanta using it as an alternate color.[/quote]

    The Rangers should go BACK to the red…the only years they made the playoffs were when they wore the red uni’s and shoes…[/quote]

    Red has been overrused in the past also.

    Check out the Indians from 1975-1977: http://www.baseballh...

    And apparently the Red Rangers jerseys worn for the 1984 and 1985 seasons was garish enough that one coach at the time remarked that he looked like a giant blood clot.

    http://www.baseballh...

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 4:53 pm |

    Anybody ever wonder why you never see these colors in the pros:

    Texas

    South Carolina

    There’s probably more, but I can’t think of any

  • Raul | September 25, 2006 at 4:55 pm |

    The Vikings unis are as ugly as we all know they are, but they don’t have to be just because they are purple. Purple alone is not innately evil, it just looks horrid when it is paired up with other bright colors. Yellow (Vikings, LSU), green (bucks), red (raptors), etc.
    On the other hand purple can look respectable when it is the only bright color, is paired with white or grey, and the uniform is kept simple. Kansas State is a good example of this. The Vikings would actually look pretty darn good if they took a simple uni, lets say Penn state, then replaced the nitany blue with Vikings purple, added a horn to the helmet, slapped a logo or simple stripe on the shoulder and called it good. It is the yellow accents and the crappy graphics that make it look so bad.

  • Dre | September 25, 2006 at 4:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”10461″]Anopther observation came in the Arizona USC game, arizona had very strange pant detail on teh bottom of their pants there was a red and white stripe that was only on the back side of the bottom of teh pant, and i’m not sure how i felt about it, their unis do already have a tons of unessecary stripes.

    This game was a great example of what Nike can do good and bad. USC’s uni’s looked classic. Not much different than the Simpson or White days. Upon closer inspection you could see the seams/piping between the performance fabric panels that PL mentioned last week. But they kept those seams/piping white. Arizona (my alma mater) on the other hand looked like just any other Team Nike school with piping, haphazzard stripes, panels, bibs, etc. U of A has no real uni tradition but like we often argue, less if more.[/quote]

    Don’t forget to mention the classy uniforms Nike provided my Alma Mater ASU (Please no comments about their embarrassing loss against the Cal Bears who looked WAY better than usual with Gold pants and not the full blue uniforms with that gold “swooshis” stripe on the sides.

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Josh | September 25, 2006 at 5:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”10478″][quote comment=”10470″]Oops! The link didn’t work. New Arizona Basketball jersey :([/quote]
    SHUDDER… I only say this out of sheer desperation but that looks like the women’s B-ball jersey even though you say it’s not. Since we’re on the topic (sort of) kudos to Coach Olson for always keeping the shorts length reasonable.[/quote]

    Unfortunately those can’t be women’s jerseys.
    They have the elite tag on them. Nike puts teams that have been in the Final Four since 1993, the year Nike established its Team Sports division, into the Elite series. Elite teams have the special silver medallion on the necklines of their jerseys. Arizona’s women have not participated in a Final Four, thus would not be Elite.
    So…they have to be men’s jerseys.

  • Not so Big Al | September 25, 2006 at 5:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”10506″][quote comment=”10464″][quote comment=”10401″]Yes, there is too much red in baseball right now.

    The Phillies, Cardinals, Reds, Red Sox all have legitimate historical claim to red.

    In addition to the Diamondbacks, the Astros, Rangers, and Angels have all moved towards (and away, and back towards) it in recent years. Along with the Nats abondoning Expo blue.

    The Rangers have reverted back to blue, but that’s still 8 out of 30 teams using red, the Rangers still in our recent memory, and teams like Atlanta using it as an alternate color.[/quote]

    The Rangers should go BACK to the red…the only years they made the playoffs were when they wore the red uni’s and shoes…[/quote]

    Red has been overrused in the past also.

    Check out the Indians from 1975-1977: http://www.baseballh...

    And apparently the Red Rangers jerseys worn for the 1984 and 1985 seasons was garish enough that one coach at the time remarked that he looked like a giant blood clot.

    http://www.baseballh...
    So, the Clevelanders invented the monochrone look so popular thesedays in the NFL ?

