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

Why Didn’t Bill Veeck Think of This?

tech.jpg

New ESPN column today — here’s the link.

Meanwhile: Tired of looking at the scoreboard? Think Oregon’s football uniforms are too sedate? Easily and happily distracted by shiny objects? Have I got the uniform concept for you.

An Australian research team has come up with a prototype design for electroluminescent basketball uniforms, which display statistical information (points scored, fouls committed) and tactical info (which team is winning, when the shot clock has almost run out) right on the jersey. As this article explains:

The simple, coloured display panels are attached to each vest and connected to a small computer, about the size of an iPod, strapped to each player’s body. These computers communicate wirelessly with a central control system, installed at the side of the court, which keeps track of all relevant statistics as the game goes on.

Crazy? Maybe, but that’s probably what someone once said about the idea of a coach talking to a quarterback via a radio-equipped helmet. Unsightly? Sure, but no more so than, say, the Vikings’ or Capitals’ unis.

The big question about this innovation, of course, is how long it’ll take for electroluminescent advertisements to start showing up on the jerseys. This seems like a gimme, especially for the players who are sitting on the bench. With this and other fears in mind, reader Jason Borneman has forwarded two modest policy proposals to Uni Watch HQ: “1) Can we get a restraining order against Nike to never ever get hold of this technology? The damage that could be done is unimaginable. 2) Is this reason enough to justify bombing Australia? Pros: Eliminate this dangerous technology. Cons: No more wallabies.”

Quiz Update: Shortly after I posted the quiz results yesterday, several readers took issue with some of the answers, and a few other discrepancies bubbled up as the day went along. Here are the questions — or, rather, the answers — at issue:

Question No. 4: I said that Steve Wallace and Mark Kelso were the only NFL players to have worn the ProCap helmet attachment. But it turns out that this article lists Don Beebe as a ProCap user. I’d never heard this before (Wallace and Kelso are cited as the only ProCappers in this Helmet Hut article), and I couldn’t find any photographic confirmation of it. But whether or not it’s accurate, I wouldn’t want to penalize anyone who came up with that article and used as the basis for answering the question.

Question No. 6: It was my belief that the 1983 Cowboys had been the last NFL team whose captains wore “C” designations. But apparently I was off by more than a decade, as seen in these pics of the 1994 Patriots.

Question No. 9: I have written many times about Elmer Layden being responsible for NFL’s rule requiring high socks. But he also mandated the use of helmets.

Question No. 16: I had asked if 1940s NFL head linesmen had worn orange and white stripes and umpires had worn red and white, when this blog entry said it was the other way around. This made it seem like a trick question, when in fact the point of the question was simply whether the officials had worn color-coded stripes — I wasn’t trying to play “Gotcha!” regarding which official wore which color. But I see that it could have seemed that way.

Since the newly acceptable answers for these four questions could have resulted in a four-point swing in someone’s score, I went back and re-scored all the entries that had been within four points of the top ten finalists. That resulted in three people’s scores being elevated up to or above 21 points, which was the threshold for being in the top ten. Those three readers are Eric Sing, Mark Mayall, and Matthew Peters.

Instead of bumping any of the previously announced finalists, I’ve decided to add these three additional names into the hat, so we now have 14 finalists, including the wild card berth. I’ll draw the winner later today and announce his name tomorrow.

If you think your score was at least 21, and you’re not among the names cited yesterday or today, please get in touch as soon as possible.

Helmet Giveaway: In case you missed it yesterday, you can enter for a chance to win a free non-autographed college helmet from our friends at Gridiron Memories simply by sending an e-mail to helmetraffle at earthlink dot net (please note that this is not the usual Uni Watch address). One entry per person, but everyone who’s ordered Uni Watch temporary tattoos will automatically have their names put into the hat a second time. (To get in on this, PayPal $1 apiece for the first five tats, 50 cents apiece after that, with a five-tat minimum, to paul_lukas at earthlink dot net.) The winner will be announced next Tuesday.

Uni Watch News Ticker: Yesterday’s discussion of flocked batting helmets inspired Todd Davis to do a bit of photo research. He turned up this shot of a flocked Maury Wills in the minor leagues, but his best finds were non-flocked, like an old Baseball Resigster cover, a classic SI cover, and the stunning revelation that Rod Carew wouldn’t have been allowed to play for the Bulls. … The Mets traded for Ambiorix Burgos yesterday (which should result in some very entertaining mispronunciations from a certain mush-mouthed talk radio host). As you may recall, Burgos is the player who caused a minor stir back on Memorial Day by wearing his American flag cap patch upside-down and in the wrong spot. … Interesting point made by Randy Rollyson, who writes: “Looking back, I see that very few MLB teams used red as their primary cap color before 1950, when the Phillies introduced the precursor to their current uniform. They wore that cap for 20 years. You might find an occasional red cap for a team, or the use of red in the bill color, but nothing that lasted. The Reds didn’t stick with an all-red cap until 1967. The Cardinals didn’t introduce a red cap that lasted until 1965. The Senators wore a red cap from ’68-’71. Why? Was red dye more expensive? Did it tend to bleed more than other colors? Was there a health concern with having red dye that close to your head?” My initial thought was that it might be an anti-Commie thing, but even that seems unlikely, since Russia was actually our ally in WWII. Anyone..? … Thanks to USA Today‘s Mike Bambach, who recently conducted this Q&A with me.

 

186 comments to Why Didn’t Bill Veeck Think of This?

  • -V | December 7, 2006 at 8:46 am |
  • -V | December 7, 2006 at 8:50 am |

    What’s wrong with the Cap’s unifoms?

  • Kel | December 7, 2006 at 9:01 am |

    Those electroluminescent unis are just wrong.

    First, if you try to focus on the stats into displayed, you’ll miss the actual play of the game.

    Second, any little mistake will be disputed and disputed until some idiot sues.

    Third, if a player falls or gets hit, etc, how durable is the little computer? Will the player be charged for broken uniforms, or do as spectators just get jacked up ticket prices to cover the cost?

    It’s a great idea if pro sports are going to be moved to inner city back alleys or midwestern corn fields at midnight, but otherwise, this seems to be another insipid attempt to be on the “cutting edge.”

  • CU Tigers Fan | December 7, 2006 at 9:06 am |

    [quote comment=”27401″]Never Forget[/quote]
    Very appropriate first post today. Good job.

  • Richard | December 7, 2006 at 9:09 am |

    HAPPY BIRTHDAY LEGEND!

    The last big mullet wearing All-Star

  • Vern | December 7, 2006 at 9:11 am |

    Have we covered the reasoning for the stars on the helmet in this photo? I must have missed it…

  • Pat | December 7, 2006 at 9:12 am |

    I went to the UMASS vs. BU game last night and noticed that UMASS not only added an ugly black away uniform but they are wearing their Atlantic 10 patch on their shorts (I couldn’t find any pictures, unfortunately). I had never seen a uniform patch on the shorts before. Anyone else seen anything like this before? Is it common practice and I just don’t pay much attention?

  • wooster, oh | December 7, 2006 at 9:29 am |

    Re: Don Beebe
    I was going to mention yesterday about the fact that Beebe wore one of those goofy helmuts in the Super Bowl (not sure if it was the first, or second or third or even the fourth one in a row they lost) because I remember the announcers talking about it and saying something along the lines that because he’s had so many concussions his wife said he had to wear one….but your question said who had worn one in regular season games, so the Super Bowl doesn’t count. Maybe he wore one in the regular season too….or maybe I’m just totally mistaken. On another note, loved seeing the traditional unis of Army and Navy last Saturday and I love the unit patches on their chests.

  • Metsfan AZ | December 7, 2006 at 9:39 am |

    Good Q & A with USA Today. My hunch is that it was edited quite a bit. I had never heard the Cheers script analogy with the Brewers, spot on.
    GREAT 1st post.

  • Matt from the 'Ville | December 7, 2006 at 9:41 am |

    Paul,

    Since you brought up the flag on a jersey today I have a question for you and my fellow readers. How do sport teams get away with having a flag patch on their jerseys. My mother and I were talking and she said that it was not “flag ettiqutte for teams to do this. I argured with here that it was a symbol of respect. But I was wrong according to this web site. Look at Section 9 near the bottom of the page.

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.”

    Who is right. My mom or I. Is there any special rule that I don’t know abbout I can’t believe that all these sport organizations would disrespect the flag in such an obvious manner.

  • Zach | December 7, 2006 at 9:42 am |

    Paul (or John, whichever of you might know),
    I recently updated my browser to Firefox 2.0 and the links in your blog no longer open in new windows (or tabs in my case, but same thing) but opens in this same window, which makes it annoying to reload this page every time I have to hit Back. In Firefox 1.X whatever it was this was not an issue. I was wondering if either of you knew why this was happening.

    Thanks for your hard work and help!

  • Mr.Fish | December 7, 2006 at 9:42 am |

    I don’t have documentation at my fingertips, however, I do seem to remember that the red dyes used for fabric, not yarn, were not as colorfast when being subjected to heat and moisture. That could be the reason for lack of red caps. The uniforms if there were colors used for yarn would have been washed previously in a fashion as to make it colorfast.

  • joe | December 7, 2006 at 9:43 am |

    [quote comment=”27409″]Re: Don Beebe
    [/quote]

    Don Beebe was awesome. I will never forget how he embarrassed Leon Lett in the Super Bowl. The guy was all-hustle all the time.

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 9:44 am |

    [quote comment=”27408″]I went to the UMASS vs. BU game last night and noticed that UMASS not only added an ugly black away uniform but they are wearing their Atlantic 10 patch on their shorts (I couldn’t find any pictures, unfortunately). I had never seen a uniform patch on the shorts before. Anyone else seen anything like this before? Is it common practice and I just don’t pay much attention?[/quote]

    I think all of the A10 teams have a patch on their shorts.

    The Big East, too.

  • B | December 7, 2006 at 9:44 am |

    Paul, I’ve been meaning to post and ask where you find all your sources for the pictures. I am starting a project on helmet art on NHL goalies helmets and need picture sources.

  • Mike | December 7, 2006 at 9:45 am |

    True, the Soviets were our ally in WWII, but the anti-communism in the US pre-dated the war by several decades. Maybe the wealthy bourgeoisie team owners didn’t want to look like they were endorsing labor unions?

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”27413″]Paul (or John, whichever of you might know),
    I recently updated my browser to Firefox 2.0 and the links in your blog no longer open in new windows (or tabs in my case, but same thing) but opens in this same window, which makes it annoying to reload this page every time I have to hit Back. In Firefox 1.X whatever it was this was not an issue. I was wondering if either of you knew why this was happening.[/quote]

    I recently updated to Firefox 2.0 as well, and I immediately hated it — and that’s without even realizing the problems you just cited. I trashed it and went back to version 1.5.0.8 — suggest you do the same.

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 9:51 am |

    [quote comment=”27418″]Paul, I’ve been meaning to post and ask where you find all your sources for the pictures. I am starting a project on helmet art on NHL goalies helmets and need picture sources.[/quote]

    Research, baby. Just research.

  • Kim | December 7, 2006 at 9:51 am |

    [quote comment=”27419″]True, the Soviets were our ally in WWII, but the anti-communism in the US pre-dated the war by several decades. Maybe the wealthy bourgeoisie team owners didn’t want to look like they were endorsing labor unions?[/quote]

    The Soviet Union as allies thing only was because we were subscribing to the “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” theory at the time. Figuring that the axis powers were the bigger threat than the Red Menace.

    Though the red dye causing health issues would definately explain the Phillies performance during that time……

  • LouUmp | December 7, 2006 at 9:52 am |

    I updated to 2.0 also, but have had no problems with links opening in new windows or tabs…check under ‘tools’ then ‘options’ then ‘tabbed browsing’…make sure that it says links ‘open in new tabs’ – if not, select that option..

    [quote comment=”27413″]Paul (or John, whichever of you might know),
    I recently updated my browser to Firefox 2.0 and the links in your blog no longer open in new windows (or tabs in my case, but same thing) but opens in this same window, which makes it annoying to reload this page every time I have to hit Back. In Firefox 1.X whatever it was this was not an issue. I was wondering if either of you knew why this was happening.

    Thanks for your hard work and help![/quote]

  • joe | December 7, 2006 at 9:53 am |

    concerning red dye->

    I’m willing to bet that its minimal use in the early days has to do with the fact that it bleeds more readily than navy or black.

    As an aside, this property of red dye didn’t keep the British Army from wearing red overcoats in the 17th/18th century. Allegedly, the rationale was that red military uniforms wouldn’t show blood and weaken the esprit d’ corps of an advancing regiment.

