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

They Didn’t Call It Exhibition Stadium for Nothing

AJW102120319_1024x768.jpg

There was a classic moment during yesterday’s press conference to unveil the Blue Jays’ new road and alternate uniforms. It came when they trotted out old-timers Lloyd Moseby and John Mayberry to model the team’s new 1979 powder blue throwbacks, which will be worn for Friday home games. At one point Moseby was asked what it felt like when he first wore that uniform back in the day. The prop boy must not have been holding the cue cards high enough for Moseby to see, because instead of giving a scripted reply, he chose to ad lib: “The uniform sucked, okay? So we ain’t gonna go there.”

After a moment of nervous laughter from the audience, followed by a beat or two of silence, Moseby added, “’Course, it was big to put on any uniform,” but it was too late — his point had been made, namely that these things were ugly back then and they’re still ugly now. I know many of you have some sort of nostalgic and/or kitschy fascination with this uniform, but come on — it’s totally minor league. With the centered crest and the pullover style, it looks and feels more like a hockey jersey than a baseball jersey. Plus they’ll be wearing it at home, which means we’ll be treated to blue-vs.-gray games — ugh. (Moseby, incidentally, gave some additional choice comments about the design to a Canadian reporter after the unveiling ceremony.)

While the original design had pants with a double-snap waistband, the throwback has more traditional belted pants (Moseby approved of this change: “When dirt got in your snaps, they wouldn’t work”). The mock-up in the MLB Style Guide shows a striped belt, presumably to simulate the striped waistband, but the belts at the unveiling were solid blue, which is probably for the best. On the other hand, I give them credit for sticking to one aspect of the original design: NNOB.

As for the new road jersey, I like it. Yeah, it doesn’t match the home design, but I count that as a plus, because the home design blows. I see at least four reasons to like this revision: 1) vertically arched lettering; 2) the ascension of blue from trim color to main color; 3) uni numbers finally appearing on the front of the jersey; 4) a pretty cool number font (soooooo much better than the old one). Problems? I count one: They’ve retained the super-clunky NOB typography. But at least it’s blue now, which is mild improvement. Now if we could just get them to wear a blue cap.

Finally, if you believe in omens, there was a bad one: The “N” in “Toronto” is supposed to look like this, with the shadowed side of the bevel down and to the right. But the “N” on the jersey that Jeremy Accardo was wearing was upside-down. Nice going, guys.

(Special thanks to the Chris Creamer board, where many of the above-linked photos were first posted.)

Uni Watch News Ticker: Homeless man update from Mike Hennessy, who writes: “At a news conference sometime over the weekend, Belichick wore his regular sweatshirt with the hood cut off. I think with this he has hit rock bottom.” … Speaking of Belichick, for a few weeks now his headband has featured a Pats logo that I haven’t seen elsewhere. I kinda like it, especially since the “New England” part of the team’s name usually doesn’t get much play. Anyone know more about this logo? … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: Steve Smith threw his cleats into the crowd after Sunday’s game. … Great catch by Jeremy Iwen, who noticed that the first “R” in Dominique Barber’s nameplate was backwards a few weeks back. … Ray Lewis memorialized Sean Taylor on his eye black last night.

 

216 comments to They Didn’t Call It Exhibition Stadium for Nothing

  • emeyel | December 4, 2007 at 8:07 am |

    The Patriots have been using that logo (though sparingly) since at least the Pete Carroll era. I bought a cap with that logo on it back in 1999 (although of course it was royal blue, not the current navy).

  • Leo | December 4, 2007 at 8:11 am |

    I love the return to blue, but I don’t envy the person that has to cut those letters/numbers nor the person that has to put them on. Upside down Ns and Os will be everywhere.

  • Shane | December 4, 2007 at 8:23 am |

    Love the new Blue Jays alts.

    At least they’re getting back to blue.

  • Chris Doran | December 4, 2007 at 8:24 am |

    I don’t think the sweatshirt in the Belicheck press conference photo is the hooded model.

    Look at the placement of the NFL Equipment logo.

    Here it’s on the collar: http://farm3.static....

    and here it’s on the pocket: http://espn-i.starwa...

    I think it’s this shirt http://www.nflshop.c... with the collar cut off.

  • Zack Bennett | December 4, 2007 at 8:27 am |

    I took all of those numbers on the back of the Pats’ helmets last night and played the lottery with them.

  • Marcus Sharp | December 4, 2007 at 8:29 am |

    Did anyone else notice that Tom Brady did not have the Sean Taylor decal on his helmet during warm-ups, but did have it on for the Pats first drive?

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 8:30 am |

    [quote comment=”181371″]I don’t think the sweatshirt in the Belicheck press conference photo is the hooded model.[/quote]

    if it’s not the hooded model, why would angry homeless man cut off just the collar? (other than the fact that he’s angry and homeless)

    /nothing on the bart scott affair paul?

  • /a | December 4, 2007 at 8:40 am |

    Have they dropped the small MLB logo on the back of the neck for the ’08 jerseys?

  • Mr. Man | December 4, 2007 at 8:40 am |

    And now we just wait for the Royals to unveil their powder blue home alternates

  • Kevin Mericle | December 4, 2007 at 8:44 am |

    Two things I noticed during last nights game. Derrick Mason was missing the “B” logo from at least one side of his pants. Willis McGahee was missing “Ravens” from the front of his jersey, and his front jersey numbers seemed bigger than the others (almost like they put the rear-jersey numbers on the front).

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 8:44 am |

    Maybe it is because the photo quality wasn’t as good in the old days, but the Blue Jays’ new powder blues look to be a tad darker than they were in 1979.

  • steve | December 4, 2007 at 8:45 am |

    [quote comment=”181375″]Did anyone else notice that Tom Brady did not have the Sean Taylor decal on his helmet during warm-ups, but did have it on for the Pats first drive?[/quote]

    Yes

  • Paul Lukas | December 4, 2007 at 8:46 am |

    [quote comment=”181384″]Willis McGahee was missing “Ravens” from the front of his jersey…[/quote]

    Nice catch, confirmed here.

  • Minna H. | December 4, 2007 at 8:50 am |

    Thank you, Moseby, for speaking the truth. Those things are ugly, dog. I got no love for the powder blues. I like the grays, though. Very nice.

    The guy in the middle (Accardo?)looks like Gary Gaetti. I was racking my brain trying to figure out when The Rat had played for Toronto, then I realized it wasn’t him.

  • teamcinnamon | December 4, 2007 at 8:51 am |

    The only jersey issue that I see w/the Blue Jays is that there are Matt Stairs jerseys available to purchase – with anti theft sensors attached!

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 8:52 am |

    In the 1970s and early 1980s, when I railed on Uni Issues to my disinterested friends, my biggest complaints were powder blues, pullovers and elastic waistbands. As teams slowly began to get away from these, I celebrated.

    As these styles begin to creep back onto the baseball diamond, I can only hope that they are used for the occasional alt and do not see a full-blown return. I can’t wait out another twenty years of bad baseball fashion.

  • teamcinnamon | December 4, 2007 at 8:53 am |

    Mr. Ovenmitts got some tv time last night when confering with the refs after what I believe was the Pat’s last TD.

    No screen cap.

  • Minna H. | December 4, 2007 at 8:54 am |

    Oh, the Ravens wore all-black last night? Very nice. I like it sans ‘Ravens’ on front. I like their all-black a tad better than New Orleans’ all-black, but all-black is always all-good.

    Anybody know if the Raiders ever wear all-black? If so, photo proof?

    P.S. Paul, for the link for the belt prototype, you have stripted–which makes me think of strip-tease for no reason.

  • chris omps | December 4, 2007 at 8:56 am |

    The pat’s logo on belicheck’s headband came from back when Nike did NFL sideline caps. I believe the hat that emeyel says that he has, is probably one with the three stripes in the brim, and three more on the back, right below the nfl shield. I have an Eagles cap just like it, Mcnabb wore it his first two years in the league, so around ’99-00 era.

  • Jet | December 4, 2007 at 9:06 am |

    [quote comment=”181391″]In the 1970s and early 1980s, when I railed on Uni Issues to my disinterested friends, my biggest complaints were powder blues, pullovers and elastic waistbands. As teams slowly began to get away from these, I celebrated.

    As these styles begin to creep back onto the baseball diamond, I can only hope that they are used for the occasional alt and do not see a full-blown return. I can’t wait out another twenty years of bad baseball fashion.[/quote]

    Amen, bro. Those were dark days indeed.

    -Jet

  • PJ | December 4, 2007 at 9:08 am |

    That NE logo was one that was created back around 2000, when almost every team had an “alternate” logo that was used on hats, etc. I think one of the equiptment suppliers at the time (Puma, Nike, Reebok) came up with them. I specifically remember them on hats. They usually incorporated something about the primary logo (The top of the “N” in NE has the Pats hat incorporated). I remember the Cardinals, Vikings, dolphins, and atlanta had interesting versions. I have to keep looking for examples.

  • Pat | December 4, 2007 at 9:10 am |

    [quote]Ray Lewis memorialized Sean Taylor on his eye black last night.[/quote]

    And he was fake crying during the moment of silence for Sean Taylor. Is anyone else tired of Ray Lewis’ attention seeking antics like this?

    Maybe he shed some real tears for Sean Taylor, and I respect the man for having his beliefs. But, to me, I can’t see him doing all of this stuff with a camera pointed right at his face. He just strikes me as clownishly over the top. And the pre-game moment of silence move was a prime example.

    But, as for the game… fuck Don Shula.

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 9:13 am |

    anyone notice shula got in a plug for nutrasystem at the end of his MNF segment?

  • /a | December 4, 2007 at 9:15 am |

    I’m willing to admit that my fondness for the Jays alts has everything to do with a fuzzy nostalgia for the team – remembering Moseby’s heyday, for example – but I distinctly remember being overjoyed when baseball gradually did away with the pullover look.

    As for the road uni, it’s a fine jersey in and of itself. Nice font, numbers on front, more blue – all good things. But it adds too many new elements to the overall look. With the stupid ‘J’ hat on, players will be sporting no fewer than 3 differing fonts (cap, ‘Toronto’ and the nameplate). There is no uniformity in the uniform.

    And all of it seems to come with fine print attached, i.e. “Blue Jays management reserves the right to alter any of these elements at any time should merchandise sales sag, thus rendering your precious overpriced teamwear obsolete…”

  • Mardi | December 4, 2007 at 9:15 am |

    I was at the bengals steelers game on sunday. Did anyone see the gloves chad johnson had on in the first quarter? they looked like they had gold on them. He changed them in the second quarter to regular gloves.

  • Justin | December 4, 2007 at 9:18 am |

    [quote comment=”181375″]Did anyone else notice that Tom Brady did not have the Sean Taylor decal on his helmet during warm-ups, but did have it on for the Pats first drive?[/quote]

    My guess, and this is completely a guess. He may use a different non-radio helmet during warmup. And since there is no reason he would use this during a game, they wouldn’t bother to put the decal on it. Was the little green sticker on his helmet for warmup?

  • Kek | December 4, 2007 at 9:20 am |

    I like the powder blue Toronto unis. I guess that’s just what I grew up on when I got into collecting baseball cards. I’ll be picking up a replica of that cap.

    Regarding the photo of Barber and his nameplate, what is the decal at the rear of his helmet. It’s the state of Minnesota but what is it symbolizing? The bridge accident perhaps? (sorry if this has been addressed already)

  • Duckstyle | December 4, 2007 at 9:21 am |

    I noticed at least one, possibly two, Ravens defenders using bright orange mouthpieces(Miami tribute maybe). Is there any rule regarding the color of mouthpieces? I realize many are so small they don’t see the light-of-day, but these were of the large, over-the-lips variety. Anyone?

  • werthj | December 4, 2007 at 9:21 am |

    The Badgers wore there 1941 ‘throwback’ socks last night.

  • werthj | December 4, 2007 at 9:23 am |

    their, not there obviously

  • Jason G. | December 4, 2007 at 9:30 am |

    [quote comment=”181412″]I noticed at least one, possibly two, Ravens defenders using bright orange mouthpieces(Miami tribute maybe). Is there any rule regarding the color of mouthpieces? I realize many are so small they don’t see the light-of-day, but these were of the large, over-the-lips variety. Anyone?[/quote]

    They actually get more airtime than you would think. Players often take them out between plays. Having seen this a million times a game, I can tell you that if there is a rule about colors, no one is following them. I’ve seen a lot of two toned mouthpieces (right half one color, left half another color). Often times they don’t even match the team colors. I have no pictures to prove any of this and don’t have time to look for them, but if you watch the games and look for them I’m sure you’ll find many examples.

  • Marcus Ramsey | December 4, 2007 at 9:30 am |

    Anyone else catch Ed Reed with an orange mouthguard?

    Was that him honoring his old Miami teammate? Or does he do that often?

