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

Robert Marshall Isn’t the Only One Placing Orders with Twin City Knitting

Picture 1.png

Major development in Oakland yesterday, as Rajai Davis wore A’s logo stirrups. Truth to tell, I think that’s a bit much — just stick with the solid green ’rups. But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling. It’s bad enough that you’ve got a mishmash of low cuffs, high cuffs, solid socks, and stirrups, but now you’ve got Davis wearing fashion hose that aren’t part of Oakland’s official wardrobe and were never intended to appear on an MLB diamond. Frankly, I’m surprised A’s equipment manager Steve Vucinich provided these for Davis. I’ll try to find out more from him today.

New ESPN columns today — look here (that one has two video segments) and here.

tonybernazard.jpg

The First Rule of Binghamton Fight Club Is Don’t Talk About Binghamton Fight Club: As you’ve probably heard by now, the big uni news in Mets-ville is that Tony Bernazard removed his uniform, so to speak, during a recent upstate jaunt (artist’s rendering at right by our own John Ekdahl). Having attended college in Binghamton, I can confirm that it is indeed a fine place to get nekkid, although I tended to do it in the company of attractive young coeds, not minor league baseball players. Of course, that’s only because the town didn’t yet have a minor league baseball team back then, but you can’t have everything.

Meanwhile, I’ve already reserved my copy of Tony Bernazard’s Nudist Guide to Upstate New York, coming soon to a bookstore near you. If you can’t find a copy, don’t worry — I have a feeling Tony will soon have a lot more time on his hands to write a sequel.

Speaking of the Mets, the answers to yesterday’s quiz can be found here. Be honest when tabulating your score, or else I’ll send Tony to kick your ass.

Uni Watch News Ticker: As you may be aware, the President of Kenya went on the telepromompterizer last night to push for his socialistical health care program. If only the gummint would just butt out and let the medical biz rely on proven market-driven solutions, like advertising on Bears jerseys. … So much better that way, no? … Looks like JC Romero has something written inside his rally cap (with thanks to Doug McConnell). … Good article on a minor league clubbie here (with thanks to Scotty Johnson). … If you go to this page and click on “2012 Football Jersey Rule,” you’ll download an interesting PowerPoint file on new jersey regs going into effect in Nebraska (nice find by David McGee). … The Bruins co-sponsor the annual New England Sand Sculpting Festival at Revere Beach. If you skip ahead to the 10th image in this slideshow, you can see the team’s logo executed in sand. … Hey, checo out Wilt as a long-jumper — and dig that cap! (Good find by Matt Mitchell.) … Ben Shaykin‘s wife is conducting some research regarding baseball fans’ feelings about “God Bless America” being sung at baseball games. If you’d like to participate, look here. … Shaun Tunick notes that Braves coach Glenn Hubbard’s helmet had an All-Star Game decal. Maybe he grabbed McCann’s helmet? Also: The upside-down N on has been fixed. … Totally gorgeous American Legion baseball uni here. … The Chargers have released their uniform sked for the upcoming season (with thanks to Eric Stangel). … Very nice slideshow-plus-video of Padres uni history here (with thanks to Justin Canoya). … The Red Sox are retiring Jim Rice’s number. … Here’s why you should never mix columbia blue, kelly green, and maroon. That image is from from this tremendous site, which is devoted to NC State program covers (big thanks to Joey Morris).

 

186 comments to Robert Marshall Isn’t the Only One Placing Orders with Twin City Knitting

  • Bob A | July 23, 2009 at 8:21 am |

    I love old program covers. That NC State site is great. But this one is still my all time favorite.

  • howard | July 23, 2009 at 8:22 am |

    Good to know that if Jonathan Vilma decides to play high school football in Nebraska, his jersey will be legal.

  • Bob | July 23, 2009 at 8:23 am |

    The Padres’ uniform history is wrong. They whiffed on the road jerseys from 1976-79 and the home jerseys of at least ’78 and ’79.

    http://data.uniontri...

  • Bob A | July 23, 2009 at 8:24 am |

    Trying link again for the football program cover.

  • Frank | July 23, 2009 at 8:28 am |

    Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?

  • Steve | July 23, 2009 at 8:32 am |

    It can’t be McCann’s helmet on the Braves coach. McCann’s would come down in the back, like a regular batting helmet. That coach is sporting the John Olerud, on-field version.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 8:34 am |

    Watching the Texas Texases last night, I thought: What team recently wore its city name at home and on the road. In the case of both Texas and this time, I think it works.

    http://exhibits.base...

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 8:36 am |

    [quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 8:41 am |

    [quote comment=”341654″]The Padres’ uniform history is wrong. They whiffed on the road jerseys from 1976-79 and the home jerseys of at least ’78 and ’79.

    http://data.uniontri...

    And no alternates in sight.

  • M.Princip | July 23, 2009 at 8:54 am |

    Does anyone know where I can get vintage style NFL tube socks made? Thought someone here posted a site a while back? Looking to make this. .

  • Kyle | July 23, 2009 at 8:59 am |

    Well, I got 6 points. I certainly would have done better if it was Pittsburgh Uni-trivia. Not so bad for an Erieite.

  • John | July 23, 2009 at 9:02 am |

    Hmmm, do I sense some sarcasm Mr Lukus?

  • Peter Wunsch | July 23, 2009 at 9:05 am |

    “the President of Kenya ”

    Paul:

    I know that this is your site, and I, too, do not like the health care plan, But I find that comment a little too offensive.

