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

Saturday Open Thread

Dickie Moore, Jean Beliveau, Tom Johnson, Don Marshall, Jean-Guy Talbot and Henri Richard were part of the “Salute to the Stanley Cup Legends” celebration this week. My question is: Why does only the one guy in the middle get to hold his jersey? Why are the rest just hanging in the back? Maybe that’s why he looks so intensely happy.. —Vince

 

134 comments to Saturday Open Thread

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 9:57 am |

    I love to catch something uni-related on TV or elsewhere and know that someone will probably beat me to the punch on this site.

    Cases in point, the ‘C’ peeling off Michael Barrett’s catchers helmet as he was getting pummelled by Zambrano and the purple-on-purple crime that was UW vs. Northwestern in softball.

  • Jim | June 2, 2007 at 9:57 am |

    Maybe he’s the only one young enough to lift up his own arms?

  • Leo | June 2, 2007 at 9:59 am |

    My guess was that it was something in their health care plan that excluded them from getting so excited.

    Regardless, every time that I see that red Habs sweater, I just have to sit back and admire its beauty.

  • Sage Confucius | June 2, 2007 at 10:06 am |

    The purple on purple matchup last night in softball. Click on the photo gallery link.
    Washington vs. Northwestern

  • Jim | June 2, 2007 at 10:07 am |

    Of course, from strictly a uniform-related point of view (though if you look really closely there’s a guy in a blue shirt eating a hot dog with ketchup … maybe there should be a thread about that), you can view the video of the peeling C in the lower right part of the page:

    http://www.chicagotr...

  • Paul Lukas | June 2, 2007 at 10:15 am |

    [quote comment=”96580″]Of course, from strictly a uniform-related point of view (though if you look really closely there’s a guy in a blue shirt eating a hot dog with ketchup … maybe there should be a thread about that), you can view the video of the peeling C in the lower right part of the page:

    http://www.chicagotr...

    Actually, it was peeling off well prior to the fisticuffs. In fact, I think that’s why Zambrano slugged him — he was offended by this breach of uni protocol.

    I’m gone for the rest of the day, and for most of tomorrow — see everyone on Monday.

  • Leo | June 2, 2007 at 10:18 am |

    I’m assuming that this was brought up yesterday, but Chelsea just “unveiled” its new away kit. Although, according to the team’s web site, they’ll just be teasing us piece-by-piece until June 14.

    Maybe the yellow will inspire the Blues to bigger and better things than the whites did. I’m hoping, because I’m still saddened that the only hardware we had this season was the FA Cup.

  • Crazy Canuck | June 2, 2007 at 10:32 am |

    FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 10:39 am |

    Might just be the perspective of the photo, but that sweater looks like it could fit Paul Bunyan (or CC Sabathia).

  • rob | June 2, 2007 at 10:53 am |

    the better question is

    what’s the over/under on the number of teeth those guys are missing

    and chelsea’s kit is going to be florescent yellow, similar to the barcelona kits from this year and last year…theyre terrible in my opinion

  • Ben | June 2, 2007 at 10:56 am |

    have themed uniforms gone too far now? the following is from the fresno grizzlies website about tonight’s game.-

    “On the field, Fresno Grizzlies players will wear The Price is Right themed jerseys, which will be modeled after the show’s signature style and symbols, making them the most colorful and distinct themed jerseys the Grizzlies have ever sported. The jerseys will be auctioned off in a silent auction during the game.”

    I hope someone on here is going and can take pictures though I will try to remember tomorrow to scavenger for some photos of it.

  • stan | June 2, 2007 at 10:58 am |

    [quote comment=”96583″]I’m assuming that this was brought up yesterday, but Chelsea just “unveiled” its new away kit. Although, according to the team’s web site, they’ll just be teasing us piece-by-piece until June 14.

    Maybe the yellow will inspire the Blues to bigger and better things than the whites did. I’m hoping, because I’m still saddened that the only hardware we had this season was the FA Cup.[/quote]

    or maybe chealski will get relagated… we can allll dream.
    yido army checking in.

  • Greg | June 2, 2007 at 11:09 am |

    [quote comment=”96583″]I’m assuming that this was brought up yesterday, but Chelsea just “unveiled” its new away kit. Although, according to the team’s web site, they’ll just be teasing us piece-by-piece until June 14.

    Maybe the yellow will inspire the Blues to bigger and better things than the whites did. I’m hoping, because I’m still saddened that the only hardware we had this season was the FA Cup.[/quote]
    And the League Cup, mickey mouse tournament sure, but they still won it

  • DenverGregg | June 2, 2007 at 11:14 am |

    Per local radio, the University of Colorado will reportedly be unveiling new football unis this afternoon.

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 11:42 am |

    [quote comment=”96603″]Per local radio, the University of Colorado will reportedly be unveiling new football unis this afternoon.[/quote]
    Maybe they’ll be putting UC on their helmet instead of CU :)

  • Dan | June 2, 2007 at 11:56 am |

    i can only imagine what the new Chelsea kits will look like. after all, their other kits are all blue, all black, and all white.

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 11:57 am |

    [quote comment=”96603″]Per local radio, the University of Colorado will reportedly be unveiling new football unis this afternoon.[/quote]
    More likely it will be some ghastly Miami-esque Nike design with piping in places for absolutely no reason and a jacked-up number font.

  • Robert | June 2, 2007 at 12:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”96614″]Article, plus a pretty throrough CU Buffs uniform history tour[/quote]

    This can’t be good: The new uniforms are a revolutionary new design by NIKE, made exclusively for the Buffaloes.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 12:08 pm |

    My presumption is that Dan Hawkins will greenlight something similar to the Boise State scheme, with stupid panels and bad angles. Either that or Nike will use them as a petry dish. Either way, bad.

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 12:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”96617″][quote comment=”96614″]Article, plus a pretty throrough CU Buffs uniform history tour[/quote]

    This can’t be good: The new uniforms are a revolutionary new design by NIKE, made exclusively for the Buffaloes.[/quote]
    That’s frightening.

  • Jon in SLC | June 2, 2007 at 12:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”96599″]have themed uniforms gone too far now? the following is from the fresno grizzlies website about tonight’s game.-

    “On the field, Fresno Grizzlies players will wear The Price is Right themed jerseys, which will be modeled after the show’s signature style and symbols, making them the most colorful and distinct themed jerseys the Grizzlies have ever sported. The jerseys will be auctioned off in a silent auction during the game.”