  • Mike | December 4, 2007 at 9:30 am |

    The Ravens “unitard” look last night reminded me of my 7 yr-old’s dance class…

  • Miguel | December 4, 2007 at 9:32 am |

    [quote comment=”181394″]The pat’s logo on belicheck’s headband came from back when Nike did NFL sideline caps. I believe the hat that emeyel says that he has, is probably one with the three stripes in the brim, and three more on the back, right below the nfl shield. I have an Eagles cap just like it, Mcnabb wore it his first two years in the league, so around ’99-00 era.[/quote]

    The Patriots were an adidas team. That’s why they have three stripes on their road socks. It’s subtle corporate branding that Reebok never let go.

  • Nolan | December 4, 2007 at 9:34 am |

    [quote comment=”181393″]Oh, the Ravens wore all-black last night? Very nice. I like it sans ‘Ravens’ on front. I like their all-black a tad better than New Orleans’ all-black, but all-black is always all-good.

    Anybody know if the Raiders ever wear all-black? If so, photo proof?

    P.S. Paul, for the link for the belt prototype, you have stripted–which makes me think of strip-tease for no reason.[/quote]
    I confirmed it here, they don’t have black pants. They haven’t changed anything about their uni in years so it may not be something you see for a while, if ever.

  • J-P | December 4, 2007 at 9:34 am |

    As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 9:36 am |

    [quote comment=”181371″]I don’t think the sweatshirt in the Belicheck press conference photo is the hooded model.

    Look at the placement of the NFL Equipment logo.

    Here it’s on the collar: http://farm3.static....

    and here it’s on the pocket: http://espn-i.starwa...

    I think it’s this shirt http://www.nflshop.c... with the collar cut off.[/quote]

    It has shoulder seams like the hoodies though.

  • GC | December 4, 2007 at 9:36 am |

    I have to admit…I am partial to powder blue.

  • Nick | December 4, 2007 at 9:37 am |

    FWIW, Ray Ray wasn’t the only one with 21 on his eye black. I know I saw it at least one other time, if not more.

  • Paul Lukas | December 4, 2007 at 9:38 am |

    [quote comment=”181425″]As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.[/quote]

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.

  • Nolan | December 4, 2007 at 9:40 am |

    [quote comment=”181407″][quote comment=”181375″]Did anyone else notice that Tom Brady did not have the Sean Taylor decal on his helmet during warm-ups, but did have it on for the Pats first drive?[/quote]

    My guess, and this is completely a guess. He may use a different non-radio helmet during warmup. And since there is no reason he would use this during a game, they wouldn’t bother to put the decal on it. Was the little green sticker on his helmet for warmup?[/quote]

    Could be possible, he was wearing a different helmet than last week. Last week he had on this helmet, notice where his high chinstrap hookup is. Last night he had on this one that he has also worn for every other game (see the different snap placement).

  • Adam | December 4, 2007 at 9:48 am |

    All these 70’s Throwbacks comming back into circle again…I love the Jays throwbacks, too bad they didn’t go with the ’77 uni’s and had TORONTO on the front instead of BLUE JAYS.
    God I hope the Pirates don’t think about doing it with their million combinations for the ’78-‘-79 jerseys….a club house attendants worst nightmare!!

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 9:52 am |

    [quote comment=”181427″][quote comment=”181371″]I don’t think the sweatshirt in the Belicheck press conference photo is the hooded model.

    Look at the placement of the NFL Equipment logo.

    Here it’s on the collar: http://farm3.static....

    and here it’s on the pocket: http://espn-i.starwa...

    I think it’s this shirt http://www.nflshop.c... with the collar cut off.[/quote]

    It has shoulder seams like the hoodies though.[/quote]

    Nevermind, it is a crew neck with a cut up or disintegrating collar, Viewimages has some pictures of him wearing them. It is a little different than the fleece in the NFL shop, but looks similar.

  • JJD | December 4, 2007 at 9:53 am |

    Is that number font on the Blue Jays jersey the same as the Chargers new font? It appears so.

  • alan | December 4, 2007 at 9:54 am |

    looks like Wisconsin is continuing it’s pursuit of logo infractions.

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 9:58 am |

    Yesterday’s big story in sporting socks.

  • Rick | December 4, 2007 at 9:59 am |

    [quote comment=”181412″]I noticed at least one, possibly two, Ravens defenders using bright orange mouthpieces(Miami tribute maybe). Is there any rule regarding the color of mouthpieces? I realize many are so small they don’t see the light-of-day, but these were of the large, over-the-lips variety. Anyone?[/quote]

    According the rules section of this site, mouth guards are not required, but says nothing about color choices of mouth guards.

  • Justin B | December 4, 2007 at 10:00 am |

    [quote comment=”181432″][quote comment=”181425″]As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.[/quote]

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.[/quote]

    Is there history to this?

  • Frenchie | December 4, 2007 at 10:02 am |

    MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”

    Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.

    “There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”

    No more pullover for Francona.

    When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”

  • Adam | December 4, 2007 at 10:03 am |

    [quote comment=”181449″][quote comment=”181412″]I noticed at least one, possibly two, Ravens defenders using bright orange mouthpieces(Miami tribute maybe). Is there any rule regarding the color of mouthpieces? I realize many are so small they don’t see the light-of-day, but these were of the large, over-the-lips variety. Anyone?[/quote]

    According the rules section of this site, mouth guards are not required, but says nothing about color choices of mouth guards.[/quote]
    I wouldn’t call the over the lips “Mouthgards”….more like a “PACIFIER” a baby would suck on to….considering nothing but babies use them!

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 10:05 am |

    NBA kicks off heritage week on Friday. Nine teams will be wearing retro unis:

    Boston Celtics (1956-57 Road)
    Chicago Bulls (1995-96 Second Road)
    Detroit Pistons (1957-58 Home)
    Golden State Warriors (1974-75 Road)
    Houston Rockets (1994-95 Home)
    Los Angeles Lakers (1987-88 Home)
    Miami Heat (1988-89 Home)
    New York Knicks (1972-73 Home)
    Philadelphia 76ers (1982-83 Home)

    The article is here.

  • scott | December 4, 2007 at 10:05 am |

    The Jays powder blues are fine as a throwback, but they shouldn’t be worn at home if there’s no history or precedent for wearing them at home.

  • Matt K | December 4, 2007 at 10:08 am |

    [quote comment=”181411″]Regarding the photo of Barber and his nameplate, what is the decal at the rear of his helmet. It’s the state of Minnesota but what is it symbolizing? The bridge accident perhaps? (sorry if this has been addressed already)[/quote]

    I may be wrong, but I believe all the Minnesota natives on the Gopher football roster have that sticker, with a star marking their hometown. Causing, based on their play this year, great shame to said hometowns.

    Re: the Jays: not in love with the powder blue, entirely, but I’m gettin’ a replica of that hat posthaste.

  • Duckstyle | December 4, 2007 at 10:09 am |

    [quote comment=”181447″] looks like Wisconsin is continuing it’s pursuit of logo infractions.[/quote]

    I hope I’m not the only one getting real irritated with this. I understand that it’s their logo, and anyone using it ought to pay up. But seriously, it’s not like these schools are making extra merch money because they use the same logo. I understand when a bootlegger is making false merch and making money, and they get charged. But a middle/high school, come on. Doesn’t their legal department have bigger fish to fry? I remember about 2 years before I attended my high school they changed their logo from a Iowa Hawkeyes ripoff to an original logo because they were asked, not sued, by the university to do so. In teh end the new logo is kinda badass, so everyones happy.

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 10:11 am |

    All right, a Francona rule and no more smocks! I love it. If he has circulation problems, that’s fine. Just wear a jacket, like Ted Williams did to hide his gut when he managed the Rangers.

  • Mike Engle | December 4, 2007 at 10:14 am |

    [quote comment=”181452″]MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”

    Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.

    “There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”

    No more pullover for Francona.

    When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”[/quote]
    [quote comment=”181459″]All right, a Francona rule and no more smocks! I love it. If he has circulation problems, that’s fine. Just wear a jacket, like Ted Williams did to hide his gut when he managed the Rangers.[/quote]
    {sarcasm} I’m disappointed. With the smock, John Gibbons was consistently the best-dressed Toronto Blue Jay. {/sarcasm}

  • James | December 4, 2007 at 10:15 am |

    I hate the powder blue. Someone please stop this trend before it gets out of hand.

    I always hated those Toronto uniforms, especially the big logo on the front. They look like Little League uniforms. I was thrilled when they finally moved the logo to the sleeve. I’ve never really cared for any Blue jays uniform, though they have improved with time.

    If baseball teams want to bring back something retro, how about showing socks and stirrups.

  • Jack Krabbe | December 4, 2007 at 10:16 am |

    [quote comment=”181421″]Anyone else catch Ed Reed with an orange mouthguard?

    Was that him honoring his old Miami teammate? Or does he do that often?[/quote]

    He does this all the time. It is a tribute to Miami. There was a season where he always wore a wristband with the UM logo as well. I’ll look for a pic.

  • Stuby | December 4, 2007 at 10:20 am |

    I would love to see the Giants use their 70s uniforms with the orange jerseys as a Friday throwback. Of course, the best part of that uni is the orange sanitaries. Unless you could get the players to wear the uniform and stirrups correctly, it would probably look like shit.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 10:26 am |

    [quote comment=”181458″][quote comment=”181447″] looks like Wisconsin is continuing it’s pursuit of logo infractions.[/quote]

    I hope I’m not the only one getting real irritated with this. I understand that it’s their logo, and anyone using it ought to pay up. But seriously, it’s not like these schools are making extra merch money because they use the same logo. I understand when a bootlegger is making false merch and making money, and they get charged. But a middle/high school, come on. Doesn’t their legal department have bigger fish to fry?[/quote]

    No, actually. Because they’re all the same.

    Setting aside the fact infringement is stealing, if Wisconsin doesn’t go after the little fish, they lose their legal standing to challenge larger infringements.

    Plus, read the article.

    For the past six years, the lawsuit states, UW-Madison has been in touch with Washburn “numerous times and requested that Washburn cease using a confusingly similar imitation of Wisconsin ‘s Motion W mark. ” Several times, the lawsuit states, Washburn assured Wisconsin that it had stopped using the Motion W logo, but instead has only expanded its use.

    If true, how could the University not sue, with a pattern like that?

  • CV | December 4, 2007 at 10:27 am |

    I would like to see these throwbacks from the 70’s-early 80’s:

    A’s – 1976 Yellow
    Indians – 1977 Blue
    Pads – 1978 whites
    Pirates – 1979 white with thick pinstripes
    Orioles – 1980 Orange
    Giants – 1981 Black

  • ML | December 4, 2007 at 10:28 am |

    The Ravens “unitard” look last night reminded me of my 7 yr-old’s dance class…

    agreed. i really like the all-black but with almost no distiguishing marks between the jersey & pants and the seriously legging-like bottoms…

  • DenverGregg | December 4, 2007 at 10:29 am |

    I guess I’m the minority here. I like powder blue, but don’t like pullovers, softball caps or the centered crest on a baseball jersey and I vehemently dislike the lettering. Tractor lettering looked pretty cool in about ’74, but like most things from that era looked woefully dated by the time the Jays first took the field.

  • Jeag | December 4, 2007 at 10:30 am |

    i’m all for the powder blue, and throwbacks and such, but the pullovers are going to look horrible, especially with the baggy 2007 style and the recent tendency of the Jays to employ huge/fat guys. i know most of you are probably for historical accuracy, but I would have advocated a “modernization” of the uniform (like Milwaukee does) to include a button front and move the logo to one side. Matt Stairs and Frank Thomas are going to look really, really sloppy.

  • John Griebel | December 4, 2007 at 10:30 am |

    Man, those Jays throwbacks are killer. I’ll buy a Jays lid the second they are available…….

  • ryan c #40 | December 4, 2007 at 10:30 am |

    favre is sportsman of the year… but wearing a replica jersey???

  • ryan c #40 | December 4, 2007 at 10:31 am |

    oops on the favre thing. link:

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Randy Miller | December 4, 2007 at 10:31 am |

    Re: the Francona rule and polyester.

    When Ted Williams managed the Texas Rangers in their Arlington debut season (1972), he ALWAYS wore the jacket. It didn’t matter the gametime temperature was 99 in the shade, Ted was not going to be seen in form-fitting polyester.

  • Matthew H. | December 4, 2007 at 10:34 am |

    Bob Watson is a major league loser who seriously needs to get some balance in his life. Can’t you just picture this guy sitting up at night thinking up ways to make sure Terry Francona wears a jersey. Idiot.

  • Mike Engle | December 4, 2007 at 10:35 am |

    [quote comment=”181476″]favre is sportsman of the year… but wearing a replica jersey???[/quote]
    Doubt it. A replica jersey probably wouldn’t have the Lambeau patch, and the front white #4 would probably have mesh holes through it. This is obviously a sewn-on number. My guess is that it is tailored authentic.