  • Kim | December 7, 2006 at 9:55 am |

    [quote comment=”27412″]Paul,

    Since you brought up the flag on a jersey today I have a question for you and my fellow readers. How do sport teams get away with having a flag patch on their jerseys. My mother and I were talking and she said that it was not “flag ettiqutte for teams to do this. I argured with here that it was a symbol of respect. But I was wrong according to this web site. Look at Section 9 near the bottom of the page.

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.”

    Who is right. My mom or I. Is there any special rule that I don’t know abbout I can’t believe that all these sport organizations would disrespect the flag in such an obvious manner.[/quote]

    Well, read it again carefully. It’s how you interpret it.

    It plainly says that the flag cannot be used as a uniform. Doesn’t say it can’t be ON a uniform. So those flashy Olympic uniforms are against the code.

    Also it states that any patriotic organization can affix a flag patch. Well you can immediately call yourself patriotic if you’re affixing a flag patch in a respectful manner, right?

  • Matt | December 7, 2006 at 9:57 am |

    The Notre Dame women broke out white jerseys with green trim and black numbering.

    Notre Dame women’s unis

    The men’s team is having a black-out tonight against Alabama, but NCAA rules require the Irish wear the home whites. The men’s team broke out the black jerseys with green trim last year.

  • Scott Novosel | December 7, 2006 at 9:59 am |

    Did anybody watch the Sixers v. Bulls game last night? On the back of Ben Wallace’s jersey, his number 3 was almost touching the letters of his name plate. Anybody have a pic of that?

    Also, How about the Memphis v. Tenn. game. I honestly don’t know how you could recruit kids to come and wear that horrible orange. I feel sorry for fans and alumni. Memphis’ unis were so bad too.

    I would have to think all of the players on that court last night felt like the dream where you are at grade school wearing nothing but your tighty wads.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 10:00 am |

    For goalie masks, I refer to a few pages.

    The Goalies Archive
    The History of Masks has a few examples.

    Masks from the Past is a good site for older masks.

    Eye Candy Air, a website run by artist Steve Nash, has lots of examples.

    Try these first. If you need something specific, just ask.

  • Matt | December 7, 2006 at 10:00 am |

    [quote comment=”27414″]I don’t have documentation at my fingertips, however, I do seem to remember that the red dyes used for fabric, not yarn, were not as colorfast when being subjected to heat and moisture. That could be the reason for lack of red caps. The uniforms if there were colors used for yarn would have been washed previously in a fashion as to make it colorfast.[/quote]

    Same thing with black… that’s why the Yankees are really dark navy blue…

  • The Ol Goaler | December 7, 2006 at 10:04 am |

    [quote comment=”27412″]Paul,

    Since you brought up the flag on a jersey today I have a question for you and my fellow readers. How do sport teams get away with having a flag patch on their jerseys. My mother and I were talking and she said that it was not “flag ettiqutte for teams to do this. I argured with here that it was a symbol of respect. But I was wrong according to this web site. Look at Section 9 near the bottom of the page.

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.”

    Who is right. My mom or I. Is there any special rule that I don’t know abbout I can’t believe that all these sport organizations would disrespect the flag in such an obvious manner.[/quote]

    Quoting from the aforementioned website:

    Are there penalties for violating the Flag Code?
    No. The Flag Code is intended as a guide to be followed on a purely voluntary basis to insure proper respect for the flag.

    So… In my opinion, both you and your Mom are right! I recall that American Legion-sponsored baseball teams were required to wear an American flag on their uniforms… and no one could ever accuse the Legion of being anything but “a patriotic organization.”

    So, as you say, all the flag patches/decals are being used by current sports teams to honor the U.S.; and they’re all also technically in violation of the Flag Code, which has no penalties.

    Hmmmm… wonder if I should tell my next-door neighbor that he should light his flag at night (or bring it inside at sunset)?

  • Pat | December 7, 2006 at 10:09 am |

    [quote comment=”27417″][quote comment=”27408″]I went to the UMASS vs. BU game last night and noticed that UMASS not only added an ugly black away uniform but they are wearing their Atlantic 10 patch on their shorts (I couldn’t find any pictures, unfortunately). I had never seen a uniform patch on the shorts before. Anyone else seen anything like this before? Is it common practice and I just don’t pay much attention?[/quote]

    I think all of the A10 teams have a patch on their shorts.

    The Big East, too.[/quote]

    So it seems. They all seem to have different placement of the patches too. Rhode Island’s is on the bottom of the shorts.

    Thanks for the help. Is it new this year or has it been like that for a while?

    I couldn’t find any Big East schools with the patch on their shorts.

  • Mark | December 7, 2006 at 10:27 am |

    [quote comment=”27432″][quote comment=”27417″][quote comment=”27408″]I went to the UMASS vs. BU game last night and noticed that UMASS not only added an ugly black away uniform but they are wearing their Atlantic 10 patch on their shorts (I couldn’t find any pictures, unfortunately). I had never seen a uniform patch on the shorts before. Anyone else seen anything like this before? Is it common practice and I just don’t pay much attention?[/quote]

    I think all of the A10 teams have a patch on their shorts.

    The Big East, too.[/quote]

    So it seems. They all seem to have different placement of the patches too. Rhode Island’s is on the bottom of the shorts.

    Thanks for the help. Is it new this year or has it been like that for a while?

    I couldn’t find any Big East schools with the patch on their shorts.[/quote]

    The picture of the Notre Dame women in post #23 shows a Big East patch. Not sure if the men and women do the same thing though.

  • Broker75 | December 7, 2006 at 10:31 am |

    Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.

  • kc | December 7, 2006 at 10:33 am |

    Big East team with patches on their shorts

    http://www.gousfbull...

  • Nat gal | December 7, 2006 at 10:37 am |

    I am sure it has been mentioned before, but Chris Clark of the Washington Caps has a football like face (well, lower face) mask. I am far to lazy to find out why, but saw it last night at the game.
    Go Caps! Go back to your old unis!

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”27432″][quote comment=”27417″][quote comment=”27408″]I went to the UMASS vs. BU game last night and noticed that UMASS not only added an ugly black away uniform but they are wearing their Atlantic 10 patch on their shorts (I couldn’t find any pictures, unfortunately). I had never seen a uniform patch on the shorts before. Anyone else seen anything like this before? Is it common practice and I just don’t pay much attention?[/quote]

    I think all of the A10 teams have a patch on their shorts.

    The Big East, too.[/quote]

    So it seems. They all seem to have different placement of the patches too. Rhode Island’s is on the bottom of the shorts.

    Thanks for the help. Is it new this year or has it been like that for a while?

    I couldn’t find any Big East schools with the patch on their shorts.[/quote]

    I could only find a few. I’m too busy pretending to work to look up all the schools, but it looks like UConn doesn’t represent.

  • Allen Kunt | December 7, 2006 at 10:39 am |

    There is no way those electroluminescent uniforms don’t give you cancer.

  • Gary | December 7, 2006 at 10:39 am |

    Glad to see other readers of New Scientist Tech out there…. I thought I was going to be the only one who sent that monstrosity of an article to you!

    And I really like the ND unis, black or not. I actually dont mind the black as much there as I do on the Mets unis….

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 10:40 am |

    [quote comment=”27442″]
    I could only find a few. I’m too busy pretending to work to look up all the schools, but it looks like UConn doesn’t represent.[/quote]

    Nevermind

    (First time I’ve ever quoted myself)

  • Richard | December 7, 2006 at 10:42 am |

    [quote comment=”27438″]Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.[/quote]

    Safety – visors are good.
    Reflective – visors are bad.

    Alexander Ovechkin – learning

  • Matt R. | December 7, 2006 at 10:48 am |

    [quote comment=”27442″][quote comment=”27432″][quote comment=”27417″][quote comment=”27408″]I went to the UMASS vs. BU game last night and noticed that UMASS not only added an ugly black away uniform but they are wearing their Atlantic 10 patch on their shorts (I couldn’t find any pictures, unfortunately). I had never seen a uniform patch on the shorts before. Anyone else seen anything like this before? Is it common practice and I just don’t pay much attention?[/quote]

    I think all of the A10 teams have a patch on their shorts.

    The Big East, too.[/quote]

    So it seems. They all seem to have different placement of the patches too. Rhode Island’s is on the bottom of the shorts.

    Thanks for the help. Is it new this year or has it been like that for a while?

    I couldn’t find any Big East schools with the patch on their shorts.[/quote]

    I could only find a few. I’m too busy pretending to work to look up all the schools, but it looks like UConn doesn’t represent.[/quote]

    Although I don’t have any photos, I believe that most if not all of the Missouri Valley teams have a “The Valley” patch on their shorts.

  • jesse | December 7, 2006 at 10:49 am |

    [quote comment=”27430″][quote comment=”27412″]Paul,

    Since you brought up the flag on a jersey today I have a question for you and my fellow readers. How do sport teams get away with having a flag patch on their jerseys. My mother and I were talking and she said that it was not “flag ettiqutte for teams to do this. I argured with here that it was a symbol of respect. But I was wrong according to this web site. Look at Section 9 near the bottom of the page.

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.”

    Who is right. My mom or I. Is there any special rule that I don’t know abbout I can’t believe that all these sport organizations would disrespect the flag in such an obvious manner.[/quote]

    Quoting from the aforementioned website:

    Are there penalties for violating the Flag Code?
    No. The Flag Code is intended as a guide to be followed on a purely voluntary basis to insure proper respect for the flag.

    So… In my opinion, both you and your Mom are right! I recall that American Legion-sponsored baseball teams were required to wear an American flag on their uniforms… and no one could ever accuse the Legion of being anything but “a patriotic organization.”

    So, as you say, all the flag patches/decals are being used by current sports teams to honor the U.S.; and they’re all also technically in violation of the Flag Code, which has no penalties.

    Hmmmm… wonder if I should tell my next-door neighbor that he should light his flag at night (or bring it inside at sunset)?[/quote]

    So long as it upright on the uniform a flag patch is allowed. At team can decide it wants wear a flag, but my reading of the rule seems to indicate that it should be on the left side of the uniform like a lapel pin.

    You should tell your friend to take down his flag at night or put a light on it. In not doing so he might as well just burn it. Obviously the flag rules are not enforced, but there is nothing more hypocritical than somebody displaying a flag to show the world how “patriotic” they are and ignorantly disrespecting the flag by not following the code.

    Because of the intricacies of the rules regarding displaying the flag, I tend to weigh against using it on athletic uniforms, although it is not per se against the rules.

  • Dan from PC | December 7, 2006 at 10:52 am |

    [quote comment=”27439″]Big East team with patches on their shorts

    http://www.gousfbull...

    I know my Friars had the big east logo on their shorts and a P on thier collar last year but changed that for this season by putting the big east logo on the collar (terrible picture, i apologize, couldnt find any better)

    very frustrating to watch last night as refs were calling all kinds of touch fouls for noah, while everytime a pc player went to the hoop he was mauled, and no call was made

  • Matt R. | December 7, 2006 at 10:52 am |

    [quote comment=”27426″]The Notre Dame women broke out white jerseys with green trim and black numbering.

    Notre Dame women’s unis

    The men’s team is having a black-out tonight against Alabama, but NCAA rules require the Irish wear the home whites. The men’s team broke out the black jerseys with green trim last year.[/quote]

    Regarding the Purdue uniform, it is highly unusual in that Purdue is partly in white and partly in gold. Are there any other teams whose name appears in two or more colors on the uniform? I can only think of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays when they had the rainbow look on their uniform.

  • Kerry | December 7, 2006 at 10:54 am |

    [quote comment=”27427″]How about the Memphis v. Tenn. game. I honestly don’t know how you could recruit kids to come and wear that horrible orange. I feel sorry for fans and alumni.[/quote]
    Nahhhh, the UT Orange allows fans, alumni and players to hunt before and/or after a sporting event without having to change! I think it’s economical and thrifty!!

  • Gary | December 7, 2006 at 10:56 am |

    Also, if you want to see more pics of the above jerseys, take a look here

  • dgc | December 7, 2006 at 11:01 am |

    [quote comment=”27441″]I am sure it has been mentioned before, but Chris Clark of the Washington Caps has a football like face (well, lower face) mask. I am far to lazy to find out why, but saw it last night at the game.
    Go Caps! Go back to your old unis![/quote]

    He’s wearing that to protect his jaw/teeth after getting hit with a puck in the mouth. He’s been wearing it for several games now.