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 9:07 am |

    [quote comment=”341664″]”the President of Kenya ”

    Paul:

    I know that this is your site, and I, too, do not like the health care plan, But I find that comment a little too offensive.[/quote]

    See comment #12.

  • LI Phil | July 23, 2009 at 9:08 am |

    [quote comment=”341663″]Hmmm, do I sense some sarcasm Mr Lukus?[/quote]

    we do take these matters very uh seriously, and uh, we’re going to investigate these things

  • John C. | July 23, 2009 at 9:10 am |

    So I got 10 right. Not as good as I had hoped, but still not bad for a 21-year old (yup, I was born less than two years after the 1986 title, and I’m pretty sure I won’t see one myself until I’m 40. Ugh).

  • John | July 23, 2009 at 9:14 am |

    (Tells self..please just let it go…let it go…don’t start a political fight on a uni site)! Phew…I’m over it. How bout those Bears!?

  • bill | July 23, 2009 at 9:17 am |

    Wilt could do it all…I seem to recall that he played in a pro volleyball and considered boxing.

  • Mike Engle | July 23, 2009 at 9:18 am |

    Got 23. And I’m not a Mets fan, and probably younger than you. Wow.

  • Peter Wunsch | July 23, 2009 at 9:19 am |

    [Phew…I’m over it. How bout those Bears

    Ditto. But I am worried that if I win the NY Lottery scartch-off of $1 million/year for life, I will be paying for the health care plan.

  • leon | July 23, 2009 at 9:19 am |

    [quote comment=”341655″]Trying link again for the football program cover.[/quote]

    Beautiful!

    (Tony feeling his oats.)

  • Hott Rodd | July 23, 2009 at 9:23 am |

    [quote]As you may be aware, the President of Kenya went on the telepromompterizer last night to push for his socialistical health care program. If only the gummint would just butt out and let the medical biz rely on proven market-driven solutions, like advertising on Bears jerseys. [/quote]

    Who wrote that paragraph, George Dubya?

  • leon | July 23, 2009 at 9:28 am |

    [quote comment=”341669″]Wilt could do it all…I seem to recall that he played in a pro volleyball and considered boxing.[/quote]

    I recall a show featuring Howard Cosell, Muhammad Ali, and Wilt (yeah, when originally shown) and Ali kept baiting Wilt to box him. Wilt’s response each time was to produce a contract and it would be a done deal. Wilt was also quite a swordsman, coxswain, and bareback equestrian!

  • John | July 23, 2009 at 9:39 am |

    Peter- you could be making ALOT less than that and you’d still be paying for it!

  • Mike | July 23, 2009 at 9:40 am |

    I got 25 of 32.

    I love the Mets and always will…and I hate myself for it.

  • u2-horn | July 23, 2009 at 9:44 am |

    “Here’s why you should never mix columbia blue, kelly green, and maroon. ”

    Is the correct image linked? I don’t get it.

  • morgan | July 23, 2009 at 9:52 am |

    I got 8 points. That’s really, uh, not good.

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 9:56 am |

    [quote comment=”341674″][quote comment=”341669″]Wilt could do it all…I seem to recall that he played in a pro volleyball and considered boxing.[/quote]

    I recall a show featuring Howard Cosell, Muhammad Ali, and Wilt (yeah, when originally shown) and Ali kept baiting Wilt to box him. Wilt’s response each time was to produce a contract and it would be a done deal. Wilt was also quite a swordsman, coxswain, and bareback equestrian![/quote]

    Best No Mas tee ever (even with all the purple):
    http://www.nomas-nyc...

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 9:59 am |

    [quote comment=”341654″]The Padres’ uniform history is wrong. They whiffed on the road jerseys from 1976-79 and the home jerseys of at least ’78 and ’79.

    http://data.uniontri...

    Completely ignores the white shoes Ozzie Smith-Dave Winfield era of late ’70s, too (immediately pre-Taco).
    http://3.bp.blogspot...

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | July 23, 2009 at 10:00 am |

    [quote]Wilt was also quite a swordsman, coxswain, and bareback equestrian![/quote]

    COTD nominee

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 10:01 am |

    I got 12 right on the Mets quiz. And that’s way more than I had any business getting right.

    Here are the correct ones: 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, both on 13 (total guess), one on 15 (guessed Vaughn correctly), 18, 21, 22

    I misread 9 — and I probably would have gotten it wrong anyway
    I should’ve known 19 & 23.

  • Hott Rodd | July 23, 2009 at 10:07 am |

    wow.. I got 6 right on the Mets Quiz. Not bad for knowing zilch about the Mets.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 10:07 am |

    [quote comment=”341669″]Wilt could do it all…I seem to recall that he played in a pro volleyball and considered boxing.[/quote]

    He worked out with Kansas City Chiefs once upon a time, too, and Hank Stram fell all over himself trying to get him to sign, saying Chamberlain would be among the greatest receivers (including tight ends, which would have been one position possibility for The Stilt) ever to play the game.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 10:09 am |

    [quote comment=”341681″][quote]Wilt was also quite a swordsman, coxswain, and bareback equestrian![/quote]

    COTD nominee[/quote]

    How to arouse Wilt:
    Knock softly on his door and say, “Housekeeping.”

    —Ricko

  • Tom Hedrick | July 23, 2009 at 10:11 am |

    Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 10:11 am |

    [quote comment=”341684″]including tight ends, which would have been one position possibility for The Stilt[/quote]
    Possibility? Oh, I’m sure that was one of them.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 10:11 am |

    re: Binghampton Fight Club.
    That’s it, Mets have jumped the shark.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 10:12 am |

    [quote comment=”341687″][quote comment=”341684″]including tight ends, which would have been one position possibility for The Stilt[/quote]
    Possibility? Oh, I’m sure that was one of them.[/quote]

    “Housekeeping.”