  • Minna H. | December 4, 2007 at 10:35 am |

    quote comment=”181424″][quote comment=”181393″]Oh, the Ravens wore all-black last night? Very nice. I like it sans ‘Ravens’ on front. I like their all-black a tad better than New Orleans’ all-black, but all-black is always all-good.

    Anybody know if the Raiders ever wear all-black? If so, photo proof?

    P.S. Paul, for the link for the belt prototype, you have stripted–which makes me think of strip-tease for no reason.[/quote]
    I confirmed it here, they don’t have black pants. They haven’t changed anything about their uni in years so it may not be something you see for a while, if ever.[/quote]

    Thanks, Nolan, even if it’s not the answer I wanted. Oh, well. I can always hope they will come up with a ‘one-timer’. I would especially love for the Raiders to go all-black because silver is vastly superior to gold.

  • J-P | December 4, 2007 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”181432″][quote comment=”181425″]As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.[/quote]

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.[/quote]
    The Giants are the other way around, which makes sense to me. They have NOB on the road and NNOB at home.

  • Matt | December 4, 2007 at 10:41 am |

    [quote comment=”181403″][quote]Ray Lewis memorialized Sean Taylor on his eye black last night.[/quote]

    And he was fake crying during the moment of silence for Sean Taylor. Is anyone else tired of Ray Lewis’ attention seeking antics like this?

    Maybe he shed some real tears for Sean Taylor, and I respect the man for having his beliefs. But, to me, I can’t see him doing all of this stuff with a camera pointed right at his face. He just strikes me as clownishly over the top. And the pre-game moment of silence move was a prime example.

    But, as for the game… fuck Don Shula.[/quote]

    Maybe they pointed the camera his way because he was crying? Is he not allowed to be sad about his deceased friend?

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 10:43 am |

    perhaps im in the minority here, but i totally dig the alt. uni thing in all it’s glory, so long as it is a RARE event…like the flashback friday trend…what’s wrong with seeing the powder blues all of 13 times a season out of 162 games??? additionally, i would love it if MLB and the other leagues have MANY different jackets, vests, sweaters, pullovers, etc. for teams to wear while not on the field of play…however…select one for the day of the game and outfit everyone in it…none of this mix and match shit

    what i am extremely anal about is uniform uniformity…i know this may sound assinine, but would it really be that big of a deal to have everyone wear stirrups, or just sanitaries, or even the low cuts (but not the manny/barry bootcuts…i might throw up into my mouth if everyone had that look) at the same time??? most will argue this would take away a player’s ‘individuality’ (well, are you a TEAM player or just one of 25???)…they could even have different days of the week to wear the different look…god forbid

    i know this will never happen, of course, but that’s just my $.02

  • Duckstyle | December 4, 2007 at 10:44 am |

    [quote comment=”181468″][quote comment=”181458″][quote comment=”181447″] looks like Wisconsin is continuing it’s pursuit of logo infractions.[/quote]

    I hope I’m not the only one getting real irritated with this. I understand that it’s their logo, and anyone using it ought to pay up. But seriously, it’s not like these schools are making extra merch money because they use the same logo. I understand when a bootlegger is making false merch and making money, and they get charged. But a middle/high school, come on. Doesn’t their legal department have bigger fish to fry?[/quote]

    No, actually. Because they’re all the same.

    Setting aside the fact infringement is stealing, if Wisconsin doesn’t go after the little fish, they lose their legal standing to challenge larger infringements.

    Plus, read the article.

    For the past six years, the lawsuit states, UW-Madison has been in touch with Washburn “numerous times and requested that Washburn cease using a confusingly similar imitation of Wisconsin ‘s Motion W mark. ” Several times, the lawsuit states, Washburn assured Wisconsin that it had stopped using the Motion W logo, but instead has only expanded its use.

    If true, how could the University not sue, with a pattern like that?[/quote]

    Fair enough. I just skimmed it, I stopped reading the full articles like 20 lawsuits ago.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 10:45 am |

    [quote comment=”181484″]
    Maybe they pointed the camera his way because he was crying? [/quote]

    Oh, I think very possibly. But I think what he was getting at was that he thought Lewis was playing for the cameras, knowing full well that it would draw their attention.

    He doesn’t think it was genuine at all, if I may speak for him.

  • ryan c #40 | December 4, 2007 at 10:47 am |

    post #42:

    “I hope the Pirates don’t think about doing it with their million combinations for the ‘78-’-79 jerseys….a club house attendants worst nightmare!!”

    ha-ha! adam, i don’t think they could afford another jersey in the rotation!!! i DO love all (4 or 5 (4 i think)) of the pirate jerseys right now. even the red one, there’s just something about it! anybody know the official name of that font/text the pirates use?

  • ryan c #40 | December 4, 2007 at 10:47 am |

    post #49:

    “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times”

    i beg you, can mlb coaches please, please, please STOP wearing uniforms!!! the look insanely stupid! a nice polo and khakis and the hat will do great. you… hell, you can EVEN wear the cleats!!!

  • JMO | December 4, 2007 at 10:48 am |

    In case Paul was looking for a an actual news link about Francona

    http://www.bostonher...

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 10:49 am |

    [quote comment=”181488″]
    Fair enough. I just skimmed it, I stopped reading the full articles like 20 lawsuits ago.[/quote]

    Too bad – the really great part was at the very bottom, where it says:

    Most of the infringements have been by high schools, Nagy said. The university typically sends them a letter, informs them that the Motion W is a registered trademark and offers assistance in creating new logos that don ‘t infringe on the trademark.

    So it would seem that the University is doing everything right.

    Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs – towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.

  • Stuby | December 4, 2007 at 10:49 am |

    I’m sorry for being so cynical. This whole Sean Taylor memorial is over the top. League-wide moment of silence? Cool. His team wearing a memorial patch? Cool. League-wide helmet sticker the size of a grapefruit? Excessive.

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 10:51 am |

    [quote comment=”181493″]post #49:

    “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times”

    i beg you, can mlb coaches please, please, please STOP wearing uniforms!!! the look insanely stupid! a nice polo and khakis and the hat will do great. you… hell, you can EVEN wear the cleats!!![/quote]

    They’d end up looking like this.

    (Actually, they’d be like the NFL, mannequins for the latest in ugly apparel).

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 10:52 am |

    [quote comment=”181493″]i beg you, can mlb coaches please, please, please STOP wearing uniforms!!! the look insanely stupid! a nice polo and khakis and the hat will do great. you… hell, you can EVEN wear the cleats!!![/quote]

    i believe MLB is the only sport where it is a rule that if you step onto the field of play, you must be wearing a uniform…therefore, fat third base coaches will be required to sport the uni…although, trainers are obviously NOT required to wear unis, so i may be wrong

    does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 10:53 am |

    [quote comment=”181479″]Bob Watson is a major league loser who seriously needs to get some balance in his life. Can’t you just picture this guy sitting up at night thinking up ways to make sure Terry Francona wears a jersey. Idiot.[/quote]

    Um, I believe that the report indicated that Francona could wear a jacket in lieu of a jersey. Just no smock.

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 10:55 am |

    [quote comment=”181494″]In case Paul was looking for a an actual news link about Francona

    http://www.bostonher...

    I love that Watson threw in a jab, referring to Francona’s smock as a “nightshirt, or whatever it is.”

  • ryan c #40 | December 4, 2007 at 10:55 am |

    post #70:

    “Doubt it. A replica jersey probably wouldn’t have the Lambeau patch, and the front white #4 would probably have mesh holes through it. This is obviously a sewn-on number. My guess is that it is tailored authentic”

    yeah mike, but don’t the sleeves look painted or ironed on??? thats not what they wear on the field. either way, no biggie! just weird…

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 10:56 am |

    [quote comment=”181499″][quote comment=”181479″]Bob Watson is a major league loser who seriously needs to get some balance in his life. Can’t you just picture this guy sitting up at night thinking up ways to make sure Terry Francona wears a jersey. Idiot.[/quote]

    Um, I believe that the report indicated that Francona could wear a jacket in lieu of a jersey. Just no smock.[/quote]

    Oops, I stand corrected. The article said that the uniform top must be worn at all times. I guess that the reference to the jacket just meant that it can be worn over the jersey.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 10:59 am |

    [quote comment=”181496″]I’m sorry for being so cynical. This whole Sean Taylor memorial is over the top. League-wide moment of silence? Cool. His team wearing a memorial patch? Cool. League-wide helmet sticker the size of a grapefruit? Excessive.[/quote]

    I tend to agree.

    I also think it diminishes the deaths of other active NFL players, who were not similarly remembered. I guess Darrent Williams and Marquise Hill had the bad timing to die outside of the NFL regular season….

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”181501″]post #70:

    “Doubt it. A replica jersey probably wouldn’t have the Lambeau patch, and the front white #4 would probably have mesh holes through it. This is obviously a sewn-on number. My guess is that it is tailored authentic”

    yeah mike, but don’t the sleeves look painted or ironed on??? thats not what they wear on the field. either way, no biggie! just weird…

    http://sportsillustr...

    Yes, it is. The Packers still use screened sleeve stripes, for some odd reason.

  • Jason | December 4, 2007 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment=”181453″]NBA kicks off heritage week on Friday. Nine teams will be wearing retro unis:

    Boston Celtics (1956-57 Road)
    Chicago Bulls (1995-96 Second Road)
    Detroit Pistons (1957-58 Home)
    Golden State Warriors (1974-75 Road)
    Houston Rockets (1994-95 Home)
    Los Angeles Lakers (1987-88 Home)
    Miami Heat (1988-89 Home)
    New York Knicks (1972-73 Home)
    Philadelphia 76ers (1982-83 Home)

    The article is here.[/quote]

    The Bucks NEED to get on board with this!

  • Mark in Shiga | December 4, 2007 at 11:09 am |

    I like the new Jays’ road uniforms too — the font looks a lot better than the Star Trek one they used to use — but what’s the deal with the massive gap between the collar and the NOB? There seems to be a lot of this lately and it really looks off-balance. (And the names themselves are big, clunky, ugly, and in the wrong font. Just dump them and make the numbers bigger.)

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 11:09 am |

    [quote comment=”181486″]perhaps im in the minority here, but i totally dig the alt. uni thing in all it’s glory, so long as it is a RARE event…like the flashback friday trend…what’s wrong with seeing the powder blues all of 13 times a season out of 162 games??? additionally, i would love it if MLB and the other leagues have MANY different jackets, vests, sweaters, pullovers, etc. for teams to wear while not on the field of play…however…select one for the day of the game and outfit everyone in it…none of this mix and match shit

    what i am extremely anal about is uniform uniformity…i know this may sound assinine, but would it really be that big of a deal to have everyone wear stirrups, or just sanitaries, or even the low cuts (but not the manny/barry bootcuts…i might throw up into my mouth if everyone had that look) at the same time??? most will argue this would take away a player’s ‘individuality’ (well, are you a TEAM player or just one of 25???)…they could even have different days of the week to wear the different look…god forbid

    i know this will never happen, of course, but that’s just my $.02[/quote]

    Part of the purpose of a uniform is the branding of a team. I am not a Yankees fan, but when you see them step out of the dugout, there is something about it. You are seeing the New York Yankees.

    That is why I don’t care for alternates at all, and am not even a fan of Sunday jerseys or anything like that. It dilutes the visual identity of the teams and some of the impact of seeing them in person. I don’t mind BP jerseys because they help create a separation between warming up and the actual start of a Major League Baseball game.

    I see the argument that “hey, can’t this be fun??” but I remember being awed by baseball games as a kid and now it seems like I go, and there is a ferris wheel and fountains, and a million things going on with a ball game in the background.

  • Robb | December 4, 2007 at 11:14 am |

    [quote comment=”181433″][quote comment=”181407″][quote comment=”181375″]Did anyone else notice that Tom Brady did not have the Sean Taylor decal on his helmet during warm-ups, but did have it on for the Pats first drive?[/quote]

    My guess, and this is completely a guess. He may use a different non-radio helmet during warmup. And since there is no reason he would use this during a game, they wouldn’t bother to put the decal on it. Was the little green sticker on his helmet for warmup?[/quote]

    Could be possible, he was wearing a different helmet than last week. Last week he had on this helmet, notice where his high chinstrap hookup is. Last night he had on this one that he has also worn for every other game (see the different snap placement).[/quote]

    Huh, looks like the equipment manager put the chin strap on upside down, Riddell puts their logo on the “upper” strap so that their name is upright…anybody know how long thats been going on?