  • Nastykjn | September 25, 2006 at 5:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”10508″]The Vikings unis are as ugly as we all know they are, but they don’t have to be just because they are purple. Purple alone is not innately evil, it just looks horrid when it is paired up with other bright colors. Yellow (Vikings, LSU), green (bucks), red (raptors), etc.
    On the other hand purple can look respectable when it is the only bright color, is paired with white or grey, and the uniform is kept simple. Kansas State is a good example of this. The Vikings would actually look pretty darn good if they took a simple uni, lets say Penn state, then replaced the nitany blue with Vikings purple, added a horn to the helmet, slapped a logo or simple stripe on the shoulder and called it good. It is the yellow accents and the crappy graphics that make it look so bad.[/quote]

    Not to split hairs on you but that LSU picture you referenced is from 2000. I could never forget how huge Rohan Davey was. The purple now is more matted than shiny as evidenced by this picture from Paul’s comments at the top of the page. And for what it’s worth, (and my advice is free), I think LSU looks awesome.

  • MetsfanAZ | September 25, 2006 at 5:41 pm |

    [/quote]

    Unfortunately those can’t be women’s jerseys.
    They have the elite tag on them. Nike puts teams that have been in the Final Four since 1993, the year Nike established its Team Sports division, into the Elite series. Elite teams have the special silver medallion on the necklines of their jerseys. Arizona’s women have not participated in a Final Four, thus would not be Elite.
    So…they have to be men’s jerseys.[/quote]

    I was afraid you were going to say that. It does look like the women’s jersey so maybe that’s a good thing. Just looking for a silver lining when I know there is none. And Dre, I prefer to never ever mention the Tempe Normal school.

  • Kim | September 25, 2006 at 5:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”10477″]for those who want a hat with the snakehead DB on it… if you read underneath it, it says “Jersey Sleeve Emblems”… up in the top right is where the hat logos are… its the same ones they have had but in their new color scheme..[/quote]

    Just because it’s not going to be on an actual game hat doesn’t mean that MLB won’t be selling hats with that logo.

  • Tod | September 25, 2006 at 6:23 pm |

    Those Arizona bball jerseys look a lot like what Illinois’ jersyes will this season. Most SEC men’s teams last year had the shoulder stripe like the team USA template and it looks like all, if not most, of the Nike Elite teams are getting jersyes like that for 06-07. I don’t have the link to photos, but the new Illinois jerseys are in their team store and feature the shoulder stripe. Stay tuned to see who all gets the generic Nike jersey. Generic in the sense that now all teams will look similar.

  • Bill | September 25, 2006 at 6:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”10506″][quote comment=”10464″][quote comment=”10401″]Yes, there is too much red in baseball right now.

    The Phillies, Cardinals, Reds, Red Sox all have legitimate historical claim to red.

    In addition to the Diamondbacks, the Astros, Rangers, and Angels have all moved towards (and away, and back towards) it in recent years. Along with the Nats abondoning Expo blue.

    The Rangers have reverted back to blue, but that’s still 8 out of 30 teams using red, the Rangers still in our recent memory, and teams like Atlanta using it as an alternate color.[/quote]

    The Rangers should go BACK to the red…the only years they made the playoffs were when they wore the red uni’s and shoes…[/quote]

    Red has been overrused in the past also.

    Check out the Indians from 1975-1977: http://www.baseballh...

    And apparently the Red Rangers jerseys worn for the 1984 and 1985 seasons was garish enough that one coach at the time remarked that he looked like a giant blood clot.

    http://www.baseballh...

    Sorry…didn’t mean to mislead with the idea of totally red Ranger uni’s…they wore white with red trim at home and grey with red trim on the road and red shoes. Red hats, too. Classy look and it worked for them. The started wearing red when they moved in to the new ballpark but changed to mostly blue a few years ago. They’ve gone downhill since!

  • Matthew | September 25, 2006 at 6:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”10518″][quote comment=”10506″][quote comment=”10464″][quote comment=”10401″]Yes, there is too much red in baseball right now.

    The Phillies, Cardinals, Reds, Red Sox all have legitimate historical claim to red.

    In addition to the Diamondbacks, the Astros, Rangers, and Angels have all moved towards (and away, and back towards) it in recent years. Along with the Nats abondoning Expo blue.

    The Rangers have reverted back to blue, but that’s still 8 out of 30 teams using red, the Rangers still in our recent memory, and teams like Atlanta using it as an alternate color.[/quote]

    The Rangers should go BACK to the red…the only years they made the playoffs were when they wore the red uni’s and shoes…[/quote]

    Red has been overrused in the past also.

    Check out the Indians from 1975-1977: http://www.baseballh...