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 10:13 am |

    [quote comment=”341680″][quote comment=”341654″]The Padres’ uniform history is wrong. They whiffed on the road jerseys from 1976-79 and the home jerseys of at least ’78 and ’79.

    http://data.uniontri...

    Completely ignores the white shoes Ozzie Smith-Dave Winfield era of late ’70s, too (immediately pre-Taco).
    http://3.bp.blogspot...

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yikes, what a horrid look. The 1984 World Series uniforms were not bad, though.

  • Hott Rodd | July 23, 2009 at 10:13 am |

    [quote comment=”341686″]Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?[/quote]

    http://www.ultimatem...

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | July 23, 2009 at 10:22 am |

    Looks like Lance and Johan’s new team is Team Radio Shack.

    Teamradioshack.com was registered on July 20. By Capital Sports and Entertainment, the agency owned by Armstrong’s longtime agent Bill Stapleton. source here.

    Saved from a Nike deluge… :)

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | July 23, 2009 at 10:26 am |

    Actual Team radio Shack source was ESPN. Article I linked to is a live blog and it might be hard for you to find the link within.

  • leon | July 23, 2009 at 10:26 am |

    including tight ends, which would have been one position possibility for The Stilt

    Another woul be “Missionary”.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 10:34 am |

    [quote comment=”341690″][quote comment=”341680″][quote comment=”341654″]The Padres’ uniform history is wrong. They whiffed on the road jerseys from 1976-79 and the home jerseys of at least ’78 and ’79.

    http://data.uniontri...

    Completely ignores the white shoes Ozzie Smith-Dave Winfield era of late ’70s, too (immediately pre-Taco).
    http://3.bp.blogspot...

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yikes, what a horrid look. The 1984 World Series uniforms were not bad, though.[/quote]

    I guess that picture was 1979, though it’s not shown here.
    http://exhibits.base...

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”341691″][quote comment=”341686″]Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?[/quote]

    http://www.ultimatem...

    Wow. I confess that I have no memory of this Gibson. There was PAUL Gibson, who pitched for both the Mets and Yanks:
    http://www.baseball-...

    But I hadn’t been aware of the “other” Bob Gibson. Thanks for enlightening me!

  • brendan | July 23, 2009 at 10:45 am |

    Come on Paul. Binghamton is not upstate, it’s western NY. Everything west of Syracuse is western NY.

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 10:46 am |

    [quote comment=”341697″]Come on Paul. Binghamton is not upstate, it’s western NY. Everything west of Syracuse is western NY.[/quote]
    Ins’t everything north of the Bronx considered “upstate”?

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”341697″]Come on Paul. Binghamton is not upstate, it’s western NY. Everything west of Syracuse is western NY.[/quote]

    Um, no.

  • Peter Wunsch | July 23, 2009 at 10:54 am |

    Anything noorth of the Bronx is upstate.

    Like the episode in Cheers where Norm says that “Vera went to visit her parents in Wyoming or Utah. One of those square states out west.”

  • Hott Rodd | July 23, 2009 at 10:54 am |

    [quote comment=”341696″][quote comment=”341691″][quote comment=”341686″]Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?[/quote]

    http://www.ultimatem...

    Wow. I confess that I have no memory of this Gibson. There was PAUL Gibson, who pitched for both the Mets and Yanks:
    http://www.baseball-...

    But I hadn’t been aware of the “other” Bob Gibson. Thanks for enlightening me![/quote]

    Considering that link shows he pitched 1 inning of 1 game.. I think we can find it in our hearts to forgive you, eventually, after you show an appropriate amount of remorse..

  • The Ol Goaler | July 23, 2009 at 10:57 am |

    [quote comment=”341696″][quote comment=”341691″][quote comment=”341686″]Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?[/quote]

    http://www.ultimatem...

    Wow. I confess that I have no memory of this Gibson. There was PAUL Gibson, who pitched for both the Mets and Yanks:
    http://www.baseball-...

    But I hadn’t been aware of the “other” Bob Gibson. Thanks for enlightening me![/quote]
    The real Bob Gibson was a coach with the Mets and Braves, working with former teammate Joe Torre… “Gibby” was Joe’s “attitude coach” in both spots!

    One can only imagine the fireworks had Gibson joined Torre in the Bronx… Think he’da put up with George? Dont. Think. So…

  • C.N. | July 23, 2009 at 11:11 am |

    From the veritable fount of uni news that is Manny Ramirez — apparently he wore street clothes under his jersey last night:

    “I was just trying to get a good pitch to hit,” said Ramirez, who arrived at his locker and peeled off his Dodgers shirt and white pants to reveal street clothes.

    http://sports.espn.g...

    Not particularly surprising, I guess…

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 11:12 am |

    [quote comment=”341701″][quote comment=”341696″][quote comment=”341691″][quote comment=”341686″]Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?[/quote]

    http://www.ultimatem...

    Wow. I confess that I have no memory of this Gibson. There was PAUL Gibson, who pitched for both the Mets and Yanks:
    http://www.baseball-...

    But I hadn’t been aware of the “other” Bob Gibson. Thanks for enlightening me![/quote]

    Considering that link shows he pitched 1 inning of 1 game.. I think we can find it in our hearts to forgive you, eventually, after you show an appropriate amount of remorse..[/quote]

    Ah, so he’s sorta the Mets’ Moonlight.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 11:12 am |

    Phil…
    Check your email.