  • Jerico | December 4, 2007 at 11:14 am |

    [quote comment=”181423″][quote comment=”181394″]The pat’s logo on belicheck’s headband came from back when Nike did NFL sideline caps. I believe the hat that emeyel says that he has, is probably one with the three stripes in the brim, and three more on the back, right below the nfl shield. I have an Eagles cap just like it, Mcnabb wore it his first two years in the league, so around ’99-00 era.[/quote]

    The Patriots were an adidas team. That’s why they have three stripes on their road socks. It’s subtle corporate branding that Reebok never let go.[/quote]
    Ah, the good old days when Nike/Puma/adidas did the NFL laundry. I do succinctly remember the NE and Philadelphia “E” hats; those were Nike-fied, baseball-like creations, I believe. They also did a Steeler hat with the Steeler logo inside the block P, and an NYJ logo for the Jets. Nike may have been responsible for the Giants going retro; when they got the NY Giants jerseys in the late ’90s, they had been selling the old-school NY logo on caps before the Giants went retro in 2000.

    In addition to changing the Broncos jerseys (for better or worse), Nike was also responsible for the Steelers changing their number font on the unis (to match the numbers on their helmets). Nike also changed the letterhead font of the Chicago Bears to match the rounded numeral font, which was REALLY cool. (For the life of me, I can’t find pics of it.) In fact, I’m kicking myself as a Bears fan for not getting apparel with the aforementioned font. When Reebok acquired the NFL rights, they switched back to the familiar block “BEARS” letterhead.

    Adidas also did the San Francisco 49ers jerseys, if you recall–another one with three stripes. Given that, it’s remarkable that the Chicago Bears were a Nike team then.

  • dm00n [Doug] | December 4, 2007 at 11:14 am |

    [quote comment=”181500″][quote comment=”181494″]In case Paul was looking for a an actual news link about Francona

    http://www.bostonher...

    I love that Watson threw in a jab, referring to Francona’s smock as a “nightshirt, or whatever it is.”[/quote]

    Doesn’t he wear the official MLB thermal shirt? Funny that he is dissing their own product, rather than just telling Francona to reverse the order of his layers.

  • Paul Lukas | December 4, 2007 at 11:20 am |

    [quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.

  • Philly Bill | December 4, 2007 at 11:21 am |

    Only vaguely uni-related, but we’ve covered this team from a sartorial standpoint since day one, so here’s some news about our favorite #26.

    http://www.philly.co...

    I’ve never heard of such a thing… and I’m a “P.C. Thug”!

  • Kevin | December 4, 2007 at 11:23 am |

    [quote comment=”181519″]Only vaguely uni-related, but we’ve covered this team from a sartorial standpoint since day one, so here’s some news about our favorite #26.

    http://www.philly.co...

    I’ve never heard of such a thing… and I’m a “P.C. Thug”![/quote]

    When the hell did PorkChop become offensive? People need to get a damn life and not get offended by every damn thing.

  • My name is not Earl | December 4, 2007 at 11:24 am |

    Which Bucks throwbacks are we talking here . . . the original, Robertson/Kareem era ones or (more likely) the classic mid-80s ones?

    Also, the thing with NNOB at home and NOB on the road probably is similar to teams having the team nickname on the home jerseys and the city name on the road ones. At home, everyone knows what city it is. Although you have to respect the Knicks, who have “New York” on both home and road jerseys (didn’t Finley have “Oakland” on both home and road jerseys the first year the A’s were in Oakland?)

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 11:26 am |

    [quote comment=”181514″]Part of the purpose of a uniform is the branding of a team. I am not a Yankees fan, but when you see them step out of the dugout, there is something about it. You are seeing the New York Yankees.

    That is why I don’t care for alternates at all, and am not even a fan of Sunday jerseys or anything like that. It dilutes the visual identity of the teams and some of the impact of seeing them in person. I don’t mind BP jerseys because they help create a separation between warming up and the actual start of a Major League Baseball game.

    I see the argument that “hey, can’t this be fun??” but I remember being awed by baseball games as a kid and now it seems like I go, and there is a ferris wheel and fountains, and a million things going on with a ball game in the background.[/quote]

    like i said, i think im in the minority…i totally agree with you on the NYY…i can’t imagine them stepping out onto the field in something as garish as the pirate sly and the family stone duds…they never abandoned the button-downs or belts during the polyester smock era, and more power to them

    my point, and i do have one, is that if a team wants to harken back to its roots on RARE occasions, i think that’s pretty cool…i’d like to see the marlins go teal once again and ditch the black or have the stros break out the psychadelics…just not every day

    as far as the classics, you can’t beat the (yankee) pinstripes or penn state or the colts (sans the blue pants) and if they never change i have no problem with that

  • Pat | December 4, 2007 at 11:26 am |

    [quote comment=”181489″][quote comment=”181484″]
    Maybe they pointed the camera his way because he was crying? [/quote]

    Oh, I think very possibly. But I think what he was getting at was that he thought Lewis was playing for the cameras, knowing full well that it would draw their attention.

    He doesn’t think it was genuine at all, if I may speak for him.[/quote]

    I don’t think anything Ray Lewis does on field in front of the cameras is genuine. I don’t want to get all off topic just explain.

    I feel like ever since his murder/obstruction of justice trial he has been on this stage trying desperately to prove he is a changed man, a religious man. He may be very religious and he may be changed. Hell, he could be the most well-behaved NFL star now for all I know. But, the antics, the inspirational speeches, the crying, the interviews where he whispers the entire time trying to sound sincere, they all seem so forced.

    No one is that inspired/emotional at all times.

    I hate this too. But, just because it’s ridiculous.

    On another note, I hope adidas doesn’t ruin the Celtics “throwback.” I’ve always wanted to see them bring back the old Celtics warmups and jersey with “Boston” on the front instead of “Celtics.”

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 11:32 am |

    [quote comment=”181518″][quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.[/quote]

    but paul…it was on wiki, so it must be true…to wit:

    [quote]In his comedy routine “Baseball & Football,” George Carlin observes that in baseball, as compared to football, the manager is required to wear the same uniform the players do. However, this was actually not true in the early years of the game. Player-managers were common, but non-playing managers whose realm was strictly the dugout often wore business suits, a common occurrence at the time. Retired players who became managers were more likely to continue to wear a baseball uniform (John McGraw, for example), especially if they were also active on the coaching lines; managers often doubled as third-base coach. By the late 1940s, nearly all managers were wearing baseball uniforms. Connie Mack was the last major league manager to wear a suit in the dugout until his retirement in the early 1950s; however, in contrast to the uniform-wearing managers, Mack rarely if ever stepped onto the field during a game; instead he sent uniformed coaches onto the field when a managerial presence outside the dugout was required.[/quote]

  • Ross | December 4, 2007 at 11:36 am |

    Did anyone else notice that a few of the Raven’s players had the NFL Equipment logo on the their lower/white socks? I only saw it a few times during the game and can’t find any pics of it.

  • Philly Bill | December 4, 2007 at 11:38 am |

    [quote comment=”181516″]Ah, the good old days when Nike/Puma/adidas did the NFL laundry. I do succinctly remember the NE and Philadelphia “E” hats; those were Nike-fied, baseball-like creations, I believe. They also did a Steeler hat with the Steeler logo inside the block P, and an NYJ logo for the Jets. Nike may have been responsible for the Giants going retro; when they got the NY Giants jerseys in the late ’90s, they had been selling the old-school NY logo on caps before the Giants went retro in 2000.[/quote]

    I’ve got an Eagles t-shirt with that stylized ‘E’ on it — made by Puma, who did the Eagles uniforms at the time. Now I also clearly remember the Steelers logo you mentioned, with the stenciled-looking ‘P’.

    [quote comment=”181515″]Could be possible, he was wearing a different helmet than last week. Last week he had on this helmet, notice where his high chinstrap hookup is. Last night he had on this one that he has also worn for every other game (see the different snap placement).[/quote]

    Huh, looks like the equipment manager put the chin strap on upside down, Riddell puts their logo on the “upper” strap so that their name is upright…anybody know how long thats been going on?[/quote]

    Wasn’t Brady fined recently for some sort of uniform violation involving his chinstrap? If I’m remembering this correctly, that’s got to have some bearing on the change we’re looking at.

  • Adam | December 4, 2007 at 11:42 am |

    [quote comment=”181527″][quote comment=”181518″][quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.[/quote]

    but paul…it was on wiki, so it must be true…to wit:

    [quote]Connie Mack was the last major league manager to wear a suit in the dugout [/quote][/quote]

    Well, I don’t know that this is the case, but there’s a wide gap between “suits” and “uniforms”. It’s possible other managers wore a shirt and pants, but not an actual suit, isn’t it?

  • Ted | December 4, 2007 at 11:42 am |

    The retro jays caps are already availabe and have been in the team shop for at least the last yr

    http://jaysshop.stor...

  • kyle. | December 4, 2007 at 11:43 am |

    [quote comment=”181420″][quote comment=”181412″]I noticed at least one, possibly two, Ravens defenders using bright orange mouthpieces(Miami tribute maybe). Is there any rule regarding the color of mouthpieces? I realize many are so small they don’t see the light-of-day, but these were of the large, over-the-lips variety. Anyone?[/quote]

    They actually get more airtime than you would think. Players often take them out between plays. Having seen this a million times a game, I can tell you that if there is a rule about colors, no one is following them. I’ve seen a lot of two toned mouthpieces (right half one color, left half another color). Often times they don’t even match the team colors. I have no pictures to prove any of this and don’t have time to look for them, but if you watch the games and look for them I’m sure you’ll find many examples.[/quote]

    mark sanchez of usc wears one that is red, white, and green like the mexican flag.

  • josh's twin | December 4, 2007 at 11:51 am |

    As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.

    The Giants are the other way around, which makes sense to me. They have NOB on the road and NNOB at home.

    I’m not sure if there’s a connection, but in the early ’70s, about half the NHL teams had NOBs at home and NNOBs on the road. Hey, it is Toronto, and they also wore their logo on their sternums (sterna?), so it makes as much sense as anything else, right?

    http://www.nhlunifor...

  • Mike Engle | December 4, 2007 at 11:52 am |

    [quote comment=”181532″]The retro jays caps are already availabe and have been in the team shop for at least the last yr

    http://jaysshop.stor...
    They have also been for sale for a long time at a Uni Watch sponsor: Distant Replays. {/gratuitous advertisement}

  • PANTONE | December 4, 2007 at 11:53 am |

    I’ve made this point on Chris’ message board a couple of times now, but that shade of Powder Blue that the Blue Jays are using for their throwbacks is the wrong shade. I had a friendly arguement with someone who was involved with this throwback – that the shade of Powder Blue used back in the day was lighter than the “standard” shade. In fact, it matched up with the Light Blue that was used as the trim color on the home uniforms, and was used in the logo on the road uniforms.

    Here’s the Powder Blue that is being used:

    And here is the Light Blue that should have been used:

  • Duckstyle | December 4, 2007 at 11:53 am |

    [quote comment=”181495″][quote comment=”181488″]
    Fair enough. I just skimmed it, I stopped reading the full articles like 20 lawsuits ago.[/quote]

    Too bad – the really great part was at the very bottom, where it says:

    Most of the infringements have been by high schools, Nagy said. The university typically sends them a letter, informs them that the Motion W is a registered trademark and offers assistance in creating new logos that don ‘t infringe on the trademark.

    So it would seem that the University is doing everything right.

    Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs – towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.[/quote]

    You’re kind of stating my point for me. They’re not really stealing anything. It’s not like if they had a different logo that they’d suddenly stop selling as much of their merch at games. They’re not making any extra money because of it. Are they being jeroffs, sure, lazy by not changing it, absolutly. But stealing? Hardly.

  • Dobu | December 4, 2007 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment=”181495″]Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs – towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.[/quote]

    WKU should sue Wisconsin. The UW flying W looks a lot like the W on the towel that WKU had years before Wisconsin switched to its new logo. Maybe Wisconsin should have picked out a more original idea. Bullies like UW go to smaller colleges and high schools and basically say switch or we’ll bury you in legal fees whether or not you’ve actually stolen anything. Does UW really want to be known as the RIAA of the NCAA? A thug that takes advantage of bought and paid for laws to hurt the little guys.

  • PANTONE | December 4, 2007 at 11:55 am |

    Sorry about the last comment…my links didn’t come through.

    Powder Blue (copy-n-paste):

    http://i6.photobucke...

    Light Blue:

    http://i6.photobucke...

  • Patrick | December 4, 2007 at 12:07 pm |

    Seems to me the Blue Jays had it right here.

  • Russ | December 4, 2007 at 12:21 pm |

    Are these really throwbacks or are they more like “Let’s go with the Microsoft Office look?”

  • Tony B | December 4, 2007 at 12:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”181530″][quote comment=”181516″]Ah, the good old days when Nike/Puma/adidas did the NFL laundry. I do succinctly remember the NE and Philadelphia “E” hats; those were Nike-fied, baseball-like creations, I believe. They also did a Steeler hat with the Steeler logo inside the block P, and an NYJ logo for the Jets. Nike may have been responsible for the Giants going retro; when they got the NY Giants jerseys in the late ’90s, they had been selling the old-school NY logo on caps before the Giants went retro in 2000.[/quote]

    I’ve got an Eagles t-shirt with that stylized ‘E’ on it — made by Puma, who did the Eagles uniforms at the time. Now I also clearly remember the Steelers logo you mentioned, with the stenciled-looking ‘P’.