    I hope someone on here is going and can take pictures though I will try to remember tomorrow to scavenger for some photos of it.[/quote]

    The Grizzlies have some of the ugliest unis’ in all of baseball anyway, so a themed jersey shouldn’t break tradition too much. Yes, that’s a Brown cap, Green jersey with yellow and orange numbers, and Grey pants. I went to the Fresno Grizzlies/Salt Lake Bees PCL game on Sunday and there were a few with high pants (but no stirrups on either team, unless you count fake stirrups by the cheerleaders). While most had pajama pants. What I found most interesting was both teams wearing gear from their big league clubs. Fresno being the top affiliate to the S.F. Giants and Salt Lake being with the Angels.

  • Miguel | June 2, 2007 at 12:23 pm |

    A traveshamockery of monumental proportions:

    Instead of wearing a jersey, Joe Torre half-assed it and went the warm-up route.

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 12:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”96624″]A traveshamockery of monumental proportions:

    Instead of wearing a jersey, Joe Torre half-assed it and went the warm-up route.[/quote]
    Why even have a uniform number?

  • Minna H. | June 2, 2007 at 12:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”96622″]

    The Grizzlies have some of the ugliest unis’ in all of baseball anyway, so a themed jersey shouldn’t break tradition too much. Yes, that’s a Brown cap, Green jersey with yellow and orange numbers, and Grey pants. I went to the Fresno Grizzlies/Salt Lake Bees PCL game on Sunday and there were a few with high pants (but no stirrups on either team, unless you count fake stirrups by the cheerleaders). While most had pajama pants. What I found most interesting was both teams wearing gear from their big league clubs. Fresno being the top affiliate to the S.F. Giants and Salt Lake being with the Angels.[/quote]

    Jon in SLC, I gotta say, I like the combo. Maybe it’s just my computer, but the brown caps complements the green jerseys. Besides, the two colors go well together is general. I like fire, so the orange and yellow numbers are agreeable to me. The only thing I’d change is the pants to white or black. I give the ensemble a thumbs up.

    P.S. LOVE the Canadiens’ sweater/jersey. It doesn’t look so good here, though.

  • Minna H. | June 2, 2007 at 12:33 pm |

    In my last post, the Canadiens’ logo doesn’t look so good here. Yeah, that’s what I meant to type.

  • =bg= | June 2, 2007 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”96619″][quote comment=”96617″][quote comment=”96614″]Article, plus a pretty throrough CU Buffs uniform history tour[/quote]

    This can’t be good: The new uniforms are a revolutionary new design by NIKE, made exclusively for the Buffaloes.[/quote]
    That’s frightening.[/quote]

    and the spectre of doom casts its shadow over the state of colorado football…

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 12:38 pm |

    Minna, you had me cracking up at the ‘I like fire’ comment.

  • mike | June 2, 2007 at 12:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”96624″]A traveshamockery of monumental proportions:

    Instead of wearing a jersey, Joe Torre half-assed it and went the warm-up route.[/quote]

    Yea Joe Torre half-assed it for a few games, but have you ever seen Jim Leyland dressed in a uniform? Well other than this ONE picture, which is funny because it was taken during Spring Training when they are supposed to wear those pull over uniforms.

  • rob | June 2, 2007 at 12:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”96600″][quote comment=”96583″]I’m assuming that this was brought up yesterday, but Chelsea just “unveiled” its new away kit. Although, according to the team’s web site, they’ll just be teasing us piece-by-piece until June 14.

    Maybe the yellow will inspire the Blues to bigger and better things than the whites did. I’m hoping, because I’m still saddened that the only hardware we had this season was the FA Cup.[/quote]

    or maybe chealski will get relagated… we can allll dream.
    yido army checking in.[/quote]

    YIIIIIIDOOOOOOO

    COME ON YOU SPURS!!!

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 12:47 pm |

    Mel Kiper and the other guy on ESPN Radio are talking about ridiculous baseball uniforms, i.e. no stirrups and pajama pants.

  • Jon in SLC | June 2, 2007 at 12:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”96626″]

    Jon in SLC, I gotta say, I like the combo. Maybe it’s just my computer, but the brown caps complements the green jerseys. Besides, the two colors go well together is general. I like fire, so the orange and yellow numbers are agreeable to me. The only thing I’d change is the pants to white or black. I give the ensemble a thumbs up.

    Minna I see your point, but in person it’s a lot to take in. Plus, the high socks they wear appear to be black (If they are brown, then they are a MUCH darker shade than the caps). So they mix together about 6 colors into one uni.

  • Jon in SLC | June 2, 2007 at 12:52 pm |

    Sorry about the caps. I’m an idiot.

  • Jeff Morris | June 2, 2007 at 1:11 pm |

    Please tell me the original questions by Vince are a joke. Why do you need 6 guys to hold up the same jersey? Sometimes I feel like people just look for a reason to bitch.

  • Dan | June 2, 2007 at 1:12 pm |

    Arsenal will be unveiling their new away kits on July 5. According to this article the kit will celebrate the innovations introduced by legendary manager Herbert Chapman. You can read about some of them by using the link on the bottom of the page.

  • Joey Guns | June 2, 2007 at 1:12 pm |

    David Wright with the high socks look again today.

  • Joey Guns | June 2, 2007 at 1:14 pm |

    Orlando Hudson of the Diamondbacks is batting with his batting gloves un-velcro-ed. Very odd….

  • SQL | June 2, 2007 at 1:32 pm |

    Arizona’s palaying at Shea and the catcher for the d-backs is wearing some grey/beige gear that makes him look just like an armadillo IMO.

  • Shaftman | June 2, 2007 at 1:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”96645″]David Wright with the high socks look again today.[/quote]

    Also has his name stitched on his cleats…which are a normal black today.

  • John Baranowski | June 2, 2007 at 2:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”96591″]FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.[/quote]
    only in Canada, it’s a hold-over term that refuses to go away. Everywhere in the states it’s called a hockey jersey.

  • MikeyB | June 2, 2007 at 2:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”96617″][quote comment=”96614″]Article, plus a pretty throrough CU Buffs uniform history tour[/quote]

    This can’t be good: The new uniforms are a revolutionary new design by NIKE, made exclusively for the Buffaloes.[/quote]

    I really like Colorado’s current uniforms.

    I knew that Colorado switched from black to blue in the Eighties, but I’ve never actually seen a picture of it.