  • todder85 | December 7, 2006 at 11:02 am |

    [quote comment=”27441″]I am sure it has been mentioned before, but Chris Clark of the Washington Caps has a football like face (well, lower face) mask. I am far to lazy to find out why, but saw it last night at the game.
    Go Caps! Go back to your old unis![/quote]

    That usually happens if a player hurts his jaw/lower face. some players have gone to a full visor in some cases instead of this route.

  • Thorold Blair | December 7, 2006 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”27441″]I am sure it has been mentioned before, but Chris Clark of the Washington Caps has a football like face (well, lower face) mask. I am far to lazy to find out why, but saw it last night at the game.
    Go Caps! Go back to your old unis![/quote]

    Usually worn to protect a jaw or head injury. No time to find pictures at the moment.. more research to come, but i’m pretty sure Pat LaFontaine and Joe Sakic among others have worn something similar at some point.

  • Kim | December 7, 2006 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”27441″]I am sure it has been mentioned before, but Chris Clark of the Washington Caps has a football like face (well, lower face) mask. I am far to lazy to find out why, but saw it last night at the game.
    Go Caps! Go back to your old unis![/quote]

    Actually it’s more like the lower half of a full face shield.

    Clark got hit in the face with a puck against the Bruins about a month ago. Lost a couple of teeth (his first!) and had his pallette crushed. It was late in a tie game, and he finished his shift!

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”27438″]Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.[/quote]

    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?

  • Matt G | December 7, 2006 at 11:10 am |

    Thank you all for your interpretations…. Please keep them coming. I think that since as today is such a historic importantance. I am intrested in know how the “Uni-Watchers” read into this issue. I know that must people think that we have had enough of “political” articles this week but this does apply with todays uni’s of all sports.

  • Kim | December 7, 2006 at 11:10 am |

    [quote comment=”27460″][quote comment=”27438″]Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.[/quote]

    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]

    While I didn’t see the interview, I’ll put words into Brett’s mouth.

    There’s an opinion that the various saftey equipment, such as visors and helmets have led to an increase in high stick related incidents. The basis of this is since players have the saftey equipment, the stick holders can be a little less vigilant about where their stick is.

  • Allison | December 7, 2006 at 11:12 am |

    Maybe I missed this, but is Cleveland rockin the orange uni’s all year? Because I just noticed a 1986-1987 patch on the shorts and it’s now 2006-2007…did they win a championship that year?

    Sorry don’t follow NBA too closely, but I never want to see those e-jerseys in America. Or in Australia. Or in Antarctica. And definitely never by Nike.

    Oh, and I think the orange uni’s should take over as the full time apparel

  • Broker75 | December 7, 2006 at 11:13 am |

    [quote comment=”27460″][quote comment=”27438″]Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.[/quote]

    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]
    He thinks if no player wears a visor, “there will be less high sticking, players will be more careful”.

  • David | December 7, 2006 at 11:13 am |

    [quote comment=”27460″][quote comment=”27438″]Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.[/quote]

    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]

    I can say anything about the Hull interview, but most anti-visor arguments I hear claim that it makes it hard to see player’s eyes and, therefore, harder to defend them. Also, there can sometimes be glare that can shine in the eyes of other players (both arguments are often directed specifically at the tinted and reflective visors).

  • Bryan S | December 7, 2006 at 11:15 am |

    First of all, in the grand scheme of uniforms, I wouldn’t pick the Caps as one of the worst, on the contrary, as far as thing go, they aren’t any better or any worse than most other jerseys…

    But what I really wanted to post was that we could be seeing a pretty cool jersey patch for the Nationals when they move to the new stadium. Check out the logo on the right of this page

  • Allison | December 7, 2006 at 11:16 am |

    [quote comment=”27462″][quote comment=”27460″][quote comment=”27438″]Brett Hull had an interview with the CBC television co. and they asked if he was commissioner of the league what changes he would make, he said he would make it mandatory for players to not wear a visor, he wants visorless players. Personally I think that this is an awful rule, if you wanna wear a visor, go right ahead.
    I was interested in seeing what you all think about this non-visor rule.[/quote]

    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]

    While I didn’t see the interview, I’ll put words into Brett’s mouth.

    There’s an opinion that the various saftey equipment, such as visors and helmets have led to an increase in high stick related incidents. The basis of this is since players have the saftey equipment, the stick holders can be a little less vigilant about where their stick is.[/quote]

    Not really sure if this is what you’re looking for, but my dad works in a USHL penalty box and scoreboard area, and this is what he had to say:

    If two players are fighting and helmets stay on, the benefit of the doubt goes to the player WITHOUT a visor because they are more exposed. The player with a visor (or cage) has less to worry about regarding hits to the head/face. Ever wonder why in some fights one guy gets a 5 min and one a 10? Or one a 5 and the other a 2? Assuming helmets stayed on and they were standing throughout the fight, the player with a visor will receive the longer penalty.

  • maximumK | December 7, 2006 at 11:34 am |

    [quote comment=”27466″]First of all, in the grand scheme of uniforms, I wouldn’t pick the Caps as one of the worst, on the contrary, as far as thing go, they aren’t any better or any worse than most other jerseys…

    But what I really wanted to post was that we could be seeing a pretty cool jersey patch for the Nationals when they move to the new stadium. Check out the logo on the right of this page[/quote]

    It’s a poor shame that the words “Nationals Ballpark” probably won’t be on there once all is said and done. DC is having enough trouble getting money into that project that they’re sure to put a big-money sponsor on that sucker. It’s still a damn nice patch, though. GO NATS!

    Mot only should the visor be mandated, but the full mask worn by little kids and, i think, colleges should be mandated. Seeing as hockey is about as violent as football, except with a tiny piece of hard rubber flying around at 100 mph, I think they need to protect the players as much as they can. GO CAPS!

  • DJ | December 7, 2006 at 11:34 am |

    The Notre Dame women broke out white jerseys with green trim and black numbering.

    The game report from http://www.und.com states that the numbers were blue (presumably navy blue). They sure looked black to me.

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 11:51 am |

    The new ESPN column is up — look here.

  • Chad G | December 7, 2006 at 11:53 am |

    [quote comment=”27470″]The new ESPN column is up — look here.[/quote]

    There is an issue with the column, it’s black on grey, instead of black on orange as usual (the text)

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 11:53 am |

    Brett Hull, much like Jeremy Roenick, has delusions of grandeur. Visors aren’t going away. While I respect Brett’s accomplishments in the game, his opinions on the game are often more publicity and pot-stirring than helpful.

    In fact, it’s madatory now that any player younger than 18 in the World Juniors has to wear a full cage to protect his face. Once players hit 18, they are adults and can choose for themselves. It’s personal choice, and it will remain that way. Arguing that removing visors will reduce high-sticking incidents to the head and face is like saying that removing seatbelts from cars will prevent people from speeding.

    On another note, Brett should thank the Blues for his retirement ceremony and keep his opinions for talk shows. The St. Louis Blues, the very team that gave Brett the retirement ceremony, have a policy that every player in training camp with no professional experience must wear a visor in camp.

    Saku Koivu nearly lost an eye in last year’s playoffs. Bryan Berard has limited vision in one eye. Brett’s former teammate Al MacInnis suffered a horrendous eye injury. Steve Yzerman was hit by a puck in ther 2004 playoffs and required surgery to fix the damage to his left eye. Dany Heatley has a permanently dilated pupil due to damage from getting hit with a puck. 38% of NHL players were wearing visors in 2005 (244 of approximately 640 players), but half of the injuries in the league are facial ones. Of those facial injuries, players not wearing visors account for three times as many as those who wear an eye shield.

    I’m not saything they should be mandatory, but Brett Hull’s argument is flawed. Pucks are doing as much damage as sticks.

  • Chad G | December 7, 2006 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment=”27471″][quote comment=”27470″]The new ESPN column is up — look here.[/quote]

    There is an issue with the column, it’s black on grey, instead of black on orange as usual (the text)[/quote]

    nevermind it fixed itself when i reloaded the page

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”27464″][quote comment=”27460″]
    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]
    He thinks if no player wears a visor, “there will be less high sticking, players will be more careful”.[/quote]

    Interestingly, Hull has a bit of experience with facial protection — look.

  • todd krevanchi | December 7, 2006 at 12:03 pm |

    about the flag and its use in athletics…
    my father being in the navy, a vietnam veteran, and heavily involved in the workings of the local vfw (and whose yard flagpole already had the flag at half staff at 8 this morning when i drove by their house) had this to say when kobe wore these shoes…
    http://cache.gettyim...
    http://cache.gettyim...

    according to the rules, what kobe did is fine. he didnt take a flag and use the flag “textile or fabric” as part of the shoe. he simply used a flag pattern on his apparell. in otherwords, that was not a flag, but a picture of a flag, there is a difference. organizations who fly the flag are unofficially considered to be patriotic organizations, ie. businesses, schools, colleges, etc. cooincidentally, a few years back, my sister bought a flag, and only wore that (strategically placed and worn though) for halloween. when she sent pictures to my parents, my father was livid, called her immediately and let her know that what she did was against the flag code…
    he is really up on the rules…

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 12:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”27475″][quote comment=”27464″][quote comment=”27460″]
    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]
    He thinks if no player wears a visor, “there will be less high sticking, players will be more careful”.[/quote]

    Interestingly, Hull has a bit of experience with facial protection — look.[/quote]

    Except that’s Bobby, his dad. Brett has never worn one.

    Just as a side note, this might be my next jersey. Check out Hull’s number. :o)

  • Josh | December 7, 2006 at 12:08 pm |

    Does NCAA basketball not have a rule about uniforms all looking the same?
    I was watching the Memphis – Tennessee game last night and I noticed that Bradshaw and the other white guy for UT (forgot his name) had a patch that looked like a torch on the right side of their jerseys. Now, I’m sure there is some meaning to that (other than the fact that they are white), but those two guys were the only ones on the team that had it.
    Strange.

  • Manzell | December 7, 2006 at 12:10 pm |

    RE: Red dyes.
    I do beleive that in fact they were MUCH more expensive. The University of Washington (color: purple and gold) wore Blue and Gold because the red component to make purple was too expensive until the 60’s or so. Belie’e Dat!

  • Jill | December 7, 2006 at 12:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”27452″]

    Regarding the Purdue uniform, it is highly unusual in that Purdue is partly in white and partly in gold. Are there any other teams whose name appears in two or more colors on the uniform? I can only think of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays when they had the rainbow look on their uniform.[/quote]

    I don’t like the two toned name. It doesn’t look so bad on the black jerseys but it looks horrible on the whites. They have a yellow alternate that looks bad too but I don’t think they have worn it yet, but I might be wrong. There is a photo on the media guide.

    The men don’t do this and I am glad.

  • Richard | December 7, 2006 at 12:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”27478″][quote comment=”27475″][quote comment=”27464″][quote comment=”27460″]
    Did he explain why he’s anti-visor?[/quote]
    He thinks if no player wears a visor, “there will be less high sticking, players will be more careful”.[/quote]

    Interestingly, Hull has a bit of experience with facial protection — look.[/quote]

    Except that’s Bobby, his dad. Brett has never worn one.

    Just as a side note, this might be my next jersey. Check out Hull’s number. :o)[/quote]

    What was he wearing 80 for?

  • Steve | December 7, 2006 at 12:20 pm |

    I know it’s a day late, but May (Q#14)isn’t technically the only player to wear his birthday on his jersey – Sidney Crosby wears #87 because he was born on August (8th month) 7th, 1987. So he even has the year covered too. A little more cryptic since May had the month spelled out, but it is still his birthday, unfortunately there is no “Crosby” month.
    http://www.tsn.ca/nh...

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 12:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”27482″][quote comment=”27478″]

    Just as a side note, this might be my next jersey. Check out Hull’s number. :o)[/quote]

    What was he wearing 80 for?[/quote]

    In honor of the late U.S. Olympic hockey coach Herb Brooks, Brett Hull donned jersey number 80 during the 2003 Red & White game played in Grand Rapids, Michigan as a tribute to the 1980 Miracle On Ice team that Brooks coached. The Red & White game features Red Wings and Griffins players. It’s a pre-season tradition between the two teams that started when the Wings and Griffins agreed on the minor league affiliate. Hull wore 80 for the entire pre-season that year.

  • WVU Tom | December 7, 2006 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”27483″]I know it’s a day late, but May (Q#14)isn’t technically the only player to wear his birthday on his jersey – Sidney Crosby wears #87 because he was born on August (8th month) 7th, 1987. So he even has the year covered too. A little more cryptic since May had the month spelled out, but it is still his birthday, unfortunately there is no “Crosby” month.
    http://www.tsn.ca/nh...[/quote]

    Not really the same, a lot of athletes base their number on their date of birth. The Sidney Crosby reference, IMO, would really only hold water if he had been born on the 87th day in the month of Crosby.