    [quote comment=”181515″]Could be possible, he was wearing a different helmet than last week. Last week he had on this helmet, notice where his high chinstrap hookup is. Last night he had on this one that he has also worn for every other game (see the different snap placement).[/quote]

    Huh, looks like the equipment manager put the chin strap on upside down, Riddell puts their logo on the “upper” strap so that their name is upright…anybody know how long thats been going on?[/quote]

    Wasn’t Brady fined recently for some sort of uniform violation involving his chinstrap? If I’m remembering this correctly, that’s got to have some bearing on the change we’re looking at.[/quote]
    In Tom Brady’s headshot for one of the networks, he is wearing an “NE” baseball cap (like the logo on BB’s headband).

  • todd | December 4, 2007 at 12:30 pm |

    purchase belichick’s headband here

  • Tony Payne | December 4, 2007 at 12:36 pm |

    Still awaiting the return of the best powder blues

  • Matt Lake | December 4, 2007 at 12:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”181452″]MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”

    Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.

    “There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”

    No more pullover for Francona.

    When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”[/quote]
    Nice to see Yankee Bob is on the case. Jackass.

  • Hank | December 4, 2007 at 12:45 pm |

    Not uni-related but bears mentioning. The new AAA affiliate of the Phillies to be based in Allentown is called the Iron Pigs. They recently held a contest to name the mascot, which is a pig. The name Pork Chop won. But it has to be changed because pork chop is reportedly an offensive term to Hispanics. First I ever heard of this. So to be PC, they changed the name to Ferrous.

    A more odd-ball thing is that Ferrous garned over 200 votes from fan polling while Pork Chop only got 30. So the nickname with 30 votes won out over the 200 vote getter. Wonder if any Supreme Court justices were involved in the decision? ;^)

  • Moose | December 4, 2007 at 12:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”181544″][quote comment=”181495″]Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs – towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.[/quote]

    WKU should sue Wisconsin. The UW flying W looks a lot like the W on the towel that WKU had years before Wisconsin switched to its new logo. Maybe Wisconsin should have picked out a more original idea. Bullies like UW go to smaller colleges and high schools and basically say switch or we’ll bury you in legal fees whether or not you’ve actually stolen anything. Does UW really want to be known as the RIAA of the NCAA? A thug that takes advantage of bought and paid for laws to hurt the little guys.[/quote]

    I think its a little over the top to say UW “bought and paid” for laws to hurt the lttle guys. Copyright laws have been around for a long, long time. No one can fault an organization for protecting something it copyrighted under valid, existing laws. That’s the way the system works.

    On another note, UW is not the only university who does this. There are many others….off the top of my head, Wyoming’s “Steamboat” cowboy is copyrighted and they are constantly protecting it from infringement.

  • ELI | December 4, 2007 at 1:01 pm |

    How about these stripes….

    Stanley Morgan circa 1979

  • ELI | December 4, 2007 at 1:02 pm |

    boy, I have issues with linking things… let’s try a cut and paste….

    http://cgi.ebay.com/...

  • tpc1215 | December 4, 2007 at 1:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”181411″]I like the powder blue Toronto unis. I guess that’s just what I grew up on when I got into collecting baseball cards. I’ll be picking up a replica of that cap.

    Regarding the photo of Barber and his nameplate, what is the decal at the rear of his helmet. It’s the state of Minnesota but what is it symbolizing? The bridge accident perhaps? (sorry if this has been addressed already)[/quote]

    It is just the state of Minnesota, the new coach has been pushing the whole “state of Minnesota” thing since he started. They did do a memorial patch for the bridge collapse on their sleeve.

  • patrick | December 4, 2007 at 1:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”181484″][quote comment=”181403″][quote]Ray Lewis memorialized Sean Taylor on his eye black last night.[/quote]

    And he was fake crying during the moment of silence for Sean Taylor. Is anyone else tired of Ray Lewis’ attention seeking antics like this?

    Maybe he shed some real tears for Sean Taylor, and I respect the man for having his beliefs. But, to me, I can’t see him doing all of this stuff with a camera pointed right at his face. He just strikes me as clownishly over the top. And the pre-game moment of silence move was a prime example.

    But, as for the game… fuck Don Shula.[/quote]

    Maybe they pointed the camera his way because he was crying? Is he not allowed to be sad about his deceased friend?[/quote]

    Matt,
    I dont want to assume that Ray lewis wasnt friends with Sean taylor, but, if the connection youre trying to make (and the one most of us would make) was Univ of Miami, well, there’s NO CHANCE they played together, or even had teammates in common. nonetheless, the U is a brotherhood, and I cant knock him for showing his emotions, real or fake.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 1:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”181543″][quote comment=”181495″][quote comment=”181488″]
    Fair enough. I just skimmed it, I stopped reading the full articles like 20 lawsuits ago.[/quote]

    Too bad – the really great part was at the very bottom, where it says:

    Most of the infringements have been by high schools, Nagy said. The university typically sends them a letter, informs them that the Motion W is a registered trademark and offers assistance in creating new logos that don ‘t infringe on the trademark.

    So it would seem that the University is doing everything right.

    Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs – towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.[/quote]

    You’re kind of stating my point for me. They’re not really stealing anything. It’s not like if they had a different logo that they’d suddenly stop selling as much of their merch at games. They’re not making any extra money because of it. Are they being jeroffs, sure, lazy by not changing it, absolutly. But stealing? Hardly.[/quote]

    They did steal it.

    The design was bought and paid for. The University of Wisconsin paid a designer good money for the logo (overpaid, in my opinion, but that’s another story). It is their property.

    Now we have another university coming along, and instead of spending the money to hire their own designer, they just take Wisconsin’s design and use it themselves. How is that not stealing?

    Just because they are stealing intellectual property and not hubcaps doesn’t make it any less theft.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 1:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”181541″][quote comment=”181532″]The retro jays caps are already availabe and have been in the team shop for at least the last yr

    http://jaysshop.stor...
    They have also been for sale for a long time at a Uni Watch sponsor: Distant Replays. {/gratuitous advertisement}[/quote]

    Not to slight the fabulous advertiser, but those aren’t the same caps.

    The caps he’s talking about are the new 59fifty – synthetic instead of wool, black undervisor, no New Era logo on the side.

  • Mike | December 4, 2007 at 1:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”181547″]Seems to me the Blue Jays had it right here.[/quote]

    Yup.

  • Minna H. | December 4, 2007 at 1:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”181496″]I’m sorry for being so cynical. This whole Sean Taylor memorial is over the top. League-wide moment of silence? Cool. His team wearing a memorial patch? Cool. League-wide helmet sticker the size of a grapefruit? Excessive.[/quote]

    Stuby, that is what I thought, too, when it happened. I thought the league-wide helmet sticker was too much. Thanks for mentioning it as I was hesitating to say it.

    Chance, I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.

    I wish they would have stuck to the moment of silence and Washington remembering him however they wanted.

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”181580″][quote comment=”181547″]Seems to me the Blue Jays had it right here.[/quote]

    Yup.[/quote]

    indeed

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 1:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”181581″]I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.[/quote]

    methinks no fun league commish goodell2shoes is behind the (seemingly mandatory) league-wide pride sticker movement, whereas tagliabooboo would have merely ‘suggested’ it

  • Jeff | December 4, 2007 at 1:35 pm |

    Lloyd Moseby is the man. Call ’em as you see ’em.

    As for the Francona rule, looks like MLB wants to be like the No Fun League. Bad call.

  • Robb | December 4, 2007 at 1:48 pm |

    Please. The Jays’ powder blues “totally minor league”? Give me a break.

    Half of MLB looks “minor league” these days: The Red Sox’ red jerseys, the Pirates’ red jerseys, the Cubs’ blue jerseys…and on and on and on.

    Powder blues for any team are, indeed, attractive probably more because of nostalgia, but it’s not like the modern uniform is the model of perfection. They stink.

  • Duckstyle | December 4, 2007 at 1:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”181578″][quote comment=”181543″][quote comment=”181495″][quote comment=”181488″]
    Fair enough. I just skimmed it, I stopped reading the full articles like 20 lawsuits ago.[/quote]

    Too bad – the really great part was at the very bottom, where it says:

    Most of the infringements have been by high schools, Nagy said. The university typically sends them a letter, informs them that the Motion W is a registered trademark and offers assistance in creating new logos that don ‘t infringe on the trademark.

    So it would seem that the University is doing everything right.

    Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs – towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.[/quote]

    You’re kind of stating my point for me. They’re not really stealing anything. It’s not like if they had a different logo that they’d suddenly stop selling as much of their merch at games. They’re not making any extra money because of it. Are they being jeroffs, sure, lazy by not changing it, absolutly. But stealing? Hardly.[/quote]

    They did steal it.

    The design was bought and paid for. The University of Wisconsin paid a designer good money for the logo (overpaid, in my opinion, but that’s another story). It is their property.

    Now we have another university coming along, and instead of spending the money to hire their own designer, they just take Wisconsin’s design and use it themselves. How is that not stealing?

    Just because they are stealing intellectual property and not hubcaps doesn’t make it any less theft.[/quote]

    A team steals Wisconsin’s logo=zero dollars spent for logo. Or, it has their resident art department lead or computer graphics nerd make a logo, probably doesn’t go thru the hassle of trademarking=zero dollars spent. Money the school makes off the the logo, whether stolen or created=same. So what are they really stealing here? There not outside Camp Randel trying to sell their t-shirts. That’s what I’m getting at. I know all about intellectual property in the workplace. But seriously, stealing? Comon. In the case presented today I understand the university taking action. But I can’t read these articles anymore without furrowing my brow and mumbling, “Seriously?”

  • Ryan | December 4, 2007 at 1:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”181518″][quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.[/quote]

    If we are talking about managing in the Majors, wouldn’t it be a tie.

    Shotton’s last year as a MLB manager was 1950. The last day of the season for the Dodgers was played on October 1, 1950.

    Mack’s last year as a MLB manager was also 1950. They also played their last game of the season on October 1, 1950.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 2:00 pm |

    Yes, stealing.

    The Motion W, much as I hate it, is the product of a certain number of manhours, bought and paid for by the University.

    Washburn decided not to spend the money, either in cash to an outside firm or in manhours from its own internal faculty, choosing to benefit from Wisconsin’s purchase.

    If intellectual property has any meaning at all, this is stealing. Petty theft, I’ll grant you. But theft nonetheless.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”181595″][quote comment=”181518″][quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.[/quote]

    If we are talking about managing in the Majors, wouldn’t it be a tie.

    Shotton’s last year as a MLB manager was 1950. The last day of the season for the Dodgers was played on October 1, 1950.

    Mack’s last year as a MLB manager was also 1950. They also played their last game of the season on October 1, 1950.[/quote]
    Depends – was one a night game? :P

  • Paul Lukas | December 4, 2007 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”181595″][quote comment=”181518″][quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.[/quote]

    If we are talking about managing in the Majors, wouldn’t it be a tie.

    Shotton’s last year as a MLB manager was 1950. The last day of the season for the Dodgers was played on October 1, 1950.

    Mack’s last year as a MLB manager was also 1950. They also played their last game of the season on October 1, 1950.[/quote]

    You’re right. Thanks for the correction.

  • billy | December 4, 2007 at 2:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”181577″][quote comment=”181484″][quote comment=”181403″][quote]Ray Lewis memorialized Sean Taylor on his eye black last night.[/quote]

    And he was fake crying during the moment of silence for Sean Taylor. Is anyone else tired of Ray Lewis’ attention seeking antics like this?

    Maybe he shed some real tears for Sean Taylor, and I respect the man for having his beliefs. But, to me, I can’t see him doing all of this stuff with a camera pointed right at his face. He just strikes me as clownishly over the top. And the pre-game moment of silence move was a prime example.

    But, as for the game… fuck Don Shula.[/quote]

    Maybe they pointed the camera his way because he was crying? Is he not allowed to be sad about his deceased friend?[/quote]

    Matt,
    I dont want to assume that Ray lewis wasnt friends with Sean taylor, but, if the connection youre trying to make (and the one most of us would make) was Univ of Miami, well, there’s NO CHANCE they played together, or even had teammates in common. nonetheless, the U is a brotherhood, and I cant knock him for showing his emotions, real or fake.[/quote]

    Ray and Sean were close, you can bet the tears were real:

    “I understand the magnitude of this game with the Patriots and everything coming in, but the bottom line is, I was more than a friend to Sean Taylor. I was someone he definitely looked up to, and bottom line, it’s unfortunate that situations happen like this. When they do happen like this, some things pull you away from everything else that everybody else wants you to worry about. This right here is life. It doesn’t change. Life is, once it’s gone, it’s gone.”