  • Joe | June 2, 2007 at 2:53 pm |

    I was looking through a soccer magazine and noticed that Clint Mathis, of the Red Bull New York appeared to be wearing two pairs of socks. One of the traditional adidas sock and another that looks like a high top regular street sock.
    here are two images i found.
    http://delivery.view...
    http://money.cnn.com...
    http://money.cnn.com...
    Anyone know more about this?
    Sorry if my links dont work.

  • Adam | June 2, 2007 at 2:54 pm |

    White Sox batting coach is not with the team today (at his daughter’s graduation), A.J. Pierzynski (who’s not playing) is wearing his jersey in the dugout, along with a fake beer gut.

  • diz | June 2, 2007 at 3:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”96644″]Arsenal will be unveiling their new away kits on July 5. According to this article the kit will celebrate the innovations introduced by legendary manager Herbert Chapman. You can read about some of them by using the link on the bottom of the page.[/quote]

    So they’ll be definitely using the inverse of the home kit then, as Chapman was the originator of the red shirts with white sleeves. Shame really, Arsenal are one of the small number of teams with traditional away colours

  • alex | June 2, 2007 at 3:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”96656″][quote comment=”96591″]FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.[/quote]
    only in Canada, it’s a hold-over term that refuses to go away. Everywhere in the states it’s called a hockey jersey.[/quote]

    Most hockey fans I know call them sweaters.

    Of course, next year, it will be “uniform system” and we shall all shed a tear.

  • Terry Mark | June 2, 2007 at 3:39 pm |

    I thought an open thread day would be a good time to bring up a topic that’s of interest to me. The recent discussion about the “Baltimore” wordmark returning to the Orioles’ road jerseys reminded me of the uniforms worn by my hometown’s two high schools — Elkhart Central and Elkhart Memorial.

    At various times, the schools’ basketball and baseball teams (other sports may have done it, too, but these are the ones I’ve noticed) have worn “Elkhart” on their uniforms. The explanations that have been offered is that the schools represent the community, so that’s why there’s the city name but not the school name.

    Now I have no objection to civic pride, but I’ve never bought that argument. The schools’ teams represent the school, so uniforms should have the nickname, or city and school name (Elkhart Memorial), or just the school name.

    The conspiratorial side of me believes that in Elkhart its the rivalry being played out on the uniforms i.e. “we’re the Elkhart school, not those other guys.”

    What are your thoughts on one of my pet peeves, and do many other high school rivals do this?

  • Patrick Jonas | June 2, 2007 at 3:59 pm |

    Isn’t anybody curious as to why the Habs jerseys have Stanley Cup Finals patches no them?

  • Johnny O | June 2, 2007 at 4:07 pm |

    The Baylor girls softball team are wearing Adidas uniforms, but the coaching staff has Under Armour shirts on, and some of the girls on the team have Under Armour spikes. I just thought that was kind of a strange combo.

  • Crazy Canuck | June 2, 2007 at 4:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”96656″][quote comment=”96591″]FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.[/quote]
    only in Canada, it’s a hold-over term that refuses to go away. Everywhere in the states it’s called a hockey jersey.[/quote]

    Well any one who calls it a jersey is JUST PLAIN WRONG. It IS a sweater and WILL ALWAYS be a sweater. Just like in soccer it’s called a kit.

  • chris | June 2, 2007 at 4:19 pm |

    speaking of the new Colorado jerseys if you go to the shop on that website you can buy the new ones before they are even unveiled. They look already, but Im not a fan on the unnecessary line on them.

  • Tod H. | June 2, 2007 at 4:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”96643″]Please tell me the original questions by Vince are a joke. Why do you need 6 guys to hold up the same jersey? Sometimes I feel like people just look for a reason to bitch.[/quote]

    Please tell me you’re not stupid enough to read Vince’s question and think he meant that all six guys should hold up one jersey. He meant, “Why didn’t each guy hold up one jersey?”
    6 guys. 6 jerseys.

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 4:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”96624″]A traveshamockery of monumental proportions:

    Instead of wearing a jersey, Joe Torre half-assed it and went the warm-up route.[/quote]

    This isn’t news, in fact Torre does that a lot, but today he is wearing the #6 uni. Finally.

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 4:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”96635″][quote comment=”96624″]A traveshamockery of monumental proportions:

    Instead of wearing a jersey, Joe Torre half-assed it and went the warm-up route.[/quote]

    Yea Joe Torre half-assed it for a few games, but have you ever seen Jim Leyland dressed in a uniform? Well other than this ONE picture, which is funny because it was taken during Spring Training when they are supposed to wear those pull over uniforms.[/quote]

    Probably picture day.

  • Metsfan AZ | June 2, 2007 at 4:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”96676″][quote comment=”96643″]Please tell me the original questions by Vince are a joke. Why do you need 6 guys to hold up the same jersey? Sometimes I feel like people just look for a reason to bitch.[/quote]

    Please tell me you’re not stupid enough to read Vince’s question and think he meant that all six guys should hold up one jersey. He meant, “Why didn’t each guy hold up one jersey?”
    6 guys. 6 jerseys.[/quote]
    Apparently you didn’t understand Jeff’s point that it would be pointless for all 6 guys to hold up the exact same jersey. It’s not like he’s showing off his name or number or anything.

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 4:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”96668″]I thought an open thread day would be a good time to bring up a topic that’s of interest to me. The recent discussion about the “Baltimore” wordmark returning to the Orioles’ road jerseys reminded me of the uniforms worn by my hometown’s two high schools — Elkhart Central and Elkhart Memorial.

    At various times, the schools’ basketball and baseball teams (other sports may have done it, too, but these are the ones I’ve noticed) have worn “Elkhart” on their uniforms. The explanations that have been offered is that the schools represent the community, so that’s why there’s the city name but not the school name.

    Now I have no objection to civic pride, but I’ve never bought that argument. The schools’ teams represent the school, so uniforms should have the nickname, or city and school name (Elkhart Memorial), or just the school name.

    The conspiratorial side of me believes that in Elkhart its the rivalry being played out on the uniforms i.e. “we’re the Elkhart school, not those other guys.”

    What are your thoughts on one of my pet peeves, and do many other high school rivals do this?[/quote]

    I know Louisiana-Lafayette and Louisiana-Monroe each had just the name “Louisiana” written on either their football jersey or football at various times in the past few years, but that was before ULM caved in and changed its name from Indians to Warhawks, and had to change the helmet with it. ULL continues to refer to itself as “Louisiana’s Ragin’ Cajuns”, but I think ULM has backed off their claim to the state name a little bit.