  • Richard | December 7, 2006 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”27484″][quote comment=”27482″][quote comment=”27478″]

    Just as a side note, this might be my next jersey. Check out Hull’s number. :o)[/quote]

    What was he wearing 80 for?[/quote]

    In honor of the late U.S. Olympic hockey coach Herb Brooks, Brett Hull donned jersey number 80 during the 2003 Red & White game played in Grand Rapids, Michigan as a tribute to the 1980 Miracle On Ice team that Brooks coached. The Red & White game features Red Wings and Griffins players. It’s a pre-season tradition between the two teams that started when the Wings and Griffins agreed on the minor league affiliate. Hull wore 80 for the entire pre-season that year.[/quote]

    Much appreciated.

  • Original Jim | December 7, 2006 at 12:30 pm |

    Paul, I just want to say thanks for the shout out in your ESPN column!

    Also, I think Brett Hull is talking out his ass with his anti-visor stance. I think it’s very lame to still have that “anti-macho” vibe throughout the league that men are pussies if they wear visors. Better to be thought of as a pussy I guess than to not be able to see the person calling you one.

    The game today is faster and stronger than it was in the past. If you watch games from the 60s and 70s, there’s no question it’s a different game now. And with all the high-tech materials in the sticks, and bigger players, the puck travels faster. You see more players going down to stop a puck than before. The players need the protection. I’d rather have someone on my team who will stop at nothing to keep the puck out of the net. And if that means they wear visors, so be it.

    Hell, I played in a street hockey league wearing a helmet and full cage. After I saw a helmetless teammate get accidentally sticked in the eye, I went out and bought the helmet. I never suffered from any loss of peripheral vision.

  • Kenny | December 7, 2006 at 12:34 pm |

    I always opted for the four point, up top chin strap…mostly white with the chin being black

    And it always had to be the hard plastic…couldn’t stand the flexible “cloth” ones

  • specs | December 7, 2006 at 12:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”27477″]a few years back, my sister bought a flag, and only wore that (strategically placed and worn though) for halloween.[/quote]

    What, no link?

  • Matt Bonnett | December 7, 2006 at 12:38 pm |

    Nice column on chinstraps in the NFL, I’ve always been fascinated by the diversity in chinstraps and indeed facemasks, you used to be able to guess someone’s position from their helmet without a jersey number, these days its a bit more muddied.

    Never ever seen a 6 point strap though, thats a first!

  • todd krevanchi | December 7, 2006 at 12:44 pm |

    when a school reaches the final 4, they become an nike elite school (silver collar medallion). this is nothing new, but yesterday it was reported that when this happens, they acquire the top of the line shoe and apparell package from nike. heck, why not, they did get to the final 4!

    what i want to know is why some of these schools arent included:
    georgetown
    providence
    unlv
    villanova
    st. johns
    virginia
    georgia
    purdue
    iowa

    now, i only went back to ’80 (the final 4s i could remember) but did these have to be nike schools first, then get to the final four?

  • David M | December 7, 2006 at 12:44 pm |

    I have a red replica Washington Nationals cap dated back to the turn of the century. I know it’s not an actual cap, just a reproduction…but did they wear red way back then? I’ll have to check out the HOF achives uni site.

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”27485″][quote comment=”27483″]I know it’s a day late, but May (Q#14)isn’t technically the only player to wear his birthday on his jersey – Sidney Crosby wears #87 because he was born on August (8th month) 7th, 1987. So he even has the year covered too. A little more cryptic since May had the month spelled out, but it is still his birthday, unfortunately there is no “Crosby” month.
    http://www.tsn.ca/nh...[/quote]

    Not really the same, a lot of athletes base their number on their date of birth. The Sidney Crosby reference, IMO, would really only hold water if he had been born on the 87th day in the month of Crosby.[/quote]

    I wanted to wear my birthday growing up (8/10) but both 10 was taken – and I don’t like wearing single digit uni’s – so I combined them and went with 18.

    As far as Hull and his opinions, Teebz, again you are dead on. Hull is a media hound – and the idea of no visors is crazy. I play recreationally and I also referee, and I also wear glasses – I HAVE to have a visor when I referee.

  • al | December 7, 2006 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”27487″][quote comment=”27484″][quote comment=”27482″][quote comment=”27478″]

    Just as a side note, this might be my next jersey. Check out Hull’s number. :o)[/quote]

    What was he wearing 80 for?[/quote]

    In honor of the late U.S. Olympic hockey coach Herb Brooks, Brett Hull donned jersey number 80 during the 2003 Red & White game played in Grand Rapids, Michigan as a tribute to the 1980 Miracle On Ice team that Brooks coached. The Red & White game features Red Wings and Griffins players. It’s a pre-season tradition between the two teams that started when the Wings and Griffins agreed on the minor league affiliate. Hull wore 80 for the entire pre-season that year.[/quote]

    Much appreciated.[/quote]

    Jeez, Teebz… you know everything ’bout Hockey!

    I wish to nominate you as the Official Curator of the UniWatchBlog museum – Hockey Wing, natch.
    Go, PuckMan!

  • Steve | December 7, 2006 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”27485″][quote comment=”27483″]I know it’s a day late, but May (Q#14)isn’t technically the only player to wear his birthday on his jersey – Sidney Crosby wears #87 because he was born on August (8th month) 7th, 1987. So he even has the year covered too. A little more cryptic since May had the month spelled out, but it is still his birthday, unfortunately there is no “Crosby” month.
    http://www.tsn.ca/nh...[/quote]

    Not really the same, a lot of athletes base their number on their date of birth. The Sidney Crosby reference, IMO, would really only hold water if he had been born on the 87th day in the month of Crosby.[/quote]

    But how many have the day, month AND year in their number?

  • Thorold Blair | December 7, 2006 at 12:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”27479″]Does NCAA basketball not have a rule about uniforms all looking the same?
    I was watching the Memphis – Tennessee game last night and I noticed that Bradshaw and the other white guy for UT (forgot his name) had a patch that looked like a torch on the right side of their jerseys. Now, I’m sure there is some meaning to that (other than the fact that they are white), but those two guys were the only ones on the team that had it.
    Strange.[/quote]

    Scholar Athlete patches.. or academic all-american pathces?? I think it’s been discussed before but in regards to football, but I think it may have something to do with academics.

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 1:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”27491″]Never ever seen a 6 point strap though, thats a first![/quote]

    Several players wear 6-pointers but leave some of the straps unsnapped (Pacman Jones, e.g.). The only guy I know of who routinely snaps all six straps is Keith Brooking (there may be others but I’m not aware of them) — he’s the one whose photo I linked to.

  • Holla At your Boy | December 7, 2006 at 1:17 pm |

    I agree with Brett. No visors. Players tend to hide behind visors.

    To understand the situation, you need to play competitive hockey, i.e. juniors or pros to understand.

    Players in the higher levels control their sticks. I would wear a visor in an adult / rec league game, because of the crazy high sticks

    NCAA college hockey needs to switch to visors. It is stupid that the NCAA is forcing their players to wear full shields. Allow the players to wear visors like major jrs and Canadian Universities, so if kids make the show, they are can play without a visor on.

    Plus no face mask looks tough.

  • dgc | December 7, 2006 at 1:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”27504″]I agree with Brett. No visors. Players tend to hide behind visors.

    To understand the situation, you need to play competitive hockey, i.e. juniors or pros to understand.

    Players in the higher levels control their sticks. I would wear a visor in an adult / rec league game, because of the crazy high sticks

    NCAA college hockey needs to switch to visors. It is stupid that the NCAA is forcing their players to wear full shields. Allow the players to wear visors like major jrs and Canadian Universities, so if kids make the show, they are can play without a visor on.

    Plus no face mask looks tough.[/quote]

    Interesting enough, during the Caps’ TV broadcast yesterday, they remarked that Jamie Heward was probably going to start wearing a visor (he got his face cut up by Modano’s skate). They even interviewed Coach Hanlon who remarked that anyone not wearing a visor was an idiot.

  • Jim H | December 7, 2006 at 1:31 pm |

    As far as chinstraps go, In my personal experience I preferred the 4 point up high strap. It was easier to buckle and unbuckle I thought using just the bottoms. I also used a chinstrap that had a gel insert in the cup to make the chin more comfortable. Also with the covers on the chin strap many players on my high school teams just used a regular wrist band. Sorry for the logo creep.

  • Mason B | December 7, 2006 at 1:31 pm |

    i dont know if this has been mentioned about the flag, but for my american legion baseball team it was required that all of our jerseys have the flag on the right arm, looks like this , i thought i remembered reading it on the american legion baseball website but i couldnt find it just now

  • Kim | December 7, 2006 at 1:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”27488″]
    Also, I think Brett Hull is talking out his ass with his anti-visor stance. I think it’s very lame to still have that “anti-macho” vibe throughout the league that men are pussies if they wear visors. Better to be thought of as a pussy I guess than to not be able to see the person calling you one.

    The game today is faster and stronger than it was in the past. If you watch games from the 60s and 70s, there’s no question it’s a different game now. And with all the high-tech materials in the sticks, and bigger players, the puck travels faster. You see more players going down to stop a puck than before. The players need the protection. I’d rather have someone on my team who will stop at nothing to keep the puck out of the net. And if that means they wear visors, so be it.

    Hell, I played in a street hockey league wearing a helmet and full cage. After I saw a helmetless teammate get accidentally sticked in the eye, I went out and bought the helmet. I never suffered from any loss of peripheral vision.[/quote]

    Good points.

    But I think you also need to look at it as a Chicken and Egg dilema. More and more players go down to block shots because of the better equipment. They don’t take shot blocking to the art form that guys like Brad Marsh (who not only was visorless, but helmetless!), or Craig Ludwig did. They rely on the equipment to make up for faults in their technique.

    I’m not saying one way is any better than the other, the result is the same.

  • GoTerriers | December 7, 2006 at 1:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”27504″]I agree with Brett. No visors. Players tend to hide behind visors.

    To understand the situation, you need to play competitive hockey, i.e. juniors or pros to understand.

    Players in the higher levels control their sticks. I would wear a visor in an adult / rec league game, because of the crazy high sticks

    NCAA college hockey needs to switch to visors. It is stupid that the NCAA is forcing their players to wear full shields. Allow the players to wear visors like major jrs and Canadian Universities, so if kids make the show, they are can play without a visor on.

    Plus no face mask looks tough.[/quote]

    Though players at higher levels might have better control of their sticks, they also skate faster are in better physical condition and are stronger. To me, this makes a BETTER argument for visors (or even full cages).
    If players from Mites upward are wearing cages (or other full-face protection) the notion of “I’m more comfortable without” the facial protection loses it’s steam. You’re wearing the protection now, just like you’ve done since your first laced up a pair of Tacks.
    On the marketing side, who do you think is more marketable: a guy with his face intact or a guy with scars and missing his teeth? The NHL is being marketed now as a game of finesse, speed and skill. The days of the “Broad Street Bullies” are gone. Call it “pretty-boy hockey” or “pussified hockey” but when played right, hockey is an intense yet elegant thing to watch. Protecting a teams’ and leagues’ assets (it’s PLAYERS) should be it’s first priority. The NCAA has it RIGHT . . .protect the players!

    The notion that “no face mask looks tough” is neanderthal. I hope you were being facetious.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 1:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”27499″]
    Jeez, Teebz… you know everything ’bout Hockey!

    I wish to nominate you as the Official Curator of the UniWatchBlog museum – Hockey Wing, natch.
    Go, PuckMan![/quote]

    Thanks. Hockey is my religion, and as such, I am a devout follower.

    That, and being a Canadian living on the cold prairies helps too. :o)

  • Broker75 | December 7, 2006 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”27511″][quote comment=”27499″]
    Jeez, Teebz… you know everything ’bout Hockey!

    I wish to nominate you as the Official Curator of the UniWatchBlog museum – Hockey Wing, natch.
    Go, PuckMan![/quote]

    Thanks. Hockey is my religion, and as such, I am a devout follower.

    That, and being a Canadian living on the cold prairies helps too. :o)[/quote]

    Teebz: who do you cheer for in the mighty NHL?