  • DonD | December 4, 2007 at 2:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”181537″]As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.

    The Giants are the other way around, which makes sense to me. They have NOB on the road and NNOB at home.

    I’m not sure if there’s a connection, but in the early ’70s, about half the NHL teams had NOBs at home and NNOBs on the road. Hey, it is Toronto, and they also wore their logo on their sternums (sterna?), so it makes as much sense as anything else, right?

    http://www.nhlunifor...
    I like the fact the league mandated names on the Jersey’s but Toronto 1st refused, then put them on but in the same colors of the jersey, after being threatened with fines they finally put them on with contrasting colors.

  • Ryan | December 4, 2007 at 2:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”181597″][quote comment=”181595″][quote comment=”181518″][quote comment=”181498″]does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?[/quote]

    1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.

    2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.[/quote]

    If we are talking about managing in the Majors, wouldn’t it be a tie.

    Shotton’s last year as a MLB manager was 1950. The last day of the season for the Dodgers was played on October 1, 1950.

    Mack’s last year as a MLB manager was also 1950. They also played their last game of the season on October 1, 1950.[/quote]
    Depends – was one a night game? :P[/quote]

    Neither game would be a night game. Both games were played on Sunday. There were no night games on Sundays back then.

  • Shane | December 4, 2007 at 2:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”181452″]MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”

    Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.

    “There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”

    No more pullover for Francona.

    When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”[/quote]

    May be late to the game and someone already called this out, but isn’t this the “Connie Mack Rule” (saw his name pop up in a few comments, though I don’t think in this sense) and therefore hasn’t it been a rule for a damn long time? Every single time the Red Sox are on TV I rail against his even stepping foot on the field as he clearly doesn’t even have a jersey on under that thing. I don’t have a rulebook in front of me and wouldn’t have the time to go diving through even if I did, but the rule (from my understanding) states all coaches and managers who wish to enter the playing field must be wearing a complete uniform and if not they have to stay in the dugout. Surprised some smug fuck like LaRussa hasn’t called him out on it.

  • Shaftman | December 4, 2007 at 2:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”181600″][quote comment=”181537″]As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.

    The Giants are the other way around, which makes sense to me. They have NOB on the road and NNOB at home.

    I’m not sure if there’s a connection, but in the early ’70s, about half the NHL teams had NOBs at home and NNOBs on the road. Hey, it is Toronto, and they also wore their logo on their sternums (sterna?), so it makes as much sense as anything else, right?

    http://www.nhlunifor...
    I like the fact the league mandated names on the Jersey’s but Toronto 1st refused, then put them on but in the same colors of the jersey, after being threatened with fines they finally put them on with contrasting colors.[/quote]

    You’re thinking of the Maple Leafs (NHL), not the Blue Jays.

  • Shaftman | December 4, 2007 at 2:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”181610″][quote comment=”181600″][quote comment=”181537″]As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.

    This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.

    The Giants are the other way around, which makes sense to me. They have NOB on the road and NNOB at home.

    I’m not sure if there’s a connection, but in the early ’70s, about half the NHL teams had NOBs at home and NNOBs on the road. Hey, it is Toronto, and they also wore their logo on their sternums (sterna?), so it makes as much sense as anything else, right?

    http://www.nhlunifor...
    I like the fact the league mandated names on the Jersey’s but Toronto 1st refused, then put them on but in the same colors of the jersey, after being threatened with fines they finally put them on with contrasting colors.[/quote]

    You’re thinking of the Maple Leafs (NHL), not the Blue Jays.[/quote]

    Quoting myself…I have to read the entire post next time. Sorry.

  • Duckstyle | December 4, 2007 at 2:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”181596″]Yes, stealing.

    The Motion W, much as I hate it, is the product of a certain number of manhours, bought and paid for by the University.

    Washburn decided not to spend the money, either in cash to an outside firm or in manhours from its own internal faculty, choosing to benefit from Wisconsin’s purchase.

    If intellectual property has any meaning at all, this is stealing. Petty theft, I’ll grant you. But theft nonetheless.[/quote]

    Alright, you threw in the term peety theft so I’m satisfied.

  • ryan c #40 | December 4, 2007 at 2:28 pm |

    guaranteed the most ridiculous is that pat tillman didn’t get a league wide patch or sticker. car crashes, training camp, shot at home, etc. all bad… but this guy went to help out his country…

  • Brien | December 4, 2007 at 2:28 pm |

    I know it’s random, but does anyone know where I can find a picture of the proposed Tampa Bay Giants logo back when they were going to move in ’92? Thanks in advance.

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 2:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”181602″]Depends – was one a night game? :P[/quote]

    espn had it

  • Kek | December 4, 2007 at 2:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”181617″]guaranteed the most ridiculous is that pat tillman didn’t get a league wide patch or sticker. car crashes, training camp, shot at home, etc. all bad… but this guy went to help out his country…[/quote]
    I thought he did… because wasn’t there an issue with Jake Plummer wanting to continue to wear the decal after the initial weekend?

  • josh's twin | December 4, 2007 at 2:38 pm |

    I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.

    Methinks Korey Stringer’s death was downplayed by the league because he died on a football practice field.

  • cheechoo | December 4, 2007 at 2:58 pm |

    guaranteed the most ridiculous is that pat tillman didn’t get a league wide patch or sticker. car crashes, training camp, shot at home, etc. all bad… but this guy went to help out his country…

    Thank you. I’ve been making that point for a week now!

  • Justin | December 4, 2007 at 3:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”181617″]guaranteed the most ridiculous is that pat tillman didn’t get a league wide patch or sticker. car crashes, training camp, shot at home, etc. all bad… but this guy went to help out his country…[/quote]

    He did… every team wore one for one week. The Cardinals wore them the rest of the year. Do you remember Jake Plummer getting fined (or threatened to be fined?) for wearing his sticker longer than what was allowed?

    How about the tragic loss of Darrent Williams on New Years Day this year? The Broncos are wearing decals all year, but the playoff teams didn’t wear a decal at the end of last year, not another team outside of Denver wore a decal this season.

    Maybe a tragic loss of life during the off season doesn’t mean as much to the NFL?

  • Kek | December 4, 2007 at 3:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”181633″]guaranteed the most ridiculous is that pat tillman didn’t get a league wide patch or sticker. car crashes, training camp, shot at home, etc. all bad… but this guy went to help out his country…

    Thank you. I’ve been making that point for a week now![/quote]
    Well, you’ve been making an incorrect point.

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Jeff | December 4, 2007 at 3:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”181468″][quote comment=”181458″][quote comment=”181447″] looks like Wisconsin is continuing it’s pursuit of logo infractions.[/quote]

    I hope I’m not the only one getting real irritated with this. I understand that it’s their logo, and anyone using it ought to pay up. But seriously, it’s not like these schools are making extra merch money because they use the same logo. I understand when a bootlegger is making false merch and making money, and they get charged. But a middle/high school, come on. Doesn’t their legal department have bigger fish to fry?[/quote]

    No, actually. Because they’re all the same.

    Setting aside the fact infringement is stealing, if Wisconsin doesn’t go after the little fish, they lose their legal standing to challenge larger infringements.

    Plus, read the article.

    For the past six years, the lawsuit states, UW-Madison has been in touch with Washburn “numerous times and requested that Washburn cease using a confusingly similar imitation of Wisconsin ‘s Motion W mark. ” Several times, the lawsuit states, Washburn assured Wisconsin that it had stopped using the Motion W logo, but instead has only expanded its use.

    If true, how could the University not sue, with a pattern like that?[/quote]

    And how do we know that Washburn didn’t have that logo first? I’ve tried doing some searches to see when each school developed their logo but haven’t found much success.

    I’d love for a school to turn around and sue Wisconsin for copying their “W”, that would just be fantastic.

  • Terry Mark | December 4, 2007 at 3:22 pm |

    Did this remind anyone else of this?

  • SWW | December 4, 2007 at 3:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”181609″][quote comment=”181452″]MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”

    Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.

    “There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”

    No more pullover for Francona.

    When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”[/quote]

    May be late to the game and someone already called this out, but isn’t this the “Connie Mack Rule” (saw his name pop up in a few comments, though I don’t think in this sense) and therefore hasn’t it been a rule for a damn long time? Every single time the Red Sox are on TV I rail against his even stepping foot on the field as he clearly doesn’t even have a jersey on under that thing. I don’t have a rulebook in front of me and wouldn’t have the time to go diving through even if I did, but the rule (from my understanding) states all coaches and managers who wish to enter the playing field must be wearing a complete uniform and if not they have to stay in the dugout. Surprised some smug fuck like LaRussa hasn’t called him out on it.[/quote]

    Tito always wears the full uniform under the pullover. He always has, as you could see the white (or gray if away) in the shoulder area of the collar. Some of the people just want to freak out when someone doesn’t look exactly just like everyone else. I don’t understand why it is such a big deal if he wants to wear MLB marketed gear.

  • Terry Mark | December 4, 2007 at 3:27 pm |

    Sorry for the linking error. My first link was supposed to go to a pic of Belichick with his hood up.

  • Marty Met | December 4, 2007 at 3:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”181624″]I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.

    Methinks Korey Stringer’s death was downplayed by the league because he died on a football practice field.[/quote]

    Stringers death was downplayed because the Vikings and the NFL were responsible for it

  • chris omps | December 4, 2007 at 3:31 pm |

    Here is a picture of one of those Nike caps from 99-00 era, Couldn’t find a patriots but here is a Colts.item.express.ebay.com/Indianapolis-Colts-Hat-

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 3:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”181644″]Tito always wears the full uniform under the pullover. He always has, as you could see the white (or gray if away) in the shoulder area of the collar. Some of the people just want to freak out when someone doesn’t look exactly just like everyone else. I don’t understand why it is such a big deal if he wants to wear MLB marketed gear.[/quote]

    apparently he doesn’t, although gammons doesn’t see what the big deal is

    [quote]Francona attracted the attention of the commissioner’s office because he sometimes refrained from wearing his regulation uniform jersey beneath his pullover. Francona said the commissioner’s office contacted him in Cleveland earlier this month to remind him to comply with the dress code.[/quote]

  • todd krevanchi | December 4, 2007 at 3:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”181599″]
    “I understand the magnitude of this game with the Patriots and everything coming in, but the bottom line is, I was more than a friend to Sean Taylor. I was someone he definitely looked up to, and bottom line, it’s unfortunate that situations happen like this. When they do happen like this, some things pull you away from everything else that everybody else wants you to worry about. This right here is life. It doesn’t change. Life is, once it’s gone, it’s gone.”

    [/quote]

    i guess of all active nfl players, ray lewis would know the most about life, death and murder. (sorry oj, sorry rae. although you, too, know what thats all about, you are no longer active)

  • BCrisp | December 4, 2007 at 3:43 pm |

    Looks like baseball is inacting a “Francona Rule” about wearing jerseys during games.
    link

  • Shane | December 4, 2007 at 3:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”181644″]
    Tito always wears the full uniform under the pullover. He always has, as you could see the white (or gray if away) in the shoulder area of the collar. Some of the people just want to freak out when someone doesn’t look exactly just like everyone else. I don’t understand why it is such a big deal if he wants to wear MLB marketed gear.[/quote]

    Pretty tough to see a jersey under a shirt that fits tight around the neck. And if you’re referring to this look that’s obviously not his uniform top sticking out. Not here, or here, or even here where you could easily see the collar line if he had it on.

    He never wears it. It’s a rule, has been for what, 75/80 years now? You’re a manager, dress like it. Put your jersey on or stay in the dugout. It’s part of the job and if he doesn’t want to do it then I hope they crack down on it even harder, because I don’t ever want to see this going out to make a pitching change.

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 3:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”181664″][quote comment=”181644″]
    Tito always wears the full uniform under the pullover. He always has, as you could see the white (or gray if away) in the shoulder area of the collar. Some of the people just want to freak out when someone doesn’t look exactly just like everyone else. I don’t understand why it is such a big deal if he wants to wear MLB marketed gear.[/quote]

    Pretty tough to see a jersey under a shirt that fits tight around the neck. And if you’re referring to this look that’s obviously not his uniform top sticking out. Not here, or here, or even here where you could easily see the collar line if he had it on.

    He never wears it. It’s a rule, has been for what, 75/80 years now? You’re a manager, dress like it. Put your jersey on or stay in the dugout. It’s part of the job and if he doesn’t want to do it then I hope they crack down on it even harder, because I don’t ever want to see this going out to make a pitching change.[/quote]

    thank you, shane, for expressing said rule violation more eloquently than i…

    of course it’s not a “big deal” to gammons and others in dead sox nation…why should they bother to abide by mlb rules

  • Shane | December 4, 2007 at 4:02 pm |

    On another managerial note, props to Alex McLeish for sticking with the Scotland-themed tie in his introduction with Birmingham. He will be missed.