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 11:19 am |

    Today’s ESPN columns are up. This one has a two-part video component:
    http://sports.espn.g...

    And this one supplements the first one:
    http://sports.espn.g...

  • Alex Poterack | July 23, 2009 at 11:19 am |

    Ins’t everything north of the Bronx considered “upstate”?

    To NYCers, yes, but people who actually live upstate *hate* this attitude, as my girlfriend from Syracuse will attest to…admittedly, I can’t get too worked up about it, but I do think referring to Westchester, e.g., as “upstate”, as some do, is pretty dumb.

  • LI Phil | July 23, 2009 at 11:21 am |

    [quote comment=”341697″]Come on Paul. Binghamton is not upstate, it’s western NY. Everything west of Syracuse is western NY.[/quote]

    not only is that not true…binghamton is almost in pennsylvania, so if anything, that’s not “western,” but rather southern tier

    JTH is correct tho…anything north of da bronx is “upstate”

  • Perry | July 23, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    [quote comment=”341674″][quote comment=”341669″]Wilt could do it all…I seem to recall that he played in a pro volleyball and considered boxing.[/quote]

    I recall a show featuring Howard Cosell, Muhammad Ali, and Wilt (yeah, when originally shown) and Ali kept baiting Wilt to box him. Wilt’s response each time was to produce a contract and it would be a done deal. Wilt was also quite a swordsman, coxswain, and bareback equestrian![/quote]

    Yeah, but could he teach German shepherds to bark in Russian? Did his blood smell like cologne? Did the sun come up later on May 6, in case his Cinco party ran late?

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 11:24 am |

    [quote comment=”341708″][quote comment=”341697″]Come on Paul. Binghamton is not upstate, it’s western NY. Everything west of Syracuse is western NY.[/quote]

    not only is that not true…binghamton is almost in pennsylvania, so if anything, that’s not “western,” but rather southern tier

    JTH is correct tho…anything north of da bronx is “upstate”[/quote]
    And by looking at that map, it appears that Binghamton is slightly to the east of Syracuse.

  • John C. | July 23, 2009 at 11:25 am |

    Speaking of stirrups today, did we link to this article in the Star Telegram back in June? I can’t seem to remember. It does a fairly good job of talking about the history of stirrups, and who’s wearing them now.

  • John C. | July 23, 2009 at 11:29 am |

    [quote comment=\”341710\”][quote comment=\”341708\”][quote comment=\”341697\”]Come on Paul. Binghamton is not upstate, it\’s western NY. Everything west of Syracuse is western NY.[/quote]

    not only is that not true…binghamton is almost in pennsylvania, so if anything, that\’s not \”western,\” but rather southern tier

    JTH is correct tho…anything north of da bronx is \”upstate\”[/quote]
    And by looking at that map, it appears that Binghamton is slightly to the east of Syracuse.[/quote]

    I go to school at the ‘Cuse, but live on Long Island, so this argument seemingly never ends up there haha. Can’t recall how many times I’ve told people there’s no such thing as Central New York.

  • Kek | July 23, 2009 at 11:31 am |

    this would make a great sponsor for Lance: http://www.agr.state...

    He could wear a regular orange jersey and market the toast chee.

    If he was able to wear the yellow jersey, he could switch to Nip Chee.

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 11:35 am |

    [quote comment=”341707″]

    Ins’t everything north of the Bronx considered “upstate”?

    To NYCers, yes, but people who actually live upstate *hate* this attitude, as my girlfriend from Syracuse will attest to…admittedly, I can’t get too worked up about it, but I do think referring to Westchester, e.g., as “upstate”, as some do, is pretty dumb.[/quote]
    Where I’m from, everything south of I-80 is considered “downstate” or “Southern Illinois”. Apparently this designation rankles some folks.

    Who knew?

  • Kek | July 23, 2009 at 11:35 am |

    Coupla Pirates notes:

    Yesterday, following the walkoff HR, Tim Neverett the Buccos’ play-by-play guy, said “I’m untucking my shirt” and apparently one of the Pirates’ players did too.

    Next Friday, the Pirates return home after this western swing to AZ and SF. The Nats will be in town Friday 7/31. Thinking about going to that game and checking out Nyjer’s stirrups again!

  • hillvecio | July 23, 2009 at 11:37 am |

    If I was a high school football coach in Nebraska, I would outfit my entire team in 1980’s era Eric Dickerson Rams jerseys.

  • Mark in Shiga | July 23, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    [quote comment=”341696″][quote comment=”341691″][quote comment=”341686″]Wasn’t there a Mets pitcher in the late 80’s named Bob Gibson? So wouldn’t the answer to #13 question from yesterday be inaccurate?[/quote]

    http://www.ultimatem...

    Wow. I confess that I have no memory of this Gibson. There was PAUL Gibson, who pitched for both the Mets and Yanks:
    http://www.baseball-...

    But I hadn’t been aware of the “other” Bob Gibson. Thanks for enlightening me![/quote]

    Paul, this is what I was talking about yesterday when I mentioned what a great tricky question #13 was. As a kid I remember hearing the fantastic of Tim McCarver coming up to the mound to talk with the “real” Bob Gibson when they were with the Cardinals, and Gibby saying “The only thing you know about pitching is that you can’t hit it! Now get back behind the plate!”