  • Forrest | June 2, 2007 at 4:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”96660″][quote comment=”96617″][quote comment=”96614″]Article, plus a pretty throrough CU Buffs uniform history tour[/quote]

    This can’t be good: The new uniforms are a revolutionary new design by NIKE, made exclusively for the Buffaloes.[/quote]

    Those old blues are actually kind of nice…

    I really like Colorado’s current uniforms.

    I knew that Colorado switched from black to blue in the Eighties, but I’ve never actually seen a picture of it.[/quote]

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 4:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”96673″][quote comment=”96656″][quote comment=”96591″]FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.[/quote]
    only in Canada, it’s a hold-over term that refuses to go away. Everywhere in the states it’s called a hockey jersey.[/quote]

    Well any one who calls it a jersey is JUST PLAIN WRONG. It IS a sweater and WILL ALWAYS be a sweater. Just like in soccer it’s called a kit.[/quote]

    And just like with soccer, Americans tend not to care and will always refer to unis in soccer and hockey as jerseys. It’s technically wrong, but the stupidity isn’t going anywhere.

  • Brian | June 2, 2007 at 4:43 pm |

    As mentioned, here are the new CU football jersies (replica, anyhow)…

  • Brian | June 2, 2007 at 4:44 pm |
  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 4:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”96684″]As mentioned, here are the new CU football jersies (replica, anyhow)…[/quote]

    Well, it’s not as bad as it could be… but they don’t look all that hot.

  • Jon Stone | June 2, 2007 at 5:01 pm |

    I need a little help with my homework. In my athletic trainer class, my assignment is to get the rules and regulations for football equipment. I figured if anyone can help me they are on this board.

  • Brian from Short Island | June 2, 2007 at 5:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”96600″][quote comment=”96583″]I’m assuming that this was brought up yesterday, but Chelsea just “unveiled” its new away kit. Although, according to the team’s web site, they’ll just be teasing us piece-by-piece until June 14.

    Maybe the yellow will inspire the Blues to bigger and better things than the whites did. I’m hoping, because I’m still saddened that the only hardware we had this season was the FA Cup.[/quote]

    or maybe chealski will get relagated… we can allll dream.
    yido army checking in.[/quote]
    YID ARMY!

    “Hockey jersey” is in common use throughout hockey, and it’s definately acceptable to use either term. As you said, they’re not sweaters anymore.

  • Pedro | June 2, 2007 at 5:20 pm |

    The Massilon Washington High School Tigers football team call themselves just Massilon almost exclusively. I think its the only high school in Massilon, Ohio.

  • MikeyB | June 2, 2007 at 5:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”96686″][quote comment=”96684″]As mentioned, here are the new CU football jersies (replica, anyhow)…[/quote]

    Well, it’s not as bad as it could be… but they don’t look all that hot.[/quote]

    They don’t look that bad. The only problem I have with it is the silver numbers. The gold stripe reminds me of VA Techs unis.

  • u kno DBo | June 2, 2007 at 5:26 pm |

    As mentioned, here are the new CU football jersies (replica, anyhow)…
    https://www.nmnathle...

    wow big numbers

  • Flip | June 2, 2007 at 5:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”96693″]As mentioned, here are the new CU football jersies (replica, anyhow)…
    https://www.nmnathle...

    wow big numbers[/quote]
    Sleeves look old-school. Tough to top the clean look CU had.

  • u kno DBo | June 2, 2007 at 5:30 pm |

    The Massilon Washington High School Tigers football team call themselves just Massilon almost exclusively. I think its the only high school in Massilon, Ohio.

    Massilon Jackson… Massilon Tuslaw…

    Im pretty sure these schools are still around, if not others as well. But your right, if you say youre going to the Massilon game then you are going to see the Washington HS Tigers.

  • Nolan | June 2, 2007 at 5:30 pm |
  • Brother B | June 2, 2007 at 5:31 pm |

    The “drawing” version of the new CU unis:

    CU

  • Flip | June 2, 2007 at 5:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”96698″]The “drawing” version of the new CU unis:

    CU[/quote]
    jersey: eh; pants: ugh!

  • Nolan | June 2, 2007 at 5:36 pm |

    Here’s the press release about the “event” nothing earth shaking we’ve heard all this stuff before from Nike. Better fit, less weight, better performance, etc.

    The look isn’t a complete abomination but it could have been better…could have been A LOT worse too I guess.

  • Mike Engle | June 2, 2007 at 5:36 pm |

    Where I live, we have two public high schools with the same uniform colors. Rarely is our town’s name on the jerseys because it is a long name and would look cramped. Generally the older school puts “North” or “Blazers” on their jerseys, while we at the newer school opt for either “South” or our nickname, the “Rebels.”

  • Mike Engle | June 2, 2007 at 5:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”96699″][quote comment=”96698″]The “drawing” version of the new CU unis:

    CU[/quote]
    jersey: eh; pants: ugh![/quote]
    I thought somebody said CU would get a unique design. Those designs look dangerously like the new template that Miami, FL will use next season…

  • Flip | June 2, 2007 at 5:46 pm |

    Powder blue delight and a neat story

  • Jeremiah A. | June 2, 2007 at 5:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”96635″][quote comment=”96624″]A traveshamockery of monumental proportions:

    Instead of wearing a jersey, Joe Torre half-assed it and went the warm-up route.[/quote]

    Yea Joe Torre half-assed it for a few games, but have you ever seen Jim Leyland dressed in a uniform? Well other than this ONE picture, which is funny because it was taken during Spring Training when they are supposed to wear those pull over uniforms.[/quote]

    Alot of managers and coaches do that nowadays. I don’t like it at all. I’m a Halos fan and I cannot recall the last time Scioscia wore his #14 jersey that he had to get from Troy Glaus when he first arrived. Paul had responded to a question I had on this. He told me that the reason they have numbers is because at one time managers were often players as well. Also they are the only coaching staff who routinely enter the field of play (as opposed to NFL or NBA staffs). That’s the prevailing rationale anyway. But I can totally see doing away with baseball coaches in full uni gear. I mean who needs to see fat, old guys wearing double-knit polyester anyway?

  • Pedro | June 2, 2007 at 5:49 pm |

    The new CU unis is a classic case of something that wasn’t broke being “fixed.” I reluctantly call the jerseys a wash (after seeing the drawing version), the pants are horrible and seem like they don’t go with the jerseys. The unis should have been left alone.