  • todd krevanchi (krvanch) | December 7, 2006 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”27500″][quote comment=”27485″][quote comment=”27483″]I know it’s a day late, but May (Q#14)isn’t technically the only player to wear his birthday on his jersey – Sidney Crosby wears #87 because he was born on August (8th month) 7th, 1987. So he even has the year covered too. A little more cryptic since May had the month spelled out, but it is still his birthday, unfortunately there is no “Crosby” month.
    http://www.tsn.ca/nh...[/quote]

    Not really the same, a lot of athletes base their number on their date of birth. The Sidney Crosby reference, IMO, would really only hold water if he had been born on the 87th day in the month of Crosby.[/quote]

    But how many have the day, month AND year in their number?[/quote]

    he has the date and month, not the day and month

  • Terry | December 7, 2006 at 1:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”27504″]I agree with Brett. No visors. Players tend to hide behind visors.

    To understand the situation, you need to play competitive hockey, i.e. juniors or pros to understand.

    Players in the higher levels control their sticks. I would wear a visor in an adult / rec league game, because of the crazy high sticks

    NCAA college hockey needs to switch to visors. It is stupid that the NCAA is forcing their players to wear full shields. Allow the players to wear visors like major jrs and Canadian Universities, so if kids make the show, they are can play without a visor on.

    Plus no face mask looks tough.[/quote]

    For those of you who live in Canada or the Northern U.S. and can get Don Cherry’s daily syndicated “Grapeline” radio segment today; listen to it, because it is concerning Brett Hull’s comments about visors and Cherry also goes into a rant/discussion about going back to helmetless in hockey again. I tried to find the podcast on Toronto’s Fan 590 website, but couldn’t find it.

  • pr9000 | December 7, 2006 at 1:49 pm |

    Could this be a legitimate game helmet? That logo sure looks … well, cheap.

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 1:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”27494″]when a school reaches the final 4, they become an nike elite school (silver collar medallion). this is nothing new, but yesterday it was reported that when this happens, they acquire the top of the line shoe and apparell package from nike. heck, why not, they did get to the final 4!

    what i want to know is why some of these schools arent included:
    georgetown
    providence
    unlv
    villanova
    st. johns
    virginia
    georgia
    purdue
    iowa

    now, i only went back to ’80 (the final 4s i could remember) but did these have to be nike schools first, then get to the final four?[/quote]

    I think they only go for Final Four teams since 1996. Isn’t that the year they started putting the swoosh on the shorts?

    And does George Mason have an Elite tag yet?

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 1:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”27504″]I agree with Brett. No visors. Players tend to hide behind visors.

    To understand the situation, you need to play competitive hockey, i.e. juniors or pros to understand.

    Players in the higher levels control their sticks. I would wear a visor in an adult / rec league game, because of the crazy high sticks

    NCAA college hockey needs to switch to visors. It is stupid that the NCAA is forcing their players to wear full shields. Allow the players to wear visors like major jrs and Canadian Universities, so if kids make the show, they are can play without a visor on.

    Plus no face mask looks tough.[/quote]

    You either have never played competitive hockey, or you’re looking to lose an eye. Either way, you’re dead wrong. I’ve already stated that in the NHL, half of the injuries in the league are facial ones. Of those facial injuries, players not wearing visors account for three times as many as those who wear an eye shield.

    I’ve already listed off enough NHLers who have had serious eye injuries as a result of both sticks and pucks.

    Let’s not forget the eye injury Kris Draper took when he was hit from behind by Claude Lemieux in the playoffs. His face was nearly destroyed by landing face-first into the boards.

    Visors do what they are intended for: protect a player’s face and eyes. Players don’t hide behind them. That’s like saying that NFL players hide behind their facemasks.

    Brad Marsh (who was helmetless throughout his career) and Craig Ludwig (who did wear a helmet throughout his career) were masters at blocking shots because they blocked shots with their shins first. They never put their head in the way because that’s suicide. If any parents out there are trying to teach their children how to blick shots, get a video of Craig Ludwig. The guy was a master, and he never got hurt.

  • pr9000 | December 7, 2006 at 1:54 pm |

    Looks like I answered my own question. Wow … that looks cheap. Amazing how the NFL would never do anything that low-rent now — not that the Bengals’ unis aren’t an abomination currently, but I’m sure they’re an expensively designed abomination.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 1:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”27512″]
    Teebz: who do you cheer for in the mighty NHL?[/quote]

    I’ve always been a Penguins fan. I was a Nordiques fan and a Jets fan as well, but the Penguins are the only team that I’ve liked that hasn’t moved.

  • Seattle Matt | December 7, 2006 at 1:55 pm |

    As a pseudo-follow up to the comment yesterday about Dwayne Wade wearing a Nike jersey on the cover of SI, during the Bulls/Sixers game last night, ESPN showed some pictures from a Muscle and Fitness magazine article featuring Ben Wallace. He was clad in a Reebok jersey. Here’s the article which unfortunately does not have the picture with the Reebok tag showing. But it was definitely not an Adidas jersey.

  • JimmyMac | December 7, 2006 at 1:59 pm |

    Ask Doug barkely if he wished he had worn a visor…how ridiculous not to properly protect yourself when playing such a dangerous sport…hey while’ll your at it take off the helmet and you might end up like Bill Masterton… Silly Brett.

    Doug Barkley’s playing career was tragically ended when an on-ice accident left him without vision in his right eye. On January 30, 1966, Barkley, a Detroit Red Wing, was battling with Chicago’s Doug Mohns for a puck at the blueline. Mohns attempted to lift Barkley’s stick, missed, and caught the bent-over Barkley directly in the right eye. He would never play again.

    Barkley began in the Chicago organization, playing parts of 1957-58 and 1959-60 with the Hawks while apprenticing in the minors. The Hawks traded him in 1962, and he soon became a regular with Detroit. Barkley joined the Red Wings for 1962-63 and missed out on rookie-of-the-year honors in the closest vote of all time when Kent Douglas of Toronto received 99.4 weighted votes to Barkley’s 99.2.

    After his injury, Barkley joined the Detroit front office, working in public relations and as a troubleshooter. He was appointed head coach of the Fort Worth farm team for Detroit in 1969 and a year later was behind the bench for the Wings, where he stayed for less than one season before quitting because of the teams slow start. He returned to coach the Wings again in 1975, but lasted just 26 games before being fired and replaced by Alex Delvecchio, his former teammate.

  • Matt | December 7, 2006 at 2:03 pm |

    If I played hockey, I would always wear a visor. My eyes are too precious to lose one.

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 2:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”27517″][quote comment=”27504″]I agree with Brett. No visors. Players tend to hide behind visors.

    To understand the situation, you need to play competitive hockey, i.e. juniors or pros to understand.

    Players in the higher levels control their sticks. I would wear a visor in an adult / rec league game, because of the crazy high sticks

    NCAA college hockey needs to switch to visors. It is stupid that the NCAA is forcing their players to wear full shields. Allow the players to wear visors like major jrs and Canadian Universities, so if kids make the show, they are can play without a visor on.

    Plus no face mask looks tough.[/quote]

    You either have never played competitive hockey, or you’re looking to lose an eye. Either way, you’re dead wrong. I’ve already stated that in the NHL, half of the injuries in the league are facial ones. Of those facial injuries, players not wearing visors account for three times as many as those who wear an eye shield.

    I’ve already listed off enough NHLers who have had serious eye injuries as a result of both sticks and pucks.

    Let’s not forget the eye injury Kris Draper took when he was hit from behind by Claude Lemieux in the playoffs. His face was nearly destroyed by landing face-first into the boards.

    Visors do what they are intended for: protect a player’s face and eyes. Players don’t hide behind them. That’s like saying that NFL players hide behind their facemasks.

    Brad Marsh (who was helmetless throughout his career) and Craig Ludwig (who did wear a helmet throughout his career) were masters at blocking shots because they blocked shots with their shins first. They never put their head in the way because that’s suicide. If any parents out there are trying to teach their children how to blick shots, get a video of Craig Ludwig. The guy was a master, and he never got hurt.[/quote]

    Plus, his shin guards were the size of fighter jet wings – they were HUGE!!

    Teebz, can I at least be on the Hockey staff at Uni-Watch Museum and University that you were nominated for?

  • al | December 7, 2006 at 2:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”27519″][quote comment=”27512″]
    Teebz: who do you cheer for in the mighty NHL?[/quote]

    I’ve always been a Penguins fan. I was a Nordiques fan and a Jets fan as well, but the Penguins are the only team that I’ve liked that hasn’t moved.[/quote]
    What are your thoughts on the Broadway Blueshirts?
    Most of us here hate Dolan and the current regime, but what is your take?

  • JimmyMac | December 7, 2006 at 2:12 pm |

    Maybe long shorts aren’t such a bad idea…hey John, you can afford to go to a tanning booth can’t you?

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Broker75 | December 7, 2006 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”27519″][quote comment=”27512″]
    Teebz: who do you cheer for in the mighty NHL?[/quote]

    I’ve always been a Penguins fan. I was a Nordiques fan and a Jets fan as well, but the Penguins are the only team that I’ve liked that hasn’t moved.[/quote]
    The Penguins belong in Pittsburgh.

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”27524″][quote comment=”27519″][quote comment=”27512″]
    Teebz: who do you cheer for in the mighty NHL?[/quote]

    I’ve always been a Penguins fan. I was a Nordiques fan and a Jets fan as well, but the Penguins are the only team that I’ve liked that hasn’t moved.[/quote]
    What are your thoughts on the Broadway Blueshirts?
    Most of us here hate Dolan and the current regime, but what is your take?[/quote]

    As the self-processed #1 Ranger fan here, let me chime in on this one.

    I like the mix of players we have now. I love the coaching staff. Sather has finally learned to stay a little behind the scenes and the improvement has gone hand in hand. Dolan? See New York Knicks, category – MISERY. Dolan’s too worried about Isiah Thomas and the Knicks – I’d be surprised if he even remembered the Rangers played there.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 2:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”27521″]Doug barkley’s history[/quote]

    Good follow-up, JimmyMac. I forgot about Barkley. :o)

  • tessa | December 7, 2006 at 2:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”27413″]Paul (or John, whichever of you might know),
    I recently updated my browser to Firefox 2.0 and the links in your blog no longer open in new windows (or tabs in my case, but same thing) but opens in this same window, which makes it annoying to reload this page every time I have to hit Back. In Firefox 1.X whatever it was this was not an issue. I was wondering if either of you knew why this was happening.

    Thanks for your hard work and help![/quote]

    If changing the options doesn’t work for you and you don’t want to go back a version, you can also hold down the CTRL button as you click the links, and they will open in tabs.

  • JimmyMac | December 7, 2006 at 2:18 pm |

    http://msn.foxsports...
    Players union files suit against NBA

    NEW YORK (AP) – The players’ association filed two unfair labor practice charges Friday against the NBA over issues with the new ball and the league’s crackdown on player complaints.

    The charges were filed with the National Labor Relations Board.

    Mike Kahn says the NBA’s union should have fought back against the league a long time ago.

    “I think that’s right within the NBA’s wheelhouse,” Dallas owner Mark Cuban said. “They say the NBA stands for ‘Nothing But Attorneys,’ so we’re going to be great at dealing with those issues.”

    A number of players publicly have complained about changing the ball from leather to a microfiber composite. Although players are adjusting to the new ball, they’re having a much harder time with the crackdown on reactions after the whistle, often referred to as a “zero-tolerance policy.”

    “You never want to feel that the NBA’s a dictatorship,” Wizards veteran Antonio Daniels said.

    NO, THE NBA IS A DEMOCRACY RUN BY A DICTATOR…

    AND SOMEONE SHOULD FILE A SUIT AGAINST THE NBA FOR THOSE WIZARDS ALTERNATE UNIFORM VIOLATING A GOOD TASTE POLICY…

  • Alex Kibler | December 7, 2006 at 2:19 pm |

    Newcastle and Reading played last night in the Premiership. As some of you may know, both of the teams are big fans of stripes, with the difference being in orientation.

    This created quite the visual spectacle.

    Good game, tho. Howay the lads.

  • Denis | December 7, 2006 at 2:20 pm |

    I play NCAA college hockey and I would prefer if the NCAA would allow us to wear visors, like we wore in juniors. It would help control all the stick work. It may sound crazy to the nontraditional hockey fan, but it does help out with the stick infractions.
    Personally, I would not wear a visor if I played in the NHL. Thats just me. I do believe that players should have the choice. The AHL and ECHL have a rule mandating their players wear visors.

    My ex-teammate who left school early for to sign in the NHL, his agent told him that it is his choice obviously, but if he chooses not to wear a visor, it shows the NHL team he is committed.