    So I was pretty excited when another neighborhood kid said he found a Bob Gibson card and was going to give it to me. My excitement grew for days until he handed over… this “other” Bob Gibson, who wasn’t one-tenth as cool as the real one.

    I say Tom Hedrick and I each get about 50 bonus points, ’80s-vintage Tides T-shirts, and the key to the city!

  • Mark in Shiga | July 23, 2009 at 11:42 am |

    But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually. It’s bad enough that Selig’s office has eliminated most of the autonomy of the two leagues, forced all teams to use the same uniform manufacturer, forced all teamsto have the same stupid practice jersey template and the same stupid practice caps, but now people want that to extend to sock styles?

    If MLB were in charge, there would probably be an MLB logo where that A’s logo is now. No, thanks.

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 11:49 am |

    [quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually.[/quote]

    Fine — have each team come up with its own standard look and make them stick to it. That’s all I meant. But it’s crazy that there’s essentially NO protocol for pants and socks.

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 11:49 am |

    I thought the idea was that the AFL charter franchises would wear the throwbacks every time they play each other this season. Apparently I was way off because according to that Chargers uni schedule, they won’t be wearing them when they play Tennessee or the second times they play Denver, Oakland and KC.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 11:50 am |

    [quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually. It’s bad enough that Selig’s office has eliminated most of the autonomy of the two leagues, forced all teams to use the same uniform manufacturer, forced all teamsto have the same stupid practice jersey template and the same stupid practice caps, but now people want that to extend to sock styles?

    If MLB were in charge, there would probably be an MLB logo where that A’s logo is now. No, thanks.[/quote]

    Don’t think Paul meant MLB should control socks, just require that everything be team-issue.

    Or was I reading too much between the lines? Or not enough?

    —Ricko

  • Berto | July 23, 2009 at 11:51 am |

    As an A’s fan I gotta say I kinda dig the A’s logo ‘rups. Get it Raj.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 11:52 am |

    [quote comment=”341721″][quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually. It’s bad enough that Selig’s office has eliminated most of the autonomy of the two leagues, forced all teams to use the same uniform manufacturer, forced all teamsto have the same stupid practice jersey template and the same stupid practice caps, but now people want that to extend to sock styles?

    If MLB were in charge, there would probably be an MLB logo where that A’s logo is now. No, thanks.[/quote]

    Don’t think Paul meant MLB should control socks, just require that everything be team-issue.

    Or was I reading too much between the lines? Or not enough?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well, there you go. Shoulda just let Paul speak for himself.
    (I spent too much time in PR. “What the Commsioner MEANT to say…”)

    LOL

  • Kek | July 23, 2009 at 11:55 am |

    [quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually. It’s bad enough that Selig’s office has eliminated most of the autonomy of the two leagues, forced all teams to use the same uniform manufacturer, forced all teamsto have the same stupid practice jersey template and the same stupid practice caps, but now people want that to extend to sock styles?

    If MLB were in charge, there would probably be an MLB logo where that A’s logo is now. No, thanks.[/quote]
    Great points Mark. Rather than uniform police, I’d rather this thing go grassroots and just cycle back like most fashion (both in pop culture and sports) does.

    What we need is a few high profile players taking the torch and saying how cool the look is. Or, have team mandates, like the Myrtle Beach Pelicans have. But the league, no thanks, and you’re probably right, they would have a majestic or MLB logo on them (and this place would go bonkers!)

    It was great watching (and seeing) the Giants in town over this past weekend. I noticed a lot of their players have better uniform fits. Zito and the RF (#12?) were wearing a tighter fit.

    I was watching the game Zito was pitching with my wife and she had her first uniwatch moment. (The fact that she was even watching baseball with me was somewhat monumental!) She says, “those baggie uniforms, how do they run and play in them” and “the pitcher’s uniform is how it should fit”.

    Preachin’ to the choir sister!

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”341719″][quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually.[/quote]

    Fine — have each team come up with its own standard look and make them stick to it. That’s all I meant. But it’s crazy that there’s essentially NO protocol for pants and socks.[/quote]

    Odd thing about that is that only the NFL and NCAA footballhave sprta strict policies on such things. MLB and NBA/NCAA hoops have, comparatively speaking, traditionally left “from the knees down and the elbows down” as areas of relatively free expression.

    Not saying what’s right or wrong, just what has been.

    —Ricko

  • chance michaels | July 23, 2009 at 11:59 am |

    [quote comment=”341725″][quote comment=”341719″][quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually.[/quote]

    Fine — have each team come up with its own standard look and make them stick to it. That’s all I meant. But it’s crazy that there’s essentially NO protocol for pants and socks.[/quote]

    Odd thing about that is that only the NFL and NCAA footballhave sprta strict policies on such things. MLB and NBA/NCAA hoops have, comparatively speaking, traditionally left “from the knees down and the elbows down” as areas of relatively free expression.

    Not saying what’s right or wrong, just what has been.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The NFL may have regulations, but they don’t always enforce them.

  • chance michaels | July 23, 2009 at 12:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”341706″]Today’s ESPN columns are up. This one has a two-part video component:
    http://sports.espn.g...

    And this one supplements the first one:
    http://sports.espn.g...

    Great stuff, Paul!

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 12:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”341726″][quote comment=”341725″][quote comment=”341719″][quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually.[/quote]

    Fine — have each team come up with its own standard look and make them stick to it. That’s all I meant. But it’s crazy that there’s essentially NO protocol for pants and socks.[/quote]

    Odd thing about that is that only the NFL and NCAA footballhave sprta strict policies on such things. MLB and NBA/NCAA hoops have, comparatively speaking, traditionally left “from the knees down and the elbows down” as areas of relatively free expression.