    And apparently the Red Rangers jerseys worn for the 1984 and 1985 seasons was garish enough that one coach at the time remarked that he looked like a giant blood clot.

    http://www.baseballh...

    Sorry…didn’t mean to mislead with the idea of totally red Ranger uni’s…they wore white with red trim at home and grey with red trim on the road and red shoes. Red hats, too. Classy look and it worked for them. The started wearing red when they moved in to the new ballpark but changed to mostly blue a few years ago. They’ve gone downhill since![/quote]

    Yeah I know you meant the red unis of the 90s rather than the early 80s. I wanted to point out previous misuse of the color in baseball unis.

    To answer an earlier question, I’m not sure where the monochromatic look in football came from, but I doubt the 1975-77 Cleveland Indians can be blamed.

  • Chuck Ryals | September 25, 2006 at 7:18 pm |

    I loved Manny’s Baseball Land! Anyone remember their “Manny’s Grab Bag” ? For 5 bucks you got a bunch of old buttons, patches etc from your favorite team.

  • Raul | September 25, 2006 at 7:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”10513″][quote comment=”10508″]The Vikings unis are as ugly as we all know they are, but they don’t have to be just because they are purple. Purple alone is not innately evil, it just looks horrid when it is paired up with other bright colors. Yellow (Vikings, LSU), green (bucks), red (raptors), etc.
    On the other hand purple can look respectable when it is the only bright color, is paired with white or grey, and the uniform is kept simple. Kansas State is a good example of this. The Vikings would actually look pretty darn good if they took a simple uni, lets say Penn state, then replaced the nitany blue with Vikings purple, added a horn to the helmet, slapped a logo or simple stripe on the shoulder and called it good. It is the yellow accents and the crappy graphics that make it look so bad.[/quote]

    Not to split hairs on you but that LSU picture you referenced is from 2000. I could never forget how huge Rohan Davey was. The purple now is more matted than shiny as evidenced by this picture from Paul’s comments at the top of the page. And for what it’s worth, (and my advice is free), I think LSU looks awesome.[/quote]
    And the picture of the Raptors I used has Vince Carter in it from several years ago, the point is that purple clashes with other bright colors, which is the main reason for people to hate it.

  • Brian from Short Island | September 25, 2006 at 7:55 pm |

    Even though soccer players use steel-studded cleats on nice (or muddy) fields, I’d still say that american football teams do much worse. American football is concentrated at the line of scrimmage. Soccer players use all corners of the field, and the damage is spread out. Also, american football players dig into the ground while shoving each other. Trust me, any poor pitch conditions are the ******* football team’s fault.

  • Brian from Short Island | September 25, 2006 at 7:56 pm |

    Reggie Bush is wearing his adidas Superstar shoes, and NFL equipment gloves and armbands..

  • Smail | September 25, 2006 at 8:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”10524″]Reggie Bush is wearing his adidas Superstar shoes, and NFL equipment gloves and armbands..[/quote]
    Argh, just beat me to it:)

  • Nastykjn | September 25, 2006 at 8:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”10522″][quote comment=”10513″][quote comment=”10508″]The Vikings unis are as ugly as we all know they are, but they don’t have to be just because they are purple. Purple alone is not innately evil, it just looks horrid when it is paired up with other bright colors. Yellow (Vikings, LSU), green (bucks), red (raptors), etc.
    On the other hand purple can look respectable when it is the only bright color, is paired with white or grey, and the uniform is kept simple. Kansas State is a good example of this. The Vikings would actually look pretty darn good if they took a simple uni, lets say Penn state, then replaced the nitany blue with Vikings purple, added a horn to the helmet, slapped a logo or simple stripe on the shoulder and called it good. It is the yellow accents and the crappy graphics that make it look so bad.[/quote]

    Not to split hairs on you but that LSU picture you referenced is from 2000. I could never forget how huge Rohan Davey was. The purple now is more matted than shiny as evidenced by this picture from Paul’s comments at the top of the page. And for what it’s worth, (and my advice is free), I think LSU looks awesome.[/quote]
    And the picture of the Raptors I used has Vince Carter in it from several years ago, the point is that purple clashes with other bright colors, which is the main reason for people to hate it.[/quote]

    Methinks Raul is a Green Bay, Ole Miss, (insert Bucks and Raptors rivals here), fan. Just kidding.