    I also heard a NHL scout criticize NCAA players vs. mjr players because college player have retailer their game to playing without a full face mask.

  • Nolan | December 7, 2006 at 2:23 pm |

    Chin strap configuration I’ve never seen before Sunday.

    Mathias Kiwanuka has a standard 4 point low snap model, but the back straps have two snaps per strap. You have to look close to the pic but they’re there.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 2:28 pm |

    I’m not going to hold office in the Uni Watch wing of hockey, so I’d be glad to have more hockey colleagues like yourselves, Banker Bill and al and Broker75. We’re all equals.

    I also think that the Penguins should remain a fixture in the Pittsburgh sporting scene until the NHL folds. Removing them would be a tragedy to a blue-collar, sports-loving city.

    As for the New York Rangers, I will say this. If Jaromir Jagr wanted to, he could rule this league like Wayne Gretzky did. This is not to bring Gretzky down, but Jagr is on a different level than 99% of NHL players. The problem is that he always seem like he’s going through the motions. If the guy had half the heart that Mark Messier did, he could probably break the 150-point mark each season.

    But, the Rangers are good. As European as they are, they sometimes play a little soft on smaller opposing forwards (most recently, Buffalo and the NYI). Malik, Ward, and Tyutin should throw their big bodies around a little more in their own end like Pronger does.

    Their goaltending is a little suspect this year, but Lundqvist looks like he’s coming into form. Marcel Hossa needs to decide if he’s going to be as good as his brother, or skate like he’s invisible like he normally does.

    Personally, I think the Rangers can, and should, win the Atlantic division. Whether or not they do hinges on these little issues.

  • Minna H | December 7, 2006 at 2:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”27511″][quote comment=”27499″]
    Jeez, Teebz… you know everything ’bout Hockey!

    I wish to nominate you as the Official Curator of the UniWatchBlog museum – Hockey Wing, natch.
    Go, PuckMan![/quote]

    Thanks. Hockey is my religion, and as such, I am a devout follower.

    That, and being a Canadian living on the cold prairies helps too. :o)[/quote]

    Mr. T. Cratchit, I, M. Scrooge, am humbly petitioning to be your intern, oh, great hockey curator. I do not know much about hockey, but I am willing to learn. Plus, I can fetch a cup of coffee (or six) with the best of them. I further humbly submit bluenoser, Richard, Riley, Kenny, et. al for positions on your staff. I would submit the name of Banker Bill, but he has already put in his application.

    As for wearing a visor, throw me in on the pro side. There is no way I would be skating around at that speed with people who had sticks in their hands, not to mention a hard, rubber object that killed a kid in the stands by striking her, without something protecting my eyes.

    Thank you in advance your your consideration of my application.

    M. Scrooge

    p.s. I would me more than willing to start on the paperwork needed to request a name change for the Wild!

  • Burrill | December 7, 2006 at 2:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”27519″][quote comment=”27512″]
    Teebz: who do you cheer for in the mighty NHL?[/quote]

    I’ve always been a Penguins fan. I was a Nordiques fan and a Jets fan as well, but the Penguins are the only team that I’ve liked that hasn’t moved.[/quote]

    What will you do if the Penguins move?

    On another hockey topic, I was fascinated to learn that the Wings have never used a lace-up collar. I’d never thought about it before, but it surprised me to learn that.

    Also, I remember both Draper’s and Yzerman’s severe injuries far too well. With those grisly details in mind, there is no substantially good argument for getting rid of facial protection at any level.

  • JJD | December 7, 2006 at 2:33 pm |

    Paul —

    Since you referenced Pacman Jones in the ESPN column, do you know why his jersey says “P. Jones” instead of “A. Jones”? That’s been bugging me and I haven’t found an answer that looked like something other than conjecture.

  • Josh | December 7, 2006 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”27494″]when a school reaches the final 4, they become an nike elite school (silver collar medallion). this is nothing new, but yesterday it was reported that when this happens, they acquire the top of the line shoe and apparell package from nike. heck, why not, they did get to the final 4!

    what i want to know is why some of these schools arent included:
    georgetown
    providence
    unlv
    villanova
    st. johns
    virginia
    georgia
    purdue
    iowa

    now, i only went back to ’80 (the final 4s i could remember) but did these have to be nike schools first, then get to the final four?[/quote]

    Nike only includes the teams that have reached the Final Four since 1994 in their “Elite” series.
    That was the year Nike created its “Team Sports” division, so it’s a tribute to their teams.

    Even though they made some unis before that year (UNLV and Georgetown) the Team Sports was not its own division.

  • Minna H | December 7, 2006 at 2:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”27540″]

    On another hockey topic, I was fascinated to learn that the Wings have never used a lace-up collar. I’d never thought about it before, but it surprised me to learn that.

    Also, I remember both Draper’s and Yzerman’s severe injuries far too well. With those grisly details in mind, there is no substantially good argument for getting rid of facial protection at any level.[/quote]

    Burrill, that was one of the easier questions on the quiz, if only because an article by Paul, himself, supplies the answer.

  • todd krevanchi | December 7, 2006 at 2:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”27543″][quote comment=”27494″]when a school reaches the final 4, they become an nike elite school (silver collar medallion). this is nothing new, but yesterday it was reported that when this happens, they acquire the top of the line shoe and apparell package from nike. heck, why not, they did get to the final 4!

    what i want to know is why some of these schools arent included:
    georgetown
    providence
    unlv
    villanova
    st. johns
    virginia
    georgia
    purdue
    iowa

    now, i only went back to ’80 (the final 4s i could remember) but did these have to be nike schools first, then get to the final four?[/quote]

    Nike only includes the teams that have reached the Final Four since 1994 in their “Elite” series.
    That was the year Nike created its “Team Sports” division, so it’s a tribute to their teams.

    Even though they made some unis before that year (UNLV and Georgetown) the Team Sports was not its own division.[/quote]

    1994 was in fact the first year that nike started to “take over”.
    however the swoosh waited a year.
    the complete nike and swoosh logo donned the nike teams in 94…
    http://cache.gettyim...
    http://cache.gettyim...

    nike branding went back as far as
    89-90 season- when the jersey logo appeared.
    http://cache.gettyim...
    90-91 season- when the jersey logo disappeared and was only on the shorts
    http://cache.gettyim...

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 3:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”27534″]
    My ex-teammate who left school early for to sign in the NHL, his agent told him that it is his choice obviously, but if he chooses not to wear a visor, it shows the NHL team he is committed.

    I also heard a NHL scout criticize NCAA players vs. mjr players because college player have retailer their game to playing without a full face mask.[/quote]

    Phil Kessel (BOS), Thomas Vanek (BUF), Zach Parise (NJ), Ryan Kesler (VAN), Patrick Eaves (OTT), Keith Ballard (PHO), Chris Higgins (MTL), Chuck Kobasew (CAL), Dany Heatley (OTT), and Krys Kolanos (DET) all sport visors. All were first-round draft picks in the NHL. That agent is lying to your friend about “showing commitment”. That’s almost negligent on his part as an agent.

    And Dany Heatley has eye damage from a puck while wearing a visor. Are they perfect? No. Do they prevent most facial injuries? Yes.

    I agree that it’s personal choice, as shown by former NCAA players Mark Stuart, Ryan Whitney, Brooks Orpik, and RJ Umberger. This sampling of players no longer wear visors after playing in the NCAA. But it’s a proven fact that they work.

    As for that NHL scout, he need only look at Buffalo and New Jersey for proof that “retailoring” the player’s game is nothing but a fallacy.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 3:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”27540″]

    What will you do if the Penguins move?

    [/quote]

    If the Penguins move, I’m might have to disown hockey. Then again, those Reebok tuck-ins next year may get me to do the same. :o|

  • Paul Lukas | December 7, 2006 at 3:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”27536″]Chin strap configuration I’ve never seen before Sunday.

    Mathias Kiwanuka has a standard 4 point low snap model, but the back straps have two snaps per strap. You have to look close to the pic but they’re there.[/quote]

    Former Packer Sean Jones had a similar setup.

  • Patrick Gaughan | December 7, 2006 at 3:06 pm |

    Nothing serious here, but the address for the blog was spelled wrong in the email that went out. Took me a few minutes to figure out why it wasn’t working.

    As for chinstraps, in highschool I preferred the 4 point cloth straps. For some reason I hated the bigger plastic ones. They looked kinda cheap and weak. Maybe because a lot of people on my team didn’t have that kind.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 3:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”27539″]
    Mr. T. Cratchit, I, M. Scrooge, am humbly petitioning to be your intern, oh, great hockey curator. I do not know much about hockey, but I am willing to learn. Plus, I can fetch a cup of coffee (or six) with the best of them. I further humbly submit bluenoser, Richard, Riley, Kenny, et. al for positions on your staff. I would submit the name of Banker Bill, but he has already put in his application.

    As for wearing a visor, throw me in on the pro side. There is no way I would be skating around at that speed with people who had sticks in their hands, not to mention a hard, rubber object that killed a kid in the stands by striking her, without something protecting my eyes.

    Thank you in advance your your consideration of my application.

    M. Scrooge

    p.s. I would me more than willing to start on the paperwork needed to request a name change for the Wild![/quote]

    As kind as all you have been, I’m no Schwab. I just know hockey thanks to my devotion and work within the jersey environment. I’m just a fan like everyone else. :o)

  • Jason B. | December 7, 2006 at 3:16 pm |

    Thanks for posting my submission, Paul. I read that article and immediately thought of UniWatch and the screams of terror it would unleash here.

  • Gary | December 7, 2006 at 3:17 pm |

    Personally I preferred the leathery one with a low 4 pointer. I did previously use the cloth one. Of course, this is 15 years ago, but the fancier ones were available. I just didn’t like the plastic cup.

  • Burrill | December 7, 2006 at 3:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”27546″]Burrill, that was one of the easier questions on the quiz, if only because an article by Paul, himself, supplies the answer.[/quote]

    Shoot. I guess this is why I never really did well in school.

    Personally, I am a big fan of laces on hockey jerseys, so I’m actually a little disappointed that the Wings never had them. I suppose it’s likely that they never will, either.

    Oh, by the way, Minna, I didn’t get any shots of them, but at the Wings game I did see a couple Black Wings jerseys. Not exactly this, but close. Since the actual team apparel seems to ignore the very extence of black, it looked a bit odd.

    Oh, and there were also some of these fantastic jerseys in the crowd, too.

    And unfortunately, they do offer a p*nk Wings jersey. I think the online shop calls it a “fashion” jersey or something. Fortunately, I didn’t spot any in the crowd.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 3:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”27556″]
    Oh, and there were also some of these fantastic jerseys in the crowd, too.

    That old-school Detroit jersey is awesome. The NHL should do a throwback season during their 100th anniversary.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 3:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”27556″]
    Oh, and there were also some of these fantastic jerseys in the crowd, too.[/quote]

    That old-school Detroit jersey is awesome. The NHL should do a throwback season during their 100th anniversary.

    That’s better.

  • Broker75 | December 7, 2006 at 3:22 pm |

    If I was the commissioner of the NHL, I would leave visors as a personal preference. Then I would look into removing hockey where hockey doesn’t belong, so buh-bye to Florida, maybe Phoenix (sorry Gretz), Nashville and consider to move a team back to Hartford for sure. I’m sure hockey would do fine in the Dakota’s, Alaska would be cool, and maybe even venture into Europe. Europeans would love to see Mats Sundin, or Fedorov, and Ovechkin on a regular basis, especially playing in the NHL, this league is huge in Europe, as well in Canada and parts of the U.S.

  • Seth H | December 7, 2006 at 3:24 pm |

    Re: Don Beebe
    I was going to mention yesterday about the fact that Beebe wore one of those goofy helmuts in the Super Bowl (not sure if it was the first, or second or third or even the fourth one in a row they lost) because I remember the announcers talking about it and saying something along the lines that because he’s had so many concussions his wife said he had to wear one….but your question said who had worn one in regular season games, so the Super Bowl doesn’t count. Maybe he wore one in the regular season too….or maybe I’m just totally mistaken.

    When Beebe wore that helmet, one of the announcers called him “The Great Gazoo.” If you ever watched the Flintstones, you know that this was one of the great references of all time.

  • Shane | December 7, 2006 at 3:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”27558″][quote comment=”27556″]
    Oh, and there were also some of these fantastic jerseys in the crowd, too.[/quote]

    That old-school Detroit jersey is awesome. The NHL should do a throwback season during their 100th anniversary.

    That’s better.[/quote]

    Probably will, seeing that they did it for their 75th. Hopefully.