    Not saying what’s right or wrong, just what has been.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The NFL may have regulations, but they don’t always enforce them.[/quote]
    Are you questioning the NFL’s uni cops?

    Blasphemy.

  • concealed78 | July 23, 2009 at 12:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 12:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”341726″][quote comment=”341725″][quote comment=”341719″][quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually.[/quote]

    Fine — have each team come up with its own standard look and make them stick to it. That’s all I meant. But it’s crazy that there’s essentially NO protocol for pants and socks.[/quote]

    Odd thing about that is that only the NFL and NCAA footballhave sprta strict policies on such things. MLB and NBA/NCAA hoops have, comparatively speaking, traditionally left “from the knees down and the elbows down” as areas of relatively free expression.

    Not saying what’s right or wrong, just what has been.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The NFL may have regulations, but they don’t always enforce them.[/quote]

    Didn’t mean to say they did (and isn’t that one of the bugaboos bout such things, enforcement?). Was just saying that in baseball and basketball it’s long kinda been “let ’em do what they want with their socks, etc.”

    I posted an article a long time ago about how umps didn’t think enforcing the “no high stirrups” rule was their responsibility, and the rule sorta died on the vine. NFL goes to the trouble of hiring “Uniform Cops”. In baseball, a sport where bitching is part of the game, can you imagine the shit Uniform Cops would get around the batting cage, etc. Not a job I’d want. “I’m sorry Mr. Ramirez, but I’ll have to report you for your baggy pants. And you’ll be fined $1,000.”

    Let’s all imagine Manny’s reaction, shall we?

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 12:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards!

  • Berto | July 23, 2009 at 12:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    Well, they’re team colors and team related. That’s a good thing.

  • leon | July 23, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    I was under the impression that NFL uniform “violations” were routinely met with fines. Either the teams pay them for the players or the players figure it into their entertainment budgets. WTH, they can afford it.

  • Hibbsy | July 23, 2009 at 12:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”341716″]If I was a high school football coach in Nebraska, I would outfit my entire team in 1980’s era Eric Dickerson Rams jerseys.[/quote]

    That would be a violation. You can’t have every player wearing the number 29.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 12:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”341733″]I was under the impression that NFL uniform “violations” were routinely met with fines. Either the teams pay them for the players or the players figure it into their entertainment budgets. WTH, they can afford it.[/quote]

    Money goes to NFL Charities in player’s name. Player takes it as a tax deduction. A socks violation is, I believe, $5,000. Per violation.

    —Ricko

  • bourbon soaked idiot | July 23, 2009 at 12:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    I prefer MLB’s attitude much more than the no individuality allowed standards of the No Fun League.

    Part of what makes sports fun as a kid is emulating your favorite players in both style of play and the way they dress. I used to stretch out my socks to get them to look like Pistol Pete’s.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 12:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”341732″][quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    Well, they’re team colors and team related. That’s a good thing.[/quote]

    So if Davis ordered stirrups, Red Sox-style, with gold stirrups, forest tops and two white stripes, that would be okay?

    Paul never said he didn’t like the A’s logo on the socks. He said they don’t appear to be team-issue socks.

    Unless they are? Maybe Vucinich reads UW, saw the TC Knitting socks (as if he didn’t already know about them) and ordered them for his stirrups-stash, which WOULD make them team-issue. Have to wait ’til Paul speaks with him, I guess.

    In other words, there’s a “To Be Continued” in this, I’m sure.

    —Ricko

  • mike | July 23, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    Broncos meet Dolphins…….

    http://www.sportpixn...

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 12:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”341736″][quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    I prefer MLB’s attitude much more than the no individuality allowed standards of the No Fun League.

    Part of what makes sports fun as a kid is emulating your favorite players in both style of play and the way they dress. I used to stretch out my socks to get them to look like Pistol Pete’s.[/quote]

    I gotta agree. I remember would I could ID a player in a highlight or photo almost immediately by knowing which guys on which teams wore their stirrups (or socks) which way…or (in football) who did or did not tape their shoes.

    I do, however, think that whatever they wear should be team-issue. Don’t need to see one of the Rams wear kelly green cleats as his personal statement in support of recycling.

    —Ricko

  • leon | July 23, 2009 at 12:51 pm |

    Money goes to NFL Charities in player’s name. Player takes it as a tax deduction. A socks violation is, I believe, $5,000. Per violation.

    So the incentive to adhere to the standards is….

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 12:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”341740″]Money goes to NFL Charities in player’s name. Player takes it as a tax deduction. A socks violation is, I believe, $5,000. Per violation.

    So the incentive to adhere to the standards is….[/quote]

    Yes, virtually non-existent.
    When you’re making a couple mil a year (or more), you need all the tax breaks you can get.
    Which makes it almost an incentive TO have the Uni Cops on your tail.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 12:58 pm |

    Here’s a thought:

    If, indeed, Vucinich ordered those logo socks for the A’s because of something he became aware of through Uni Watch, will that be the first actual change to a big-time uni that Uni Watch has wrought?

    Would be spectacular if it were, huh.

    —Ricko

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | July 23, 2009 at 1:02 pm |

    Team Radio Shack! Website is up. Cool 2010 Get ready Logo. Video announcement here. @TeamRadioShack

  • Steve | July 23, 2009 at 1:08 pm |

    http://www.itsthesea...