    And while I’m at it, does anyone know where you can get one of those ties that all of Rangers’ managers, coaches, and board wear? Really interested for a Christmas gift for someone.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 4:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”181639″]
    And how do we know that Washburn didn’t have that logo first? I’ve tried doing some searches to see when each school developed their logo but haven’t found much success.

    I’d love for a school to turn around and sue Wisconsin for copying their “W”, that would just be fantastic.[/quote]

    Such a case would be short-lived and extremely expensive for the school who filed it – Wisconsin undoubtedly has the paper trail with the design firm to establish their claim.

    I’ve never seen the documentation, but I’ve read about the design process in the press – a couple years ago there was a reference to a “tail” on the designer’s final version of the Motion W. Barry Alvarez, then the team coach, crossed off the tail and approved the design.

    We know that Washburn didn’t develop it first because they didn’t context Wisconsin’s claim. They only tried to weasel out of it by changing the logo 10% or so, in hopes that would be enough.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 4:09 pm |

    Aaargh!

    That should be “We know that Washburn didn’t develop it first because they didn’t contest Wisconsin’s claim.”

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 4:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”181634″][quote comment=”181617″]guaranteed the most ridiculous is that pat tillman didn’t get a league wide patch or sticker. car crashes, training camp, shot at home, etc. all bad… but this guy went to help out his country…[/quote]

    He did… every team wore one for one week. The Cardinals wore them the rest of the year. Do you remember Jake Plummer getting fined (or threatened to be fined?) for wearing his sticker longer than what was allowed?

    How about the tragic loss of Darrent Williams on New Years Day this year? The Broncos are wearing decals all year, but the playoff teams didn’t wear a decal at the end of last year, not another team outside of Denver wore a decal this season.

    Maybe a tragic loss of life during the off season doesn’t mean as much to the NFL?[/quote]

    That’s my point. This tribute sets a terrible precedent – three active players killed this year alone, and one is elevated above the other two. What’s going to happen when somebody dies next season, and the league doesn’t have a league-wide memorial patch?

    This tribute seems to be done out of blind emotion without any thought, which is a wonderful sentiment for a person to express but disastrous from any corporation or group.

  • todd krevanchi | December 4, 2007 at 4:14 pm |

    i was always under the impression that the therma base fleece and the therma base tech fleece II were approved on field items for players and mangers to wear…

  • Shane | December 4, 2007 at 4:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”181676″]i was always under the impression that the therma base fleece and the therma base tech fleece II were approved on field items for players and mangers to wear…[/quote]

    True, as long as (if you’re a manager) you wear your full uniform under it. See Scioscia.

  • josh's twin | December 4, 2007 at 4:21 pm |

    I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.

    Methinks Korey Stringer’s death was downplayed by the league because he died on a football practice field.

    Stringers death was downplayed because the Vikings and the NFL were responsible for it

    That was my point exactly.

  • Jeff | December 4, 2007 at 4:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”181673″]

    We know that Washburn didn’t develop it first because they didn’t context Wisconsin’s claim. They only tried to weasel out of it by changing the logo 10% or so, in hopes that would be enough.[/quote]

    And you know this how? Just because Wisconsin has a paper trail establishing when they developed it, who’s to say that the firm they hired actually looked at Washburn beforehand to see what theirs looked like? And Washburn being a little school probably can’t financially contest Wisconsin’s claim or figure that’s its not a big deal (cause it isn’t). Now if its true that Washburn has continued to use the same exact logo since being told to stop, then that’s legit.

    What the truth is I don’t know. I’ve done some searching and can’t find anything that shows a Washburn logo from before 1990. It doesn’t look like they have any logos on their uniforms, just the wordmark “Washburn” or “Icabods” or both. I just continue to find it all ridiculous. No one is going to confuse Washburn and Wisconsin, and anyone who might be confused probably doesn’t deserve to get into either school.

  • JMcanes | December 4, 2007 at 4:25 pm |

    anybody see MaGahee’s visor?? looked like it faded to purple…or was i just seeing things??

  • Tony Miller | December 4, 2007 at 4:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”181589″]Please. The Jays’ powder blues “totally minor league”? Give me a break.

    Half of MLB looks “minor league” these days: The Red Sox’ red jerseys, the Pirates’ red jerseys, the Cubs’ blue jerseys…and on and on and on.

    Powder blues for any team are, indeed, attractive probably more because of nostalgia, but it’s not like the modern uniform is the model of perfection. They stink.[/quote]

    The Cubs got rid of the blues last year, didn’t they?

  • Robert | December 4, 2007 at 4:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”181680″]I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.

    Methinks Korey Stringer’s death was downplayed by the league because he died on a football practice field.

    Stringers death was downplayed because the Vikings and the NFL were responsible for it

    That was my point exactly.[/quote]

    The Vikings were not not responsible for Stringer’s death. The case went to the Minnesota Supreme Court, and they shot it down.

  • Jeff | December 4, 2007 at 4:48 pm |

    Looking at the History section of the media guide (before my browser froze up and crashed my computer) there was picture of the football team from 1990-91 that had “WU” in block type on the helmet. So I’ll take that as proof that Washburn didn’t have the logo first.

    Their media guide actually has some really interesting pictures. At one point they used a negative space W inside a yellow oval. Didn’t catch the year before my crash. Their basketball media guide also has some interesting old time photos.

  • Tim | December 4, 2007 at 4:58 pm |

    Toronto, from the Leafs to the Raptors to the Argos to the actual city logo (www.toronto.ca) is a purely uppercase lettering city. It’s nice to see the Jays return to that (on the road at least). I figure it’s only a matter of time until the design goes completely back to something resembling the original.

  • Pat | December 4, 2007 at 4:58 pm |

    [quote]Ray and Sean were close, you can bet the tears were real:

    “I understand the magnitude of this game with the Patriots and everything coming in, but the bottom line is, I was more than a friend to Sean Taylor. I was someone he definitely looked up to, and bottom line, it’s unfortunate that situations happen like this. When they do happen like this, some things pull you away from everything else that everybody else wants you to worry about. This right here is life. It doesn’t change. Life is, once it’s gone, it’s gone.”[/quote]

    This is exactly my point about Lewis being all an act. If he had just said something about how he was more than a friend to Taylor and maybe said something like “He was like a little brother to me” I would have been fine with it.

    But, “I was someone he definitely looked up to” is just taking a chance to put some more attention on yourself. It is indirectly giving yourself a pat on the back. Even if it wasn’t his intention it just kind of proves that that is what Ray Lewis is all about.

    I don’t buy into any of it. I don’t think Ray Lewis knows what a real emotion even feels like anymore. Or maybe he is just so overcome with overblown, exaggerated emotion that he thinks that is real. Maybe, I don’t really know.

  • Chance | December 4, 2007 at 4:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”181682″][quote comment=”181673″]

    We know that Washburn didn’t develop it first because they didn’t context Wisconsin’s claim. They only tried to weasel out of it by changing the logo 10% or so, in hopes that would be enough.[/quote]

    And you know this how? Just because Wisconsin has a paper trail establishing when they developed it, who’s to say that the firm they hired actually looked at Washburn beforehand to see what theirs looked like? And Washburn being a little school probably can’t financially contest Wisconsin’s claim or figure that’s its not a big deal (cause it isn’t). Now if its true that Washburn has continued to use the same exact logo since being told to stop, then that’s legit.[/quote]

    They changed the logo about 10%, which we’ve established on these boards is commonly believed to shield the users against a suit. We’ve also learned on these boards that such a belief is utterly false and without basis in actual law.

    It doesn’t cost Washburn anything to produce a piece of paper, or letterhead, or athletic equipment, or even a photo to demonstrate that they developed the logo first. So why haven’t they? Only one reason makes sense – no such photo or letterhead or piece of paper exists.

    The Helmet Project shows Washburn as adding the motion W to their helmets in 1996, five years after Wisconsin. So your hypothetical breaks down pretty quickly.

    [quote comment=”181682″]What the truth is I don’t know. I’ve done some searching and can’t find anything that shows a Washburn logo from before 1990. It doesn’t look like they have any logos on their uniforms, just the wordmark “Washburn” or “Icabods” or both. I just continue to find it all ridiculous. No one is going to confuse Washburn and Wisconsin, and anyone who might be confused probably doesn’t deserve to get into either school.[/quote]

    That’s not the point – if Wisconsin doesn’t defend its intellectual property in this case, they lose the legal right to defend it in any case. So while Washburn might not present any financial threat to the UW’s income, the countefeiters on State Street do. And they’re of a kind.

  • Adam | December 4, 2007 at 5:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”181685″][quote comment=”181589″]Please. The Jays’ powder blues “totally minor league”? Give me a break.

    Half of MLB looks “minor league” these days: The Red Sox’ red jerseys, the Pirates’ red jerseys, the Cubs’ blue jerseys…and on and on and on.

    Powder blues for any team are, indeed, attractive probably more because of nostalgia, but it’s not like the modern uniform is the model of perfection. They stink.[/quote]

    The Cubs got rid of the blues last year, didn’t they?[/quote]

    They did, appearently because the team president didn’t like them. I’m curious if they might make a comeback this year (they still show on MLB.com as alternate jerseys) because the president quit.

  • Moose | December 4, 2007 at 5:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”181697″][quote comment=”181682″][quote comment=”181673″]

    We know that Washburn didn’t develop it first because they didn’t context Wisconsin’s claim. They only tried to weasel out of it by changing the logo 10% or so, in hopes that would be enough.[/quote]

    And you know this how? Just because Wisconsin has a paper trail establishing when they developed it, who’s to say that the firm they hired actually looked at Washburn beforehand to see what theirs looked like? And Washburn being a little school probably can’t financially contest Wisconsin’s claim or figure that’s its not a big deal (cause it isn’t). Now if its true that Washburn has continued to use the same exact logo since being told to stop, then that’s legit.[/quote]

    They changed the logo about 10%, which we’ve established on these boards is commonly believed to shield the users against a suit. We’ve also learned on these boards that such a belief is utterly false and without basis in actual law.

    It doesn’t cost Washburn anything to produce a piece of paper, or letterhead, or athletic equipment, or even a photo to demonstrate that they developed the logo first. So why haven’t they? Only one reason makes sense – no such photo or letterhead or piece of paper exists.

    The Helmet Project shows Washburn as adding the motion W to their helmets in 1996, five years after Wisconsin. So your hypothetical breaks down pretty quickly.

    [quote comment=”181682″]What the truth is I don’t know. I’ve done some searching and can’t find anything that shows a Washburn logo from before 1990. It doesn’t look like they have any logos on their uniforms, just the wordmark “Washburn” or “Icabods” or both. I just continue to find it all ridiculous. No one is going to confuse Washburn and Wisconsin, and anyone who might be confused probably doesn’t deserve to get into either school.[/quote]

    That’s not the point – if Wisconsin doesn’t defend its intellectual property in this case, they lose the legal right to defend it in any case. So while Washburn might not present any financial threat to the UW’s income, the countefeiters on State Street do.

    And they’re of a kind.[/quote]

    As I said above, his argument is a moot point. Why pick on Wisconsin? They aren’t the first school to have a copyrighted logo. As I said, Wyoming protects its “Steamboat” cowboy with all its might. THAT’S THE WAY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT LAW WORKS. I suppose I should be able to use the NFL logo to start my new company under this guys logic!

  • Jerico | December 4, 2007 at 5:31 pm |

    From Sunday night (and SI.com): is it just me, or does the Nike logo on Hines Ward’s wrist look drawn into the tape job there?

  • Brendan | December 4, 2007 at 5:48 pm |

    I always thought that Mack wore a suit to the ground rules discussion and lineup card meeting, then changed to a uniform before the game officially started.

    Maybe that was just when he was a player/manager.

  • Jeff | December 4, 2007 at 5:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”181700″][quote comment=”181697″][quote comment=”181682″][quote comment=”181673″]

    We know that Washburn didn’t develop it first because they didn’t context Wisconsin’s claim. They only tried to weasel out of it by changing the logo 10% or so, in hopes that would be enough.[/quote]

    And you know this how? Just because Wisconsin has a paper trail establishing when they developed it, who’s to say that the firm they hired actually looked at Washburn beforehand to see what theirs looked like? And Washburn being a little school probably can’t financially contest Wisconsin’s claim or figure that’s its not a big deal (cause it isn’t). Now if its true that Washburn has continued to use the same exact logo since being told to stop, then that’s legit.[/quote]

    They changed the logo about 10%, which we’ve established on these boards is commonly believed to shield the users against a suit. We’ve also learned on these boards that such a belief is utterly false and without basis in actual law.