    I respect the opinion that purple is a dicey primary color. I just don’t agree. I think one could do much worse on picking color combos. (See: Dolphins, Miami & Hornets, New Orleans).

  • Jeff E. | September 25, 2006 at 8:49 pm |

    I was trying to watch the NO-ATL coin flip, but Ed Hochuli’s biceps kept filling up the TV screen.

  • Brinke Guthrie | September 25, 2006 at 8:54 pm |

    so he can get away with wearing adidas ///..
    is that because they bought reebok (and thus the NFL license?)

  • Brian from Short Island | September 25, 2006 at 8:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”10422″]I think the “db” snake head logo might be my new favorite current logo. Very nice.[/quote]
    I disagree.. It looks like a certain part of the male anatomy doing its function :/

  • Brinke Guthrie | September 25, 2006 at 9:02 pm |

    looks like Dunn is wearing a HUGE neck chain under his pads, and it can easily get caught, isn’t their a rule on that?

    PS Morten weating his old-school facemask.

  • Vegas4BOC | September 25, 2006 at 9:28 pm |

    If you look closely at the Bills throwback picture of Melvin Fowler hugging Roscoe Parrish, you’ll notice Parrish’s jersey has an elastic-banding look instead of the regular jersey cut. Kind of looks like something you see on weatherproof or warm-up jacket bottoms.

  • Riley | September 25, 2006 at 9:43 pm |

    I find it moderately interesting that BOTH teams do not have a BP logo on their documents. These things are not supposed to leak in the first place so I’m starting to wonder if there will be some sort of change in batting practice wear for next season that could cause this delay.

  • Jill | September 25, 2006 at 10:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”10527″]I was trying to watch the NO-ATL coin flip, but Ed Hochuli’s biceps kept filling up the TV screen.[/quote]

    Ed Hochuli does not look right in that ridiculous new ref costume.

  • Raul | September 25, 2006 at 10:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”10526″][quote comment=”10522″][quote comment=”10513″][quote comment=”10508″]The Vikings unis are as ugly as we all know they are, but they don’t have to be just because they are purple. Purple alone is not innately evil, it just looks horrid when it is paired up with other bright colors. Yellow (Vikings, LSU), green (bucks), red (raptors), etc.
    On the other hand purple can look respectable when it is the only bright color, is paired with white or grey, and the uniform is kept simple. Kansas State is a good example of this. The Vikings would actually look pretty darn good if they took a simple uni, lets say Penn state, then replaced the nitany blue with Vikings purple, added a horn to the helmet, slapped a logo or simple stripe on the shoulder and called it good. It is the yellow accents and the crappy graphics that make it look so bad.[/quote]

    Not to split hairs on you but that LSU picture you referenced is from 2000. I could never forget how huge Rohan Davey was. The purple now is more matted than shiny as evidenced by this picture from Paul’s comments at the top of the page. And for what it’s worth, (and my advice is free), I think LSU looks awesome.[/quote]
    And the picture of the Raptors I used has Vince Carter in it from several years ago, the point is that purple clashes with other bright colors, which is the main reason for people to hate it.[/quote]

    Methinks Raul is a Green Bay, Ole Miss, (insert Bucks and Raptors rivals here), fan. Just kidding.

    I respect the opinion that purple is a dicey primary color. I just don’t agree. I think one could do much worse on picking color combos. (See: Dolphins, Miami & Hornets, New Orleans).[/quote]
    First off, no I’m not, my own high school has purple and yellow in their color scheme. Second, even if that was true, it doesn’t mean anything. Using the fallacy of attacking the person (http://onegoodmove.o...) is a logical fallacy and thus proves nothing. Otherwise you could just win any argument by comparing your opponent to Hitler. To disprove the argument (purple clashes with other bright colors) you have to attack the argument (purple clashes with other bright colors) not me.

  • mark | September 25, 2006 at 11:16 pm |

    think a saints player is wearing gloves with the reebok logo on the very end of the index finger. talk about logo creep!

  • Kenny | September 25, 2006 at 11:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”10523″]Even though soccer players use steel-studded cleats on nice (or muddy) fields, I’d still say that american football teams do much worse. American football is concentrated at the line of scrimmage. Soccer players use all corners of the field, and the damage is spread out. Also, american football players dig into the ground while shoving each other. Trust me, any poor pitch conditions are the ******* football team’s fault.[/quote]

    No need to get all nasty…I like soccer, I was just stating what the announcers said…so I repeat, no need to get all nasty

  • Minna H | September 26, 2006 at 1:16 am |

    HEY, EK! Great job with the Ryder Cup. Now that I’ve buttered you up, what about the gravatars!???!!!!

    ps. I love the buttons, in case you can’t tell.
    pps. Why is the site so slow right now?
    ppps. I hate the little Viking head at the top of the leg stripe. Drives me nuts!