    Perhaps a “I’m calling it The Sears Tower” shirts are in order?

  • Namhob | July 23, 2009 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”341735″][quote comment=”341733″]I was under the impression that NFL uniform “violations” were routinely met with fines. Either the teams pay them for the players or the players figure it into their entertainment budgets. WTH, they can afford it.[/quote]

    Money goes to NFL Charities in player’s name. Player takes it as a tax deduction. A socks violation is, I believe, $5,000. Per violation.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    This website is dedicated to keeping track of uniform violations in a couple sports.

    http://www.uniformvi...

  • Hibbsy | July 23, 2009 at 1:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”341738″]Broncos meet Dolphins…….

    http://www.sportpixn...

    More like Broncos meet Canes.

  • mmwatkin | July 23, 2009 at 1:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    Maybe MLB can have a rule that the only stirrups allowed must have the MLB logo and Majestic logo visable?

    ;)

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 1:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”341742″]Here’s a thought:

    If, indeed, Vucinich ordered those logo socks for the A’s because of something he became aware of through Uni Watch, will that be the first actual change to a big-time uni that Uni Watch has wrought?

    Would be spectacular if it were, huh.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’m pretty certain that Steve doesn’t need any help from me to be familiar with Twin City Knitting’s product line. But even if he did learn about the logo stirrups from Uni Watch, this woudln’t be the first time UW has resulted in an on-field change. In fact, it’s not even the first time Steve has been involved in such a change:
    http://www.uniwatchb...

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 1:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”341748″][quote comment=”341742″]Here’s a thought:

    If, indeed, Vucinich ordered those logo socks for the A’s because of something he became aware of through Uni Watch, will that be the first actual change to a big-time uni that Uni Watch has wrought?

    Would be spectacular if it were, huh.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’m pretty certain that Steve doesn’t need any help from me to be familiar with Twin City Knitting’s product line. But even if he did learn about the logo stirrups from Uni Watch, this woudln’t be the first time UW has resulted in an on-field change. In fact, it’s not even the first time Steve has been involved in such a change:
    http://www.uniwatchb...
    Any idea which version of the A’s logo is on Davis’ stirrups? I can’t really tell from the picture up top.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 1:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”341748″][quote comment=”341742″]Here’s a thought:

    If, indeed, Vucinich ordered those logo socks for the A’s because of something he became aware of through Uni Watch, will that be the first actual change to a big-time uni that Uni Watch has wrought?

    Would be spectacular if it were, huh.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’m pretty certain that Steve doesn’t need any help from me to be familiar with Twin City Knitting’s product line. But even if he did learn about the logo stirrups from Uni Watch, this woudln’t be the first time UW has resulted in an on-field change. In fact, it’s not even the first time Steve has been involved in such a change:
    http://www.uniwatchb...

    Yeah, kinda figured he’d heard of TC Knitting, alluded to that.

    Correcting an oops isn’t the same as helping determine a team’s new stirrups look, though, is it?

    Ah, well, I’m being picky, I guess. I know UW has it share of clout already, Just wondered if this had the potential to be a new level.

    (Kinda hoping for the Oakland Tribune to quote him. “The logo on the stirrups? Well, there’s lot of interesting input on a web site called ‘Uni Watch’…”).

    :)

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 1:35 pm |

    Forgive me. Once a PR man, always a PR man.

    —Ricko

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”341744″]http://www.itsthesearstower.com/

    Perhaps a “I’m calling it The Sears Tower” shirts are in order?[/quote]
    Here in Chicago another local landmark is the John Hancock Center (or John Hancock Building). The controversy over the Sears Tower led one of the newspapers to print a story stating that the Hancock was definitely NOT going to change names. :-)

  • Berto | July 23, 2009 at 1:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”341737″][quote comment=”341732″][quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    Well, they’re team colors and team related. That’s a good thing.[/quote]

    So if Davis ordered stirrups, Red Sox-style, with gold stirrups, forest tops and two white stripes, that would be okay?

    Paul never said he didn’t like the A’s logo on the socks. He said they don’t appear to be team-issue socks.

    Unless they are? Maybe Vucinich reads UW, saw the TC Knitting socks (as if he didn’t already know about them) and ordered them for his stirrups-stash, which WOULD make them team-issue. Have to wait ’til Paul speaks with him, I guess.

    In other words, there’s a “To Be Continued” in this, I’m sure.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I guess it could be.

  • JimV19 | July 23, 2009 at 1:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”341736″][quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    I prefer MLB’s attitude much more than the no individuality allowed standards of the No Fun League.

    Part of what makes sports fun as a kid is emulating your favorite players in both style of play and the way they dress. I used to stretch out my socks to get them to look like Pistol Pete’s.[/quote]

    I agree socks should be uniform, but in general I prefer the MLB standards to the gestapo that is the NFL. I think you have to let some parts of the uni go, kinda like knowing which battles to choose with your kids. That might be why there’s a lot more wackiness among NFL players – they’re rebelling against an overly-restrictive parent. Set some serious non-negotiable uniform standards, but leave room for a bit of individuality.

  • John | July 23, 2009 at 1:45 pm |

    While you’re at it, ask Vucinich about Adam Kennedy’s stirrups. He’s not wearing them anymore but when he did I swear there was like an Athletic’s wordmark or something on the top.

  • Wes | July 23, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    Really cool articles and video on Page 2 today, Paul. How much input did you have on putting together the video segments – script, music, editing, etc.? I thought it came out very nicely!