    It doesn’t cost Washburn anything to produce a piece of paper, or letterhead, or athletic equipment, or even a photo to demonstrate that they developed the logo first. So why haven’t they? Only one reason makes sense – no such photo or letterhead or piece of paper exists.

    The Helmet Project shows Washburn as adding the motion W to their helmets in 1996, five years after Wisconsin. So your hypothetical breaks down pretty quickly.

    [quote comment=”181682″]What the truth is I don’t know. I’ve done some searching and can’t find anything that shows a Washburn logo from before 1990. It doesn’t look like they have any logos on their uniforms, just the wordmark “Washburn” or “Icabods” or both. I just continue to find it all ridiculous. No one is going to confuse Washburn and Wisconsin, and anyone who might be confused probably doesn’t deserve to get into either school.[/quote]

    That’s not the point – if Wisconsin doesn’t defend its intellectual property in this case, they lose the legal right to defend it in any case. So while Washburn might not present any financial threat to the UW’s income, the countefeiters on State Street do.

    And they’re of a kind.[/quote]

    As I said above, his argument is a moot point. Why pick on Wisconsin? They aren’t the first school to have a copyrighted logo. As I said, Wyoming protects its “Steamboat” cowboy with all its might. THAT’S THE WAY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT LAW WORKS. I suppose I should be able to use the NFL logo to start my new company under this guys logic![/quote]
    It’s a Block W! I’m sorry, but even if you paid for a designer to come up with that, it’s a common enough device that there should be no case allowed here. The Cowboy is different because it is an original design- original artwork. that’s a basis to get a copyright- it has to be an original work. It’s doubtful if a copyright should have ever been granted in Wisconsin’s case, that does not look original to me. That’s why.

    But Wisconsin will win anyway, they have too much money to lose.

  • Stevo | December 4, 2007 at 6:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”181591″]
    A team steals Wisconsin’s logo=zero dollars spent for logo. Or, it has their resident art department lead or computer graphics nerd make a logo, probably doesn’t go thru the hassle of trademarking=zero dollars spent. Money the school makes off the the logo, whether stolen or created=same. So what are they really stealing here? There not outside Camp Randel trying to sell their t-shirts. That’s what I’m getting at. I know all about intellectual property in the workplace. But seriously, stealing? Comon. In the case presented today I understand the university taking action. But I can’t read these articles anymore without furrowing my brow and mumbling, “Seriously?”[/quote]

    The University of Wisconsin-Madison has a certain amount of goodwill and public identity that is derived from the “Motion W”, just like the Bears have with their C and Miami (FL) with the U. That goodwill and identity is diluted when another school uses that logo. Licensing fees are there to allow UW to recoup some of the lost revenue from those schools using the W on products.

  • LI Phil | December 4, 2007 at 6:34 pm |

    d-train & miggy gonna look funky with a old english “D” on their caps…from nu skool to old school like that

  • Michael Emody | December 4, 2007 at 6:46 pm |

    Re: powder blue’s:

    In order to waste time today in a way that Uni Watch readers can appreciate, I drew a powder blue version of the White Sox current road uni, using the Dressed to the Nines template.
    I know… I need to get a life….

  • josh's twin | December 4, 2007 at 6:48 pm |

    I agree with you, too, about why Taylor gets the league-wide memorial, but, say, Korey Stringer (because I’m a Vikings’ fan) didn’t. Is it because he died in season? That doesn’t seem right.

    Methinks Korey Stringer’s death was downplayed by the league because he died on a football practice field.

    Stringers death was downplayed because the Vikings and the NFL were responsible for it

    That was my point exactly.

    The Vikings were not not responsible for Stringer’s death. The case went to the Minnesota Supreme Court, and they shot it down.

    I didn’t mean legal liability as much as Korey Stringer’s death, “damaged the NFL brand”, and the powers that be wanted it forgotten about as soon as possible.

  • […] They Didn’t Call It Exhibition Stadium for NothingBy Paul LukasNow if we could just get them to wear a blue cap. Finally, if you believe in omens, there was a bad one: The “N” in “Toronto” is supposed to look like this, with the shadowed side of the bevel down and to the right. …Uni Watch – http://www.uniwatchb... […]

  • Mike | December 4, 2007 at 7:22 pm |

    Wow is it too early to call the Tigers MLB champs for next season? I can’t wait to see Willis in Detroit high socks.

  • felix | December 4, 2007 at 7:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”181547″]Seems to me the Blue Jays had it right here.[/quote]

    Absolutely. I owned both the solid blue and the blue/white caps back in the day, too.

    In regards to the the “Francona Rule”, I’ve discovered that fellow Franconian smock/pullover/windbreaker enthusiast John Gibbons wears #5. Who knew?

  • Kelly | December 4, 2007 at 8:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”181452″]MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”

    Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.

    “There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”

    No more pullover for Francona.

    When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”[/quote]

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Majestic Athletic, the official apparel supplier of Major League Baseball doesn’t complain about this rule, after all their sales of the microfleece on-field pullover will probably suffer.

  • Steve from Austin | December 4, 2007 at 8:53 pm |

    I CAN’T BELIEVE I JUST FOUND OUT THAT PAUL WAS IN AUSTIN!!! Crap… I’ve been through a lot of stuff lately and haven’t gotten to check the page in a long time. I’m incredibly disappointed!

  • Grant | December 4, 2007 at 8:55 pm |

    Accardo’s upside down N may be a faux pas, but at least it’s not as bad what happened to Joe Carter in 93 (I think it was 93). After the all star game he had a new road uniform, and Toronto was spelled TOROTNO. He wore it for half a game then went back to an old shirt, I’m still wondering how it passed quality inspection!

  • shaylen | December 4, 2007 at 8:56 pm |

    i’m sure it’s been mentioned but just in case it hasn’t georgia will wear black for the sugar bowl

  • shaylen | December 4, 2007 at 9:00 pm |

    oh yeah also one of pitts’ db’s had a sean taylor tribute on his wrist sleeve

  • Stevo | December 4, 2007 at 10:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”181542″]I’ve made this point on Chris’ message board a couple of times now, but that shade of Powder Blue that the Blue Jays are using for their throwbacks is the wrong shade. I had a friendly arguement with someone who was involved with this throwback – that the shade of Powder Blue used back in the day was lighter than the “standard” shade. In fact, it matched up with the Light Blue that was used as the trim color on the home uniforms, and was used in the logo on the road uniforms.

    Here’s the Powder Blue that is being used:

    And here is the Light Blue that should have been used:

    [/quote]

    Well, the Canadian Powder Blue is closing the gap to the American Powder Blue in recent years, it used to be one CPB was worth about .65 ACB, now it’s worth about .9 APB.

  • Adam | December 4, 2007 at 10:17 pm |

    Wiscosin’s flying “W”….too bad my alma matter WAYNESBURG COLLEGE..ooops…WAYNESBURG UNIVERSITY uses the same font on their football helmets only in that puky TENNESSEE orange color on a white base. SUE those bastards…all my tuition money went to new buildings that I never got the chance to destroy..let alone enter!

  • matt | December 4, 2007 at 10:38 pm |

    maybe the sean taylor thing would be cool if they did it for te two other players killed from the denver broncos

  • Stevo | December 4, 2007 at 10:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”181786″]maybe the sean taylor thing would be cool if they did it for te two other players killed from the denver broncos[/quote]

    Gee, you’re only the 10 millionth person to bring that up in the last 3 days. Perhaps you’d also like to bring up the “fact” that the NFL did nothing for Pat Tillman?

  • Fr | December 4, 2007 at 11:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”181475″]Man, those Jays throwbacks are killer. I’ll buy a Jays lid the second they are available…….[/quote]
    agreed.

  • Matt Powers | December 4, 2007 at 11:27 pm |

    I think this guY:

    http://sportsillustr...

    looks alot like this 74 year old man:

    http://ballsiest.com...

  • Stuby | December 4, 2007 at 11:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”181789″]I think this guY:

    http://sportsillustr...

    looks alot like this 74 year old man:

    http://ballsiest.com...
    When I opened that Samari Rolle link, I honestly thought it was Torii Hunter.

  • Joe | December 5, 2007 at 12:05 am |

    Article on Paul and the Uniwatch Blog in the Boston Herald [“Field of Seams”]. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to meet up with Paul and other uniwatchers on Thursday in Boston. Guys and gals- have a cold one for me!

  • Dan from Austin | December 5, 2007 at 12:21 am |

    [quote comment=”181770″]I CAN’T BELIEVE I JUST FOUND OUT THAT PAUL WAS IN AUSTIN!!! Crap… I’ve been through a lot of stuff lately and haven’t gotten to check the page in a long time. I’m incredibly disappointed![/quote]

    I know! Well, I read the blog when he announced he was coming, but I had to work that night, and forgot to request off from work. When I got home that night, I was like…CRAP! Could’ve worn my Lakers sweatshirt too!

  • Joe | December 5, 2007 at 12:35 am |

    Sorry. Let me try again with the link.

    http://bostonherald....

  • Mike | December 5, 2007 at 1:08 am |

    [quote comment=”181791″][quote comment=”181789″]I think this guY:

    http://sportsillustr...

    looks alot like this 74 year old man:

    http://ballsiest.com...
    When I opened that Samari Rolle link, I honestly thought it was Torii Hunter.[/quote]
    Haha what!?! You white guys always thinking all black people look the same. Rolle and Hunter look totally different.

  • Stuby | December 5, 2007 at 1:12 am |

    [quote comment=”181798″][quote comment=”181791″][quote comment=”181789″]I think this guY:

    http://sportsillustr...

    looks alot like this 74 year old man:

    http://ballsiest.com...
    When I opened that Samari Rolle link, I honestly thought it was Torii Hunter.[/quote]
    Haha what!?! You white guys always thinking all black people look the same. Rolle and Hunter look totally different.[/quote]
    Why are you assuming I’m white?

  • Colten | December 5, 2007 at 1:31 am |

    Funny that on the helmet hut link there was a helmet with a Tennessee “T” and one that looked like Elon’s “E”.

    And maybe those certain teams have NNOB on the road to make it harder for opposing fans to harass the players.

  • todd krevanchi | December 5, 2007 at 2:37 am |

    [quote comment=”181799″][quote comment=”181798″][quote comment=”181791″][quote comment=”181789″]I think this guY:

    http://sportsillustr...

    looks alot like this 74 year old man:

    http://ballsiest.com...
    When I opened that Samari Rolle link, I honestly thought it was Torii Hunter.[/quote]
    Haha what!?! You white guys always thinking all black people look the same. Rolle and Hunter look totally different.[/quote]
    Why are you assuming I’m white?[/quote]

    exactly.
    one of the great features of a message board or blog is that we are all just names.
    the letters that spell our our names are not like VIN numbers in that they dont tell year make and model (or in our case, age, race and religion).
    i could care less about what color you guys are. all i know is that you guys have something in common with me, and im interested to hear what you have to say about the topics of interest.

  • SWW | December 5, 2007 at 3:37 am |

    [quote comment=”181679″][quote comment=”181676″]i was always under the impression that the therma base fleece and the therma base tech fleece II were approved on field items for players and mangers to wear…[/quote]

    True, as long as (if you’re a manager) you wear your full uniform under it. See Scioscia.[/quote]

    When did the ThermaBase apparel come in a satin look with a v neck? Oh wait…

    http://shop.mlb.com/...

    And I can’t even find the first item that Scioscia is wearing there. A short sleeve wind breaker.

  • SWW | December 5, 2007 at 3:38 am |

    Meant to say the item, as both pictures are of the same item.

  • Dobu | December 5, 2007 at 7:59 am |

    The second the good people of this country stand up and recognize that law school is just a trade school that turns out holier than though individuals incapable of thinking outside of the box the better. Wisconsin’s “Flying W” looks like a thousand W’s I’ve seen before and after they bought the stupid logo and intellectual property is an area of law that is way too over-practiced given the fact that ALL of this intellectual property is just a reorganization of existing thoughts. Copyright Fascists are assholes.

  • hawkguy | December 6, 2007 at 12:13 am |

    John Mayberry is scheduled to also be at the Royals powder blue unveiling Thursday night in KC. Too bad he didn’t play for the Astros too. Maybe he’d get them to bring back the rainbows.

  • Mike | December 6, 2007 at 3:54 pm |

    I’m all for the Jays going back to the original caps (best of the jays caps with the exception of the twins athletics hybrid new school old school jays hat whch had the new J logo with the old color scheme red white and blue that is still avaliable at Lids I believe in the twins retro collection http://www.lids.com/... . This should be the cap of the future for the Jays) but why did they have to use the powder blues, they could’ve easily have gone with the acceptible home whites. Ideally the retro jersey should be from the world series years which has a belt with the logo on the bottom left of the uniform and comes in greys or whites.
    Regardless of jerseys however, GO JAYS GO!

  • Web Design Portland | December 25, 2007 at 8:05 pm |

    Good move for the Jays. I hate the surname font, though.