  • Tod H. | June 2, 2007 at 5:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”96679″][quote comment=”96676″][quote comment=”96643″]Please tell me the original questions by Vince are a joke. Why do you need 6 guys to hold up the same jersey? Sometimes I feel like people just look for a reason to bitch.[/quote]

    Please tell me you’re not stupid enough to read Vince’s question and think he meant that all six guys should hold up one jersey. He meant, “Why didn’t each guy hold up one jersey?”
    6 guys. 6 jerseys.[/quote]
    Apparently you didn’t understand Jeff’s point that it would be pointless for all 6 guys to hold up the exact same jersey. It’s not like he’s showing off his name or number or anything.[/quote]

    No, I know Jeff, and he is that stupid.

  • Pedro | June 2, 2007 at 5:57 pm |

    Hey Jeremiah A I’m a fellow Halo fan and Scioscia has been wearing the jersey lately, but under his jacket or windbreaker (you have to look closely). Anyway, I’ve been bringing this up all week and getting ignored, Mike Napoli’s halo on his jersey was missing during his at bat in the 8th in Tuesday’s game againt the M’s. Have been unsuccesful in my attempts to find photo evidence. Can you or anyone help (screengrab maybe). I’ve been really curious to know if I’m right or if my eyes were playing tricks on me.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 6:01 pm |

    re: CU – Looks like, aside from the standard nike panel crap staying monochromatic for once, the only major color change is the silver numerals (changed from white).

    A different (and better detailed) rundown of the changes here.

  • Forrest | June 2, 2007 at 6:02 pm |

    I suppose they could be worse, but those CU uniforms could also be a lot better.

    if no one has seen them.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 6:12 pm |

    There are “leaked” images of the new Washington Capitals jerseys floating about. They’re from the site of a Baltimore freelance graphic designer/illustrator, so I’m not buying them as authentic.

    home

    away

    Let’s just say: I hope not.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 6:23 pm |

    One of my misgivings about these Caps mockups: if you check the home sweater, follow the red base stripe and you’ll see a miscolored white panel under the right arm stars. It doesn’t mirror on the road whites, so i’m presuming it’s a photoshop moment.

  • Frank Mercogliano | June 2, 2007 at 6:43 pm |

    Actually, I played college soccer, and we never once called them kits, and I play hockey to this day, and we never call them sweaters…both were jerseys. Is it TECHNIALLY a kit and a sweater, well, yeah, I suppose, but jersey or sweater, jersey or kit, to me, not a huge deal, and I’m certainly not stupid or an idiot.

    CU’s uniforms aren’t bad really…I mean I can’t imagine that number being that huge in real life, but I’ll say this, the biggest key on a jersey is can you read the number (as someone who keeps stats for a living, trust me that the number is of prime importance).

    Colorado’s jersey passes on this front, and hopefully they don’t go black-on-black, although if they do that for only like their Homecoming game, that would be passable.

    Within the context of MAJOR PROGRAM announcements, Nike has done well with Colorado and Michigan State, both of which are fairly understated. Boise State’s aren’t bad either. Of course, Nike did well with our (Idaho State) jerseys too last season …

    Frank

  • S Dot | June 2, 2007 at 7:13 pm |

    The Tigers and Indians are both wearing classic Unis tonight. The first six hitters in the Detroit lineup are featuring high socks.

  • Vince Grzegorek | June 2, 2007 at 7:28 pm |

    Sorry about the ‘jersey’ ‘sweater’ mistake. Must admit, not that huge of a hockey fan, so it didn’t seem odd to me to use the term ‘jersey’ at all.

    As for the all six guys holding a jersey question. The point was: Why have only one jersey being held up if you’re going to hang five in the background. Why not hold them all up, or, hang them all up?

    At the same time I wasn’t being serious about any of it.

    Go Cavs.

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 7:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”96722″]Actually, I played college soccer, and we never once called them kits, and I play hockey to this day, and we never call them sweaters…both were jerseys. Is it TECHNIALLY a kit and a sweater, well, yeah, I suppose, but jersey or sweater, jersey or kit, to me, not a huge deal, and I’m certainly not stupid or an idiot.

    CU’s uniforms aren’t bad really…I mean I can’t imagine that number being that huge in real life, but I’ll say this, the biggest key on a jersey is can you read the number (as someone who keeps stats for a living, trust me that the number is of prime importance).

    Colorado’s jersey passes on this front, and hopefully they don’t go black-on-black, although if they do that for only like their Homecoming game, that would be passable.

    Within the context of MAJOR PROGRAM announcements, Nike has done well with Colorado and Michigan State, both of which are fairly understated. Boise State’s aren’t bad either. Of course, Nike did well with our (Idaho State) jerseys too last season …

    Frank[/quote]

    That’s true. I always hate watching a game when I can’t tell who’s who.

    And just to clear everything up, I wasn’t insinuating that any one person is stupid or an idiot… but that America’s general attitude, which I am guilty of myself at times, is indifference toward such details as calling things “kits” or “sweaters” vs. calling them “jerseys”. Yeah, it’s a minor detail, but isn’t that what this whole site is about?

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 7:32 pm |

    Hey Vince, do you miss the Cavs’ red-wine-colored jerseys at all? Personally, I’m getting a bit tired of the navy ones… which originally were supposed to be alts, right?

  • Mark | June 2, 2007 at 7:33 pm |

    Indians and Tigers playing in throwbacks tonight– 1977– no belts– pullover tops– lots of players showing off thier socks– and Grady Sizemore wearing ribbon stirrups– Josh Barfield– going perfect old school stirrups– it’s awesome!!!

  • Bud | June 2, 2007 at 7:34 pm |

    Also Grady Sizemore is rockin the old school thin stirups.

  • Kyle at IU | June 2, 2007 at 7:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”96718″]There are “leaked” images of the new Washington Capitals jerseys floating about. They’re from the site of a Baltimore freelance graphic designer/illustrator, so I’m not buying them as authentic.

    home

    away

    Let’s just say: I hope not.[/quote]

    I certainly hope that’s not what the Caps are going with. I’m planning on buying a new caps jersey if they make a version that’s not ridiculously expensive. I do share your skepticism on this one though…it just doesn’t look like something someone as ridiculous as Ted Leonsis would do.