  • Richard | December 7, 2006 at 3:29 pm |

    looks like we won’t have a Nike/Adidas snafu for US Soccer now…

    No Klinsmann

  • Burrill | December 7, 2006 at 3:36 pm |

    An NHL team in Alaska? Talk about travel fatigue! I always marvel at Alaska-Fairbanks; they belong to the CCHA, which is primarily midwestern. They really don’t have any close away conference games; they have to travel to Nebraska, Michigan, Ohio and Indiana. I mean, I know the other teams have to travel to Alaska, too, but still…

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 3:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”27563″]Probably will, seeing that they did it for their 75th. Hopefully.[/quote]

    I can hope.

    However, I mean the teams should wear the jerseys as their regular jerseys for the entire season. Scrap the new jerseys and logos… switch back to old jerseys for the entire season.

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 3:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”27559″]If I was the commissioner of the NHL, I would leave visors as a personal preference. Then I would look into removing hockey where hockey doesn’t belong, so buh-bye to Florida, maybe Phoenix (sorry Gretz)…[/quote]

    I think Gretzky’s wife would like to move the team to Vegas or Atlantic City.

  • Minna H | December 7, 2006 at 3:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”27556″][quote comment=”27546″]Burrill, that was one of the easier questions on the quiz, if only because an article by Paul, himself, supplies the answer.[/quote]

    Shoot. I guess this is why I never really did well in school.

    Personally, I am a big fan of laces on hockey jerseys, so I’m actually a little disappointed that the Wings never had them. I suppose it’s likely that they never will, either.

    Oh, by the way, Minna, I didn’t get any shots of them, but at the Wings game I did see a couple Black Wings jerseys. Not exactly this, but close. Since the actual team apparel seems to ignore the very extence of black, it looked a bit odd.

    Oh, and there were also some of these fantastic jerseys in the crowd, too.

    And unfortunately, they do offer a p*nk Wings jersey. I think the online shop calls it a “fashion” jersey or something. Fortunately, I didn’t spot any in the crowd.[/quote]

    When I said it was one of the easier questions, Burrill, it was more to point out how hard the rest of them were. At least for me.

    Wait, black is a Detroit Wings’ uni color? Excellent. Now, if they would just wear them for a game….As for the p*nk jerseys, I’m going to pretend you never said that.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 4:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”27568″]
    Wait, black is a Detroit Wings’ uni color? Excellent.[/quote]

    The Wings have zero black in their design. Sorry to disappoint you, Minna.

  • Warren Thompson | December 7, 2006 at 4:00 pm |

    I’m old enough to remember 07 December 1941; I was in first grade. It was virtually the only time I saw my father cry — he was a pre-war 30-year US Army veteran and had been stationed earlier near Pearl Harbor ….

  • Scoops | December 7, 2006 at 4:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”27559″]Then I would look into removing hockey where hockey doesn’t belong […] and consider to move a team back to Hartford for sure. I’m sure hockey would do fine in the Dakota’s, Alaska would be cool, and maybe even venture into Europe.[/quote]
    Back during the lockout, my friends and I spent a good deal of time trying to fix the NHL on our own. First, we figured the league should drop 10 teams. Though I can’t recall all of them now, I’m sure the southern teams were all there. I don’t think Alaska or Dakota are good ideas, really. They’re good to great hockey areas, but the business reality is that the teams would be in impossibly small markets.

    We also discussed the idea of having, essentially, two leagues: the (20 team) NHL as the North American league and and equal number of European (particularly Swedish, Finnish and Russian) teams in their own league, followed by a baseball-like playoff, where the NorthAm champ would face the Euro champ.

    [quote comment=”27556″]Oh, by the way, Minna, I didn’t get any shots of them, but at the Wings game I did see a couple Black Wings jerseys. Not exactly this, but close. Since the actual team apparel seems to ignore the very extence of black, it looked a bit odd.[/quote]
    For what it’s worth, that’s a practice jersey. They can come in all sorts of wacky colours, so that each line can match up in practice. One of my buddies plays shinny in a bright yellow Leafs jersey.

  • Ryan Real | December 7, 2006 at 4:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”27542″]Paul —

    Since you referenced Pacman Jones in the ESPN column, do you know why his jersey says “P. Jones” instead of “A. Jones”? That’s been bugging me and I haven’t found an answer that looked like something other than conjecture.[/quote]

    Yeah, I’ve been wondering about that too since I mentioned it in Sunday’s comments. Someone offered a plausible explanation, but I figured Paul would have some insight.

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 4:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”27534″]I play NCAA college hockey and I would prefer if the NCAA would allow us to wear visors, like we wore in juniors. It would help control all the stick work. It may sound crazy to the nontraditional hockey fan, but it does help out with the stick infractions.
    Personally, I would not wear a visor if I played in the NHL. Thats just me. I do believe that players should have the choice. The AHL and ECHL have a rule mandating their players wear visors.

    My ex-teammate who left school early for to sign in the NHL, his agent told him that it is his choice obviously, but if he chooses not to wear a visor, it shows the NHL team he is committed.

    I also heard a NHL scout criticize NCAA players vs. mjr players because college player have retailer their game to playing without a full face mask.[/quote]

    That’s excellent insight from someone who would know more than I would (a rec league player who can’t stand on a pier and shoot the puck into the ocean.) I just know that although no visors might unileaterally lead to more “respect” as it were in regards to stick work, the game is so fast that even the most careful person can have their stick brought up. As far as playing cautious, I would think that without a visor, I would worry a little more, maybe be a little more hesitant, and you know what happens when you play scared – that’s when you really get hurt.

  • JimmyMac | December 7, 2006 at 4:15 pm |

    Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 4:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”27557″][quote comment=”27556″]
    Oh, and there were also some of these fantastic jerseys in the crowd, too.

    That old-school Detroit jersey is awesome. The NHL should do a throwback season during their 100th anniversary.[/quote]

    I remember when they had the 75th anniversary and the original 6 wore throwbacks. Did Detroit wear those, or a variation of those? The Rangers wore their Blue throwbacks all year as their road uni’s – Messier’s first year there I believe.

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 4:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    OK, I’ll bite…what the hell are the Shamrox, and why do they have cheerleaders?

  • Metsfan AZ | December 7, 2006 at 4:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]
    Is it in you?

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 4:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    That’s the biggest vector Reebok logo I’ve ever seen on a jersey.

  • Banker Bill | December 7, 2006 at 4:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”27579″][quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    OK, I’ll bite…what the hell are the Shamrox, and why do they have cheerleaders?[/quote]

    Never mind – behold the power of Google! THe orange in the jersey needs to go.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 4:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”27577″]
    I remember when they had the 75th anniversary and the original 6 wore throwbacks. Did Detroit wear those, or a variation of those? The Rangers wore their Blue throwbacks all year as their road uni’s – Messier’s first year there I believe.[/quote]

    Detroit, Chicago, Montreal, Toronto, New York and Boston wore their original jerseys when they played each other. The Rangers’ throwbacks were actually quite similar to their road jerseys that they played in that season. They didn’t wear them all season, though.

    Here is what they looked like. This is Tony Amonte in the road jersey in 1991. I’m trying to hunt down a player in the 75th anniversary jersey.

  • Broker75 | December 7, 2006 at 4:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”27582″][quote comment=”27579″][quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    OK, I’ll bite…what the hell are the Shamrox, and why do they have cheerleaders?[/quote]

    Never mind – behold the power of Google! THe orange in the jersey needs to go.[/quote]
    yah, phew, thanks for clearing the fog Google. I thought for a minute there the Blackhawks went ballistic.

  • Docious | December 7, 2006 at 4:40 pm |

    Nike’s Uni Flyers for 06-07

    The above link has the flyers for a bunch of different sports that Nike makes uni’s for.
    Tons of templates, shoes that haven’t come out yet, equipment (like chinstraps and chinstrap covers [think McGahee, and his Nike cover. how much did he get fined?], etc.
    Keep in mind, most of these are for small College and High School Equipment Mgrs to order their unis from. It may be the ‘Oregon’ template, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that UO will sport these next season.

    Kvranch, miss ya on Niketalk. This post is actually a T-O-Double-D request fulfillment.

    Anyone want to venture on who else wearing PE Jordan cleats in the NFL this year?
    JT99
    Dre Bly 32
    TO81
    Sapp99
    Lamont Jordan
    Marvin88
    Ahman Green 30
    >Jordan Brand Alumni:
    McNabb
    Eddie George
    Randy Moss
    &
    Charles Woodson

    Those guys have regularly worn Jordans, there are a couple of others that have worn Jordans on a less consistent basis, most namely Ronnie Lott (on the turf), Marshall Faulk, Culpepper, Simeon Rice & Terrell Suggs.

  • todd krevanchi | December 7, 2006 at 4:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    im telling you , thats what the maple leaf is headed for, the angled, italicized “meaner” (if an inanimate object can be mean to begin with) look

  • ed gaug | December 7, 2006 at 4:53 pm |

    back in high school, I wore a four point strap hooked into the top snap and the bottom snap. At our high school, we wore royal blue plastic cup chin straps that were reserved for varsity players and the JVs and freshmen got the cloth straps with the two holes in them. The down fall to the plastic cup chin strap was that the padding in it started to smell awful after 3 months of practice and games in the New England fall weather which included 80 degrees and pouring cold rain in the same week. We also had royal blue strap that had “Blue Knights” printed on them. Some would customize them with white electrical tap to do a striping effect.

  • Burrill | December 7, 2006 at 4:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”27573″]For what it’s worth, that’s a practice jersey. They can come in all sorts of wacky colours, so that each line can match up in practice. One of my buddies plays shinny in a bright yellow Leafs jersey.[/quote]

    Ah, that makes sense, then. I suppose what made me suspicious is that the black jersey is the only non-standard Wings jersey I saw at the online shop.

    And Minna, if the Wings introduced black into their unis, I think there would be a small riot among many Wings fans.

  • todd krevanchi | December 7, 2006 at 5:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”27589″]Nike’s Uni Flyers for 06-07

    The above link has the flyers for a bunch of different sports that Nike makes uni’s for.
    Tons of templates, shoes that haven’t come out yet, equipment (like chinstraps and chinstrap covers [think McGahee, and his Nike cover. how much did he get fined?], etc.
    Keep in mind, most of these are for small College and High School Equipment Mgrs to order their unis from. It may be the ‘Oregon’ template, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that UO will sport these next season.

    Kvranch, miss ya on Niketalk. This post is actually a T-O-Double-D request fulfillment.

    Anyone want to venture on who else wearing PE Jordan cleats in the NFL this year?
    JT99
    Dre Bly 32
    TO81
    Sapp99
    Lamont Jordan
    Marvin88
    Ahman Green 30
    >Jordan Brand Alumni:
    McNabb
    Eddie George
    Randy Moss
    &
    Charles Woodson

    Those guys have regularly worn Jordans, there are a couple of others that have worn Jordans on a less consistent basis, most namely Ronnie Lott (on the turf), Marshall Faulk, Culpepper, Simeon Rice & Terrell Suggs.[/quote]

    i usually only post when i really have something to contribute. i have taken a serious backseat over the last few years. remember to celebrate niketalks 7th anniversary on saturday december 9th!!!

  • Minna H | December 7, 2006 at 5:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”27592″][quote comment=”27573″]For what it’s worth, that’s a practice jersey. They can come in all sorts of wacky colours, so that each line can match up in practice. One of my buddies plays shinny in a bright yellow Leafs jersey.[/quote]

    Ah, that makes sense, then. I suppose what made me suspicious is that the black jersey is the only non-standard Wings jersey I saw at the online shop.

    And Minna, if the Wings introduced black into their unis, I think there would be a small riot among many Wings fans.[/quote]

    Damn. There goes the start of a sports’ wide black-out. I would dearly love to see a team’s fans go into conniptions over the introduction of black into a uniform.

    Burrill, is it specfically the black they would hate, or any major change in the unis? What would they do if the wheels lost their wings?

  • Shane | December 7, 2006 at 5:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”27573″]
    For what it’s worth, that’s a practice jersey. They can come in all sorts of wacky colours, so that each line can match up in practice. One of my buddies plays shinny in a bright yellow Leafs jersey.[/quote]

    Yep. I go to Albany for AHL games, and their team store stocks the old player-worn practice jerseys. Weird seeing yellow and green when the team wears the same color scheme as Carolina (and New Jersey before that).

    I have two. A grey one signed by Jesse Boulerice and a black one.