  • Chris Coleman | September 26, 2006 at 2:29 am |

    I noticed something about the Saints helmets during MNF, it looks as though on certain helmet designs they have a faux back bumper. You can see it here. has this always been the case with the Saints and other NFL teams?

  • Chris | September 26, 2006 at 6:43 am |

    Morten Anderson was still wearing the older style facemask last night that attaches directly to his helmet.
    http://sports-att.es...

  • Mark in Shiga | September 26, 2006 at 8:44 am |

    [quote comment=”10505″][quote comment=”10483″]Did anyone else notice this on the Gillette Stadium site? Looks to be for sale in the team shop for the China Bowl. Sad.[/quote]

    I’m not sure if it is sad, I think it looks pretty cool! Though I do wonder if there are any more examples of non-Hindu-Arabic numerals on jerseys out there.[/quote]

    I love that jersey too; who wears #5 for the Pats, and is he any good? The coolest looking Chinese numeral is 5 (五).

    The original incarnation of the Yomiuri Giants had all-Japanese uniforms — emblem on the front and number on the back — for their 1935 tour of the US, but the Americans couldn’t read them and so they went back to English-based uniforms.

    The Brady jersey would look much cooler if it were writen vertically. Unfortunately I think Mao’s “reforms” in the 1950s-60s have virtually eradicated vertical text from mainland China. Which reminds me… the site selling the jerseys has a Chinese team logo using simplified characters, but the official Chinese site uses the more aesthetically-pleasing traditional characters.

    Now what ever happened to those Chinese MLB caps that they used to make? Getting some of those team names into a single character required some real creativity!

  • Tom | September 26, 2006 at 8:49 am |

    [quote comment=”10465″][quote comment=”10458″][quote comment=”10448″][quote comment=”10423″]
    In an effort to redeem myself, Gillette Stadium is one of the nicest facilities in the NFL but the fact that the MLS games tear up the field so heinously is an abomination . . .[/quote]

    Please. MLS has nothing to do with the sad state of the field. The rather large men that stand around the center of the field do. Belicheck reportedly likes having the lumpy, uneven surface, so the Gillette stadium ground crew doesn’t need to do much in the fall.

    If MLS were a problem, I’m sure the field at RFK for Nationals games would be all torn up, too. Or Arrowhead would show ill effects.[/quote]

    The Rochester Red Wings (baseball) & Rhinos (soccer) used to share the same field up until this year… the field was torn to shit by the soccer team… there were all these patches of turf all over the place to replace where the soccer tam tore up the field… this year, now that the soccer team has its own field, the baseball field is in much better shape…[/quote]

    But the Gillette field was fine until the Pats showed up in August. If the Revs had really torn up the field, that would have shown up early in the season like May or June….or even July. The MLS season is long enough that it should have made it’s impact long before the big racks of meat came back for the fall.

    Football/Lacrosse cleats tear up fields much worse than soccer cleats. Think about it, a football player is supposed to dig his feet in to hold ground or push through an opponent.[/quote]

    While the soccer players do add to the chewing up of the turf at Gillette, its mostly the football team’s doing. Soccer’s main problem is the extra lines on the field, but they cover those up with blue/green paint during football games so it isnt quite as bad. Another selfish reason for me not liking the soccer field there is that the size of the field meant the stadium seats had to be pushed further back from the football field. If they built the field surface for football only, the seats would be closer to the action.

    The field at Gillette gets torn up so badly because Belichick likes to practice inside the stadium quite often, which doesnt really give the grass time to heal and grow back. Personnaly, I dont mind the conditions. In fact, the poor surface may have saved the franchise back in 2003. Brady was hit low on a blitz but his leg slid on the muddy track, saving him from a possible severe knee injury.

  • Tom | September 26, 2006 at 8:55 am |

    And I’ll throw in a good high school uniform, the Brockton Boxers. I’ve always liked the maroon-gray-black color scheme, and these uniforms are simple and sharp.