  • Johnny O | June 2, 2007 at 7:49 pm |

    I noticed that the Brewers wear the Cool-flo (sp?) helmets only during Retro Friday games. Are there any other teams who wear Cool-flo at one point for an alt. or away uni, and then wear normal ones other times like the Crew?

    Retro Friday

    Any other day

  • Gamecock | June 2, 2007 at 8:07 pm |

    Now I’m sick. The Indians and Tigers are wearing 1977 uniforms tonight. Grady Sizemore came to the plate and the announcers lauded him for wearing the uniform in an era-appropriate manner. He was wearing the socks with fake stirrups, for crying out loud! Not only that, but the Indians did not go with striped hosiery, which would be the authentic look. And they are wearing 2007 batting helmets. Weak effort all around.

  • Jeff I/ | June 2, 2007 at 8:12 pm |

    Anyone know where to find those ’77 throebacks for sale

  • alex | June 2, 2007 at 8:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”96669″]Isn’t anybody curious as to why the Habs jerseys have Stanley Cup Finals patches no them?[/quote]

    I thought that too.

    I wouldn’t put it past the NHL to sew patches on sweaters from the 150s.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 8:21 pm |

    The Denver Post’s take on CU’s new unis.

    Image next post..

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 8:23 pm |

    four players modeling the new CU unis.

    The numbers look a lot more sensible in proportion than the for-sale replicas would lead us to believe.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 8:25 pm |
  • Brandon Grimm | June 2, 2007 at 8:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”96741″]Now I’m sick. The Indians and Tigers are wearing 1977 uniforms tonight. Grady Sizemore came to the plate and the announcers lauded him for wearing the uniform in an era-appropriate manner. He was wearing the socks with fake stirrups, for crying out loud! Not only that, but the Indians did not go with striped hosiery, which would be the authentic look. And they are wearing 2007 batting helmets. Weak effort all around.[/quote]

    I think the Tribe looks better with their current helmets on than the Tigers do with the cool-flo helmets. I havent seen any striped hosiery on the Tigers either, just solid socks. Overall I think it looks good, not a weak effort at all.

  • Brandon Grimm | June 2, 2007 at 8:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”96732″]Hey Vince, do you miss the Cavs’ red-wine-colored jerseys at all? Personally, I’m getting a bit tired of the navy ones… which originally were supposed to be alts, right?[/quote]

    I think the navy jerseys look better than the wine jerseys. If you haven’t noticed pretty much every team that was in the playoffs that had alternate jerseys wore them throughout the playoffs. If I remember correctly I heard on here that the league passed some new uni guidelines for the playoffs this year. I’m guessing it is whatever road uni you wear you have to wear it throughout the playoffs b/c that is what every team has done. So basically, don’t plan on seeing the wine uni’s until at least November.

  • Stuby | June 2, 2007 at 8:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”96668″]I thought an open thread day would be a good time to bring up a topic that’s of interest to me. The recent discussion about the “Baltimore” wordmark returning to the Orioles’ road jerseys reminded me of the uniforms worn by my hometown’s two high schools — Elkhart Central and Elkhart Memorial.

    At various times, the schools’ basketball and baseball teams (other sports may have done it, too, but these are the ones I’ve noticed) have worn “Elkhart” on their uniforms. The explanations that have been offered is that the schools represent the community, so that’s why there’s the city name but not the school name.

    Now I have no objection to civic pride, but I’ve never bought that argument. The schools’ teams represent the school, so uniforms should have the nickname, or city and school name (Elkhart Memorial), or just the school name.

    The conspiratorial side of me believes that in Elkhart its the rivalry being played out on the uniforms i.e. “we’re the Elkhart school, not those other guys.”

    What are your thoughts on one of my pet peeves, and do many other high school rivals do this?[/quote]
    Sort of related, but not really…I’ve always thunk it odd that the University of South Carolina would go with ‘CAROLINA’ across their football jersey. I know folks in North Carolina refer to their school as just ‘Carolina’ as well. Probably a situation of each one proclaiming to be the ‘Real’ Carolina.

  • muskiejim | June 2, 2007 at 8:54 pm |

    Manager slook so much better in uniforms. Proof

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 9:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”96753″][quote comment=”96668″]I thought an open thread day would be a good time to bring up a topic that’s of interest to me. The recent discussion about the “Baltimore” wordmark returning to the Orioles’ road jerseys reminded me of the uniforms worn by my hometown’s two high schools — Elkhart Central and Elkhart Memorial.

    At various times, the schools’ basketball and baseball teams (other sports may have done it, too, but these are the ones I’ve noticed) have worn “Elkhart” on their uniforms. The explanations that have been offered is that the schools represent the community, so that’s why there’s the city name but not the school name.

    Now I have no objection to civic pride, but I’ve never bought that argument. The schools’ teams represent the school, so uniforms should have the nickname, or city and school name (Elkhart Memorial), or just the school name.

    The conspiratorial side of me believes that in Elkhart its the rivalry being played out on the uniforms i.e. “we’re the Elkhart school, not those other guys.”

    What are your thoughts on one of my pet peeves, and do many other high school rivals do this?[/quote]
    Sort of related, but not really…I’ve always thunk it odd that the University of South Carolina would go with ‘CAROLINA’ across their football jersey. I know folks in North Carolina refer to their school as just ‘Carolina’ as well. Probably a situation of each one proclaiming to be the ‘Real’ Carolina.[/quote]

    Speaking as someone who has lived in NC, I don’t really think one-up-manship is the case as much as just using only “Carolina” for simplicity’s sake.

  • chance | June 2, 2007 at 9:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”96735″][quote comment=”96718″]There are “leaked” images of the new Washington Capitals jerseys floating about. They’re from the site of a Baltimore freelance graphic designer/illustrator, so I’m not buying them as authentic.

    home

    away

    Let’s just say: I hope not.[/quote]

    I certainly hope that’s not what the Caps are going with. I’m planning on buying a new caps jersey if they make a version that’s not ridiculously expensive. I do share your skepticism on this one though…it just doesn’t look like something someone as ridiculous as Ted Leonsis would do.[/quote]

    Nope. Those were created by a guy on the “Concepts” forum of the Chris Creamer boards, and have been picked up and passed off as “leaks” on a dozen occasions.

    Those aren’t the new Caps sweaters.

  • Jeff | June 2, 2007 at 9:27 pm |

    Ducks Senators right now, Spezza is wearing #44 jersey of ‘Eaves’ after his jersey was torn up. The commentators are talking about how he might need to go up in the stands and buy a jersey.