  • Burrill | December 7, 2006 at 5:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”27595″]Burrill, is it specfically the black they would hate, or any major change in the unis? What would they do if the wheels lost their wings?[/quote]

    My guess is it would be the major change. The basic reds with the flight-certified tire is pretty well-established with only minor tweaks along the road. The three recent Stanley Cups probably only helped the jersey design, too.

    And hey, check out the socks. Not bad. Note the olde english D, too.

    The rest of the list is right here.

  • Miguel | December 7, 2006 at 6:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”27598″]

    My guess is it would be the major change. The basic reds with the flight-certified tire is pretty well-established with only minor tweaks along the road. The three recent Stanley Cups probably only helped the jersey design, too.
    [/quote]

    That’s awesome. But why would Redman chose this guy as his alter-ego?

  • Rod Gaspar Fan Club | December 7, 2006 at 7:40 pm |

    Did somebody mention striped socks? It looks like a Packers theme…I think.

  • CC | December 7, 2006 at 8:14 pm |

    Refs are in pants tonight in Pittsburgh. I think temps are in the low 20s, plus wind and a chance of snow.

  • Matthew P | December 7, 2006 at 8:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    OMG, I thought they were advertising for Gatorade!

  • Sammy | December 7, 2006 at 9:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”27414″]I don’t have documentation at my fingertips, however, I do seem to remember that the red dyes used for fabric, not yarn, were not as colorfast when being subjected to heat and moisture. That could be the reason for lack of red caps. The uniforms if there were colors used for yarn would have been washed previously in a fashion as to make it colorfast.[/quote]

    Can anybody explain why no MLB team wears a white hat/helmet combination? I know that teams such as the White Sox and Yankees have in the past, but as far as I know, none have recently.

    I saw some college softball teams wear white hats, visors and helmets in the College Softball World Series in the spring, and the white Cool-Flo helmets look AWFUL!

  • Jeff I | December 7, 2006 at 9:51 pm |

    With all the talk about the noveau NHL unis and the new toronto logo, I thought tonight’s Original 6 matchup was quite classy, as per usual.

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    http://espn-i.starwa...

  • Eric G. | December 7, 2006 at 10:05 pm |

    Here are some other ideas for those really damn ugly Buffaslugs.

    Sorry if any have you have seen any of these before; they seemed new to my eyes.

  • Teebz | December 7, 2006 at 10:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”27606″]With all the talk about the noveau NHL unis and the new toronto logo, I thought tonight’s Original 6 matchup was quite classy, as per usual.

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    Except only Boston is wearing their alternate jersey. What’s up with TML?

  • Matt B | December 7, 2006 at 10:15 pm |

    To chime in on the visor/faceshield discussion: a friend played semipro hockey for a couple years and despite being accustomed to the face shield through youth, NCAA, and rec-league hockey, he lost it after the first game (much to the consternation of his girlfriend). The reason: opposing players assume you’re dirty if you wear a mask and hit you that much harder.

    In that context, I can see how Hull’s policy of mutually-assured destruction as a deterrent make some sense. Perhaps requiring everyone to wear a half-shield would remove the stigma and clean things up a little bit?

  • Jeff I | December 7, 2006 at 10:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”27608″][quote comment=”27606″]With all the talk about the noveau NHL unis and the new toronto logo, I thought tonight’s Original 6 matchup was quite classy, as per usual.

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    http://espn-i.starwa...

    Except only Boston is wearing their alternate jersey. What’s up with TML?[/quote]
    I’m not really sure why theyre not wearing their vintage alternates because they are white. the two teams have played alot recently (5 times in 28 days!) here’s a breakdown:

    3@Boston – Bos – black vintage, Tor – normal white aways

    1@ Tor – Bos – black vintage, Tor – white vintage

    1@Tor – Bos – normal white aways, Tor – normal blue homes

  • bg | December 7, 2006 at 10:56 pm |

    We already have a new 2007MLB All-Star Game logo here in SF; guess we’ll see another commerative one here when Barry hits The Big One next season.

    Published reports indicate the San Francisco Giants have re-signed slugger Barry Bonds to a One-Year deal worth $16,000,000. For more details watch Gary Radnich on KRON 4 News at 11:00 or click here: http://www.kron4.com...

  • Denis | December 7, 2006 at 11:09 pm |

    I just heard the Steelers radio announcer Tunch Ilkin say that he think ever team should go to block uniform numbers

  • GoMac | December 7, 2006 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”27603″][quote comment=”27576″]Ug.

    http://www.chicagois...

    Sham the operative word… my goodness what a mess…[/quote]

    OMG, I thought they were advertising for Gatorade![/quote]

    Same here..wow..

    That’s retarded..Gatorade should sue..or pay them a lot of money..either way it’s advertising..

  • Richard | December 7, 2006 at 11:35 pm |

    All whites for the Browns…something just doesn’t seem correct.

  • Jon in SLC | December 8, 2006 at 12:22 am |

    I know that I’m getting in late on the Hull comments and that most of you will not see this, but that’s ok. I think you had to have played to understand what can happen on the ice. I have personally seen slap shots with such velocity that it breaks the toe cap of the skate and breaks all the toes inside. I have had linemates take shots in the ankles, breaking and spraining them. And I have personally taken my helmet (with half visor [Itech I think]) off in the locker room and noticed new marks, scraps and once a crack from action that I didn’t even realize happened. I had my captain ridden into the corner from behind and knocked cold for several minutes while wearing a helmet and visor. My point is that the game moves fast, it can be violent (and graceful), and protection is a must. Visors don’t hurt the macho image of the game, there are enough chances to get hurt and feel masculine.

    Brett Hull agian proves why my teammates used to call him Butt Hole (It was High School, we weren’t too mature).

  • Minna H | December 8, 2006 at 12:38 am |

    [quote comment=”27598″][quote comment=”27595″]Burrill, is it specfically the black they would hate, or any major change in the unis? What would they do if the wheels lost their wings?[/quote]

    My guess is it would be the major change. The basic reds with the flight-certified tire is pretty well-established with only minor tweaks along the road. The three recent Stanley Cups probably only helped the jersey design, too.

    And hey, check out the socks. Not bad. Note the olde english D, too.

    The rest of the list is right here.[/quote]

    Just for the record, Burrill, I am not suggesting a change. I think the flying-certified wheels (TM) (seeing if I can slide one trademark past Paul) fits Motown. All I’m saying is, one black uni one game a year. That’s not too much to ask, is it?

  • Minna H | December 8, 2006 at 12:43 am |

    [quote comment=”27626″]I know that I’m getting in late on the Hull comments and that most of you will not see this, but that’s ok. I think you had to have played to understand what can happen on the ice. I have personally seen slap shots with such velocity that it breaks the toe cap of the skate and breaks all the toes inside. I have had linemates take shots in the ankles, breaking and spraining them. And I have personally taken my helmet (with half visor [Itech I think]) off in the locker room and noticed new marks, scraps and once a crack from action that I didn’t even realize happened. I had my captain ridden into the corner from behind and knocked cold for several minutes while wearing a helmet and visor. My point is that the game moves fast, it can be violent (and graceful), and protection is a must. Visors don’t hurt the macho image of the game, there are enough chances to get hurt and feel masculine.

    Brett Hull agian proves why my teammates used to call him Butt Hole (It was High School, we weren’t too mature).[/quote]

    Jon in SLC—just wanted to let you know that I read your post and am glad you chimed in. It’s sad that there is still a perception that it is better to be baaaaad than safe. Hopefully, most hockey players will put their health before their reputations.

  • Jon in SLC | December 8, 2006 at 12:54 am |

    [quote comment=”27630″][quote comment=”27626″]I know that I’m getting in late on the Hull comments and that most of you will not see this, but that’s ok. I think you had to have played to understand what can happen on the ice. I have personally seen slap shots with such velocity that it breaks the toe cap of the skate and breaks all the toes inside. I have had linemates take shots in the ankles, breaking and spraining them. And I have personally taken my helmet (with half visor [Itech I think]) off in the locker room and noticed new marks, scraps and once a crack from action that I didn’t even realize happened. I had my captain ridden into the corner from behind and knocked cold for several minutes while wearing a helmet and visor. My point is that the game moves fast, it can be violent (and graceful), and protection is a must. Visors don’t hurt the macho image of the game, there are enough chances to get hurt and feel masculine.

    Brett Hull agian proves why my teammates used to call him Butt Hole (It was High School, we weren’t too mature).[/quote]

    Jon in SLC—just wanted to let you know that I read your post and am glad you chimed in. It’s sad that there is still a perception that it is better to be baaaaad than safe. Hopefully, most hockey players will put their health before their reputations.[/quote]

    I agree. Even without high-sticking, there is enough going on at a high rate of speed, the face and eyes need protection. Plus, it never helps to get drunk before pratice. Upset coaches make you skate ladders ’til you puke. Not good.

  • Scoops | December 8, 2006 at 1:08 am |

    [quote comment=”27608″]Except only Boston is wearing their alternate jersey. What’s up with TML?[/quote]
    Like most teams, the Leafs prefer to wear their alts at home (since you can only wear them for about a quarter of the season’s games). It’s all about marketing merch to the home fans. Hell that’s part of the reason the league flipped the uni colours back to home/colour and road/white.

    Now if only the Leafs would stop losing…

  • BurghFan | December 8, 2006 at 1:47 am |

    Refs are in pants tonight in Pittsburgh. I think temps are in the low 20s, plus wind and a chance of snow.

    Yeah, gametime temperature was officially 20.

    Now that I’m thawed, I’ll mention that the officials’ black pants just look odd, and we’ll probably adjust over time. The better uni note was that the Browns’ parkas had the old brownie logo on the back.

  • Minna H | December 8, 2006 at 1:50 am |

    [quote comment=”27633″]
    I agree. Even without high-sticking, there is enough going on at a high rate of speed, the face and eyes need protection. Plus, it never helps to get drunk before pratice. Upset coaches make you skate ladders ’til you puke. Not good.[/quote]

    Jon, I hope you’re not speaking from experience on the last item. By thi way, what are ladders? Back and forth, back and forth? That would be torture.

  • Minna H | December 8, 2006 at 1:51 am |

    by the way. Hey, it’s late. Give me a break.

  • Tim C. | December 8, 2006 at 2:40 am |

    Owners need to realize what the public wants. The nineties are over, and so is black, darkening logos, making logos meanier (seahawks, dolphins), and all other futuristic modernizations.

    The Southern NHL owners need to take a page out of the the original 6 and go with simpler logos and color schemes. Recognition is the name of the game, and they are alienating themselves even more by looking like arena league football teams on ice.

  • Teebz | December 8, 2006 at 9:46 am |

    [quote comment=”27634″][quote comment=”27608″]Except only Boston is wearing their alternate jersey. What’s up with TML?[/quote]
    Like most teams, the Leafs prefer to wear their alts at home (since you can only wear them for about a quarter of the season’s games). It’s all about marketing merch to the home fans. Hell that’s part of the reason the league flipped the uni colours back to home/colour and road/white.

    Now if only the Leafs would stop losing…[/quote]

    Except their alternates are white, not blue, meaning any other team has to carry both sets of jerseys on a road trip.

  • Teebz | December 8, 2006 at 9:53 am |

    [quote comment=”27639″]By the way, what are ladders? Back and forth, back and forth? That would be torture.[/quote]

    Ladders are man-makers in some circles. Goal line to blue line back to the goal line to the centre line, etc… all the way down the ice. One of my coaches was insane and used to make us tag up each line so you went:

    goal line
    blue line
    goal line
    centre line
    blue line
    centre line
    goal line
    opposite blue line
    centre line
    opposite blue line
    blue line
    opposite blue line
    goal line
    opposite goal line…

    You get the picture. Guys would literally be dying on the ice. He would bring out empty buckets and lay them on the lines if people wanted to puke. It was hell on ice.

  • Scoops | December 8, 2006 at 2:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”27674″]Except their alternates are white, not blue, meaning any other team has to carry both sets of jerseys on a road trip.[/quote]
    C’mon… it’s Toronto! It’s not like we care about anyone else! We’re the centre of the universe! ;)

  • DenverGregg | December 8, 2006 at 4:48 pm |

    Back to Mr. L’s question, assuming anyone reaeds these comments this late, I think the combination of fabric, dye, sweat and sunshine would have meant too much fading. (Some tangentially related info: is here.) Owners wouldn’t want to pony up for new caps too often and players of that era wouldn’t show up in pink.

  • Samuel | December 19, 2006 at 7:34 pm |

    Ever read sportables jersey stock watch?
    I found it on yardbarker, its pretty interesting.