  • a arauz | September 26, 2006 at 9:17 am |

    [quote comment=”10547″]And I’ll throw in a good high school uniform, the Brockton Boxers. I’ve always liked the maroon-gray-black color scheme, and these uniforms are simple and sharp.[/quote]

    I like the team nickname…. the Boxer after Marvin Hagler, I presume? … maybe they should have just gone w/ the Bombers? Long Live Marvelous Marvin !!!

    Hey, Paul… maybe there’s a sport you’ve yet to mine: boxing. You’d have nearly a century of documentation to wade thru ….

  • John | September 26, 2006 at 9:32 am |

    [quote comment=”10541″]I noticed something about the Saints helmets during MNF, it looks as though on certain helmet designs they have a faux back bumper. You can see it here. has this always been the case with the Saints and other NFL teams?[/quote]

    A lot of teams are now putting their back bumper logo decal on the Schutt and Adams helmets (sorry, I can’t see the photo you linked; it’s blocked where I am now). I’ve seem them on the Colts, Saints, Bears, Packers, and Panthers for sure this season – I didn’t pay attention to whether or not the Falcons had them last night as well. I guess it is to make all the teams helmets look more similar, but I’ve always thought it looked kind of dumb on those helmet shell designs.

    The only thing worse is the teams like the Bengals and Jaguars who place a tiny decal on the wider center part of the exposed foam padding on the back of the Schutt Air helmets.

    The Steelers, Chiefs and Giants might have the right idea – no logos on the back of the helmets.

  • Jim | September 26, 2006 at 9:41 am |

    [quote comment=”10550″]I like the team nickname…. the Boxer after Marvin Hagler, I presume?[/quote]

    Actually, “Boxers” after Rocky Marciano. But Hagler only adds to the legend.

  • Jason | September 26, 2006 at 9:52 am |

    [quote comment=”10376″]Here’s another candidate for the worst high school uniforms, the Rock Bridge Bruins of Columbia, MO.[/quote]
    Am I the only person who has a real problem seeing names on the back of high school jerseys? First, names on the back really runs afoul of the “we’re teaching teamwork and important life lessons” message we hear regarding scholastic sports. Second, considering the problems we have with funding in public schools all over the country, how is it that these schools have the money to buy at least two new sets of uniforms every year?

  • DAVID | September 26, 2006 at 5:59 pm |

    THE HELMET..
    the head gear worn by drew stanton is made by schutt it is called the DNA it is one of 2 helmets worn in college and pros made by schutt.
    it was created with military technology to help defelect blws and hits to the head…(similiar to the revolution again one of 2 helmets made by riddell used in pros and college) it also has a piece which extends inot the mandible area. both are designed to help prevent concussions.

  • jamie kilgore | September 27, 2006 at 9:02 am |

    NO this cannot be happening!
    href=”http://cachemediasrv.patriots.com/ImgDyn.cfm?s=ChineseTomBradyJersey.jpg”>

  • jamie kilgore | September 27, 2006 at 9:04 am |

    ok that was supposed to be a link, but oh well, just go to the patriots website and youll see a tom brady jersey, with a chinese number, in stead of a 12

  • dirtydust | September 29, 2006 at 12:28 am |

    We won’t have to worry about ugly HS football uni’s again begining in 2010!
    This can not be happening…

    Does this really mean that every uni in the country will be exactly the same? This needs to be stopped.

  • dirtydust | September 29, 2006 at 12:34 am |

    ok here is the link:

    http://www.sdhsaa.co...

  • Mike Miller | September 29, 2006 at 12:56 am |

    [quote comment=”10561″][quote comment=”10376″]Here’s another candidate for the worst high school uniforms, the Rock Bridge Bruins of Columbia, MO.[/quote]
    Am I the only person who has a real problem seeing names on the back of high school jerseys? First, names on the back really runs afoul of the “we’re teaching teamwork and important life lessons” message we hear regarding scholastic sports. Second, considering the problems we have with funding in public schools all over the country, how is it that these schools have the money to buy at least two new sets of uniforms every year?[/quote]

    At my high school in the early/mid 90’s, the players bought some if not all of the uniform (the soccer team I played on bought 2 jerseys, 1 pair of shorts and 2 pairs of socks for $70 at the start of the year) and kept it at the end of the year. So a lot of our teams had jerseys with names on the backs: football, basketball, volleyball, soccer, baseball and softball. It’s died down now, I don’t think any team has them now, so the school may be buying and reusing the uniforms.