  • Jeff | June 2, 2007 at 9:29 pm |

    they just said someone ran up and bought him a jersey and he’s back in 19 now. prompting a commentator to say “for everything else, there’s mastercard”

  • Forrest | June 2, 2007 at 9:30 pm |

    Some interesting happenings with uniform malfunctions at the hockey game tonight, as Jason Spezza’s sweater was ripped apart, forcing him to stay on the bench instead of serving a penalty while the equipment guy looked for a new one. He then came off the bench wearing #44 of Patrick Eaves instead of his #19. After the next line change, he had his #19 again, and the announcers were joking they went into the stands and the memorabilia booth to find it. Good stuff, Go Senators!

  • Brien | June 2, 2007 at 9:31 pm |

    Jason Spezza of the Senators just got sent to the box, but his jersey got ripped, so another guy had to sit in the box for him until someone ran and got a new jersey. I missed the reason why, but they had to give Spezza another player’s (Eaves?) jersey. The announcers say they’ve never seen this sort of thing before in the NHL.

  • Brien | June 2, 2007 at 9:32 pm |

    Dang, I knew someone else would post something about that in the time it took to write!

  • Jeff | June 2, 2007 at 9:34 pm |

    just glad to see i’m not the only one watching. I got the tv tuner recording now, hope they show it again so i can get a screen shot.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 9:34 pm |

    re: Caps – Good.

    Lou Piniella remembered to wear a jersey today – so that he could be properly identified for ejection.

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 9:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”96767″]re: Caps – Good.

    Lou Piniella remembered to wear a jersey today – so that he could be properly identified for ejection.[/quote]

    Which is only the second time all season- after yesterday- that I’ve seen him wear the home uni all year.

  • C.N. | June 2, 2007 at 9:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”96770″][quote comment=”96767″]re: Caps – Good.

    Lou Piniella remembered to wear a jersey today – so that he could be properly identified for ejection.[/quote]

    Which is only the second time all season- after yesterday- that I’ve seen him wear the home uni all year.[/quote]

    And Torre wore the jersey too- now if Uni Watch Nation can just get Francona, Leyland, Scioscia, and Gibbons to wear their jerseys. Can you say “Ditch the Smock”?

    And yes, I know about Francona’s blood pressure or whatever. No reason he can’t wear the jersey under his pullover, or a long-sleeved shirt under his uni.

  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 9:52 pm |
  • TD | June 2, 2007 at 9:54 pm |

    Indians throwbacks here and here

  • DW in Cincy | June 2, 2007 at 9:57 pm |

    Anybody know what model adidas shoes Torre is wearing in this photo?

  • DW in Cincy | June 2, 2007 at 9:58 pm |

    http://i15.photobuck...

    Sorrey about not including the link.

  • Jeff | June 2, 2007 at 10:16 pm |

    They said that Spezza got a replacement jersey from the stands, still not sure if they were joking or not. But he did come out with a 19. I think maybe it was just a backup jersey. It comes complete with the Stanley Cup patch. Though it does look kinda small, not nearly as loose and baggy.

    12/Image1322.jpg”>

  • Jeff | June 2, 2007 at 10:17 pm |

    dont think i did that right. In any case, Spezza could have been wearing a souvenir jersey when the kick-or not kicked in goal occured.

    http://i180.photobuc...
    http://i180.photobuc...

  • Matt from the 'Ville | June 2, 2007 at 10:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”96671″]The Baylor girls softball team are wearing Adidas uniforms, but the coaching staff has Under Armour shirts on, and some of the girls on the team have Under Armour spikes. I just thought that was kind of a strange combo.[/quote]

    I notice this in the night game against NW. Also both NW and Baylors jerseys are made by Adidas but only Baylors have the three strips on the Shoulder strip. Sorry no pics

  • Terry Mark | June 2, 2007 at 10:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”96776″]They said that Spezza got a replacement jersey from the stands, still not sure if they were joking or not. But he did come out with a 19. I think maybe it was just a backup jersey. It comes complete with the Stanley Cup patch. Though it does look kinda small, not nearly as loose and baggy.

    12/Image1322.jpg”>[/quote]

    I would think that’s just a joke. It would surprise me that Ottawa wouldn’t have at least a backup jersey available and probably several since I believe many players change their sweaters between periods.

  • Buckeye Mike | June 2, 2007 at 11:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”96781″][quote comment=”96671″]The Baylor girls softball team are wearing Adidas uniforms, but the coaching staff has Under Armour shirts on, and some of the girls on the team have Under Armour spikes. I just thought that was kind of a strange combo.[/quote]

    I notice this in the night game against NW. Also both NW and Baylors jerseys are made by Adidas but only Baylors have the three strips on the Shoulder strip. Sorry no pics[/quote]

    Also, during the DePaul/U of A game the DePaul 1st baseman wore number 88. thought that was funny looking too. no picks but here is her profile page. just thought everyone would like that

  • tessa | June 2, 2007 at 11:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”96682″][quote comment=”96673″][quote comment=”96656″][quote comment=”96591″]FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.[/quote]
    only in Canada, it’s a hold-over term that refuses to go away. Everywhere in the states it’s called a hockey jersey.[/quote]

    Well any one who calls it a jersey is JUST PLAIN WRONG. It IS a sweater and WILL ALWAYS be a sweater. Just like in soccer it’s called a kit.[/quote]

    And just like with soccer, Americans tend not to care and will always refer to unis in soccer and hockey as jerseys. It’s technically wrong, but the stupidity isn’t going anywhere.[/quote]

    Actually, both sweater and jersey are appropriate, and it has nothing to do with stupidity. Language is constantly evolving. I don’t have a problem with people saying that it is “traditionally” referred to as a sweater. Heck, even state a preference for the traditional term. However, the term ‘jersey’ is not wrong. “Jersey” is a more general term (every sweater is a jersey, but not every jersey is a sweater).

    In fact, if you look at rule 9.3 of the NHL 2006 – 07 Rulebook, you will see that it refers to the player’s “jersey,” not his “sweater.”

  • Mike Engle | June 2, 2007 at 11:41 pm |

    OK Mr. Grzegorek, your Cavs won. Go celebrate. Obviously, it will be the picture on tomorrow’s open thread, right?

  • Nolan | June 2, 2007 at 11:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”96746″]four players modeling the new CU unis.

    The numbers look a lot more sensible in proportion than the for-sale replicas would lead us to believe.[/quote]

    [quote comment=”96747″]a better look[/quote]
    I believe Paul interviewed a girl in which she said that she hates Vegas gold because you can never get it to match between fabrics. I think (without re-reading) she cited the NO Saints as an example. Well, add these Colorado pants to the list. They aren’t even gold, they look like Oregon’s pants got sent to CO.

  • C.N. | June 3, 2007 at 12:03 am |

    [quote comment=”96790″][quote comment=”96682″][quote comment=”96673″][quote comment=”96656″][quote comment=”96591″]FYI a hockey “jersey” (especially the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge of Les Habitants) is called a sweater. Even though they are no longer wool nor hand knit, they are still called a sweater.[/quote]
    only in Canada, it’s a hold-over term that refuses to go away. Everywhere in the states it’s called a hockey jersey.[/quote]

    Well any one who calls it a jersey is JUST PLAIN WRONG. It IS a sweater and WILL ALWAYS be a sweater. Just like in soccer it’s called a kit.[/quote]

    And just like with soccer, Americans tend not to care and will always refer to unis in soccer and hockey as jerseys. It’s technically wrong, but the stupidity isn’t going anywhere.[/quote]

    Actually, both sweater and jersey are appropriate, and it has nothing to do with stupidity. Language is constantly evolving. I don’t have a problem with people saying that it is “traditionally” referred to as a sweater. Heck, even state a preference for the traditional term. However, the term ‘jersey’ is not wrong. “Jersey” is a more general term (every sweater is a jersey, but not every jersey is a sweater).

    In fact, if you look at rule 9.3 of the NHL 2006 – 07 Rulebook, you will see that it refers to the player’s “jersey,” not his “sweater.”[/quote]

    Seems to me more like it’s arrogance, or “nonconformity”, if you want to be politically correct. Which is stupidity.

  • thump | June 3, 2007 at 12:31 am |

    [quote comment=”96698″]The “drawing” version of the new CU unis:

    CU[/quote]

    Yuck, the sports bra look!

  • Ryan | June 3, 2007 at 1:50 am |

    Now, I usually love bobblehead nights at PNC Park – but tonight’s promotion was spoiled by the dreaded used tampon jersey.

    La Roche College sponsored the Adam LaRoache promotion. How lame is that?

  • Bryan | June 3, 2007 at 2:40 am |

    [quote comment=”96661″]I was looking through a soccer magazine and noticed that Clint Mathis, of the Red Bull New York appeared to be wearing two pairs of socks. One of the traditional adidas sock and another that looks like a high top regular street sock.
    here are two images i found.
    http://delivery.view...
    http://money.cnn.com...
    http://money.cnn.com...
    Anyone know more about this?
    Sorry if my links dont work.[/quote]First of all, the first image you linked to isn’t even New York Red Bulls. It’s from a match between the Colorado Rapids and Chivas USA, from last season (Colorado has different colors and logo this season).

    Second of all, the other image you link to is from a match between the USA National team vs. (I believe) Germany, and it is from 2002.

    Just thought I would point that out to you.

  • chris | June 3, 2007 at 4:44 am |

    [quote comment=”96797″][quote comment=”96698″]The “drawing” version of the new CU unis:

    CU[/quote]

    Yuck, the sports bra look![/quote]

    not close to the sports bra look. only in terms of what is mesh and not mesh, but its still all black or all white…not like the contrasting colors on the ORegon St. jerseys

  • jsdryden | June 3, 2007 at 7:08 am |

    From NHL.com re: Spezza’s Jersey

    Wardrobe malfunction — Patrick Eaves was a healthy scratch for Game 3, but you weren’t losing your mind when you saw Eaves’ No. 44 on the Ottawa bench early in the second period. That was actually Jason Spezza, who after having his sweater ripped by Sammy Pahlsson, was given an Eaves jersey to wear until one with his name and No. 19 could be located in the equipment room.

    “I’ve worn it before actually, in training camp, so it was pretty funny,” Spezza said of No. 44. “If I would have … it would have been nice to have scored with Patty’s jersey on.”

  • Nick | June 3, 2007 at 10:58 pm |

    NEW COLORADO FOOTBALL UNIS

    This is a lateral move at best. I like the use of silver, golsd & white for the trim on the #’s, but this is a mixed up carnival for the sake of using the colors. In the mid 1990’s the Buffs had awesome FB jerseys using all of these colors, but the trim was senible and sharp, with good use of stripes on the sleeves.

    They also wore a Gold jersey for one game, and it is perhaps the coolest colege FB jersey I have ever seen – despite the fsct that the “Gold” is VEGAS GOLD – that ghastly color that is nothing more than a cheap description of watered down cat p.ss!!!. I was fortunate to be able to purchase one and it is indeed sharp despite the weak gold color.

    The Saints share this problem. They among many also worship at the altar of “Vegas gold”, a weak mistake of a color. And dont even get me started on the Buffs or the Saints wearing the horrid “Black on Black” combo, or “White on Black” road mess. They look like ghetto 7th grade teams wearing hand-me-downs, not to mention it is an ugly, no-class, assinine, false trendy lack of imagination excuse for an NFL or real NCAA uniform.

    Oh yeah, but the “kook really tough” …. BARF

  • Andrew | June 3, 2007 at 11:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”96689″]
    YID ARMY!

    “Hockey jersey” is in common use throughout hockey, and it’s definately acceptable to use either term. As you said, they’re not sweaters anymore.[/quote]

    MARTIN JOL’S BLUE AND WHITE ARMY *toot toot toot*

    It’s not really a big deal; they can be either. *shrug*

    In Spurs-uni related news, I lost the link, but Tottenham have a one-off fourth jersey for their 125th anniversary that is apparently a throwback to the 1885 days; it’s a white-and-sky-blue-halved shirt with the rest of the normal home kit, which is supposedly what Blackburn Rovers wore when they won the FA Cup in those days, and therefore the same jersey that Spurs, then a boarding-school team, decided to adopt.

  • DearLordStanley | June 3, 2007 at 11:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”96718″]There are “leaked” images of the new Washington Capitals jerseys floating about. They’re from the site of a Baltimore freelance graphic designer/illustrator, so I’m not buying them as authentic.

    home

    away

    Let’s just say: I hope not.[/quote]

    Something is definitely wrong because next season the NHL is returning to the “home whites” custom. The dark jersey would be worn in road games.