  • Teebz | July 23, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”341754″]
    I agree socks should be uniform, but in general I prefer the MLB standards to the gestapo that is the NFL. I think you have to let some parts of the uni go, kinda like knowing which battles to choose with your kids. That might be why there’s a lot more wackiness among NFL players – they’re rebelling against an overly-restrictive parent. Set some serious non-negotiable uniform standards, but leave room for a bit of individuality.[/quote]

    This debate over uniformity in uniforms is why I love hockey. Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates, the uniform never comes into question. And when one player changes what the uniform looks like, it’s highly noticeable.

    Players still have individuality with numbers and their own sponsorships, especially goaltenders with their masks, but everyone looks the same for most part – exactly what a uniform should look like.

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 1:53 pm |

    A general baseball question, involving how we define things here.

    When did “White home/Gray road” become the rule in MLB?

    I ask because it would give us a reasonable benchmark for discussions of who has “never” worn–or not worn–something or the other.

    Was thinking of the discussion about dark jerseys the other day. I’m far from a Yankees champion, but applying the “White/Gray” benchmark, they probably ARE the one team that has “never” gone dark for an MLB game (meaning since dark slipped back into the equation).

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 1:56 pm |

    Or was it EVER “White/Gray”? Was it “White/Dark” and teams opted for gray because with wool flannel unis it minimized the impact of sunlight?

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 1:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”341758″]A general baseball question, involving how we define things here.

    When did “White home/Gray road” become the rule in MLB?

    I ask because it would give us a reasonable benchmark for discussions of who has “never” worn–or not worn–something or the other.

    Was thinking of the discussion about dark jerseys the other day. I’m far from a Yankees champion, but applying the “White/Gray” benchmark, they probably ARE the one team that has “never” gone dark for an MLB game (meaning since dark slipped back into the equation).

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Here’s another question: Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 2:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    Agreed. Wear the socks how you wish, but wear socks (or stirrups), for crying out loud.

  • LI Phil | July 23, 2009 at 2:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”341757″][quote comment=”341754″]
    I agree socks should be uniform, but in general I prefer the MLB standards to the gestapo that is the NFL. I think you have to let some parts of the uni go, kinda like knowing which battles to choose with your kids. That might be why there’s a lot more wackiness among NFL players – they’re rebelling against an overly-restrictive parent. Set some serious non-negotiable uniform standards, but leave room for a bit of individuality.[/quote]

    This debate over uniformity in uniforms is why I love hockey. Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates, the uniform never comes into question. And when one player changes what the uniform looks like, it’s highly noticeable.

    Players still have individuality with numbers and their own sponsorships, especially goaltenders with their masks, but everyone looks the same for most part – exactly what a uniform should look like.[/quote]

    wow…teebz…

    first time in a while we are in total and complete 100% agreement

    usually it’s pretty close, but you’re exactly right on this one

    +1

  • Judd | July 23, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”341761″][quote comment=”341731″][quote comment=”341729″][quote comment=”341659″][quote comment=”341656″]Why is it ok for Jamie Moyer to wear Liberty Bell stirrups when you think it’s a bit too much for Rajai Davis to wear stirrups with the A’s logo on it?[/quote]

    The Liberty Bell stirrups are part of Philly’s official uni set. And the Liberty Bell logo doesn’t appear anywhere else on the uniform, so it’s a nice little bonus.[/quote]

    But Paul, didn’t you say you liked & showed the old Twins “TC” stirrups as well as the old navy Astros orange-star stirrups in past blog entries? Any stirrups seen should be considered a victory in itself.[/quote]

    In general, yeah. What really concerns me is the idea that you can just grab any stirrups — or any socks at all, official or not — and wear them on the field. It all reflects a failure to take this part of the uniform seriously. Impose some standards![/quote]

    Agreed. Wear the socks how you wish, but wear socks (or stirrups), for crying out loud.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”341760″][quote comment=”341758″]A general baseball question, involving how we define things here.

    When did “White home/Gray road” become the rule in MLB?

    I ask because it would give us a reasonable benchmark for discussions of who has “never” worn–or not worn–something or the other.

    Was thinking of the discussion about dark jerseys the other day. I’m far from a Yankees champion, but applying the “White/Gray” benchmark, they probably ARE the one team that has “never” gone dark for an MLB game (meaning since dark slipped back into the equation).

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Here’s another question: Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)[/quote]

    Atlanta – St Louis in the 1982 NLCS?

  • Mark in Shiga | July 23, 2009 at 2:08 pm |

    Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

    Surely there were many in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1984 NLCS between the Cubs and Padres, neither team had any gray in any of their uniforms.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 2:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”341764″] Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

    Surely there were many in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1984 NLCS between the Cubs and Padres, neither team had any gray in any of their uniforms.[/quote]

    You’re a winner! Darn, that was easier than I thought. I’ll see, when time permits, if I can determine whether this ever happened any other time.

  • bourbon soaked idiot | July 23, 2009 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”341762″][quote comment=”341757″][quote comment=”341754″]
    I agree socks should be uniform, but in general I prefer the MLB standards to the gestapo that is the NFL. I think you have to let some parts of the uni go, kinda like knowing which battles to choose with your kids. That might be why there’s a lot more wackiness among NFL players – they’re rebelling against an overly-restrictive parent. Set some serious non-negotiable uniform standards, but leave room for a bit of individuality.[/quote]

    This debate over uniformity in uniforms is why I love hockey. Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates, the uniform never comes into question. And when one player changes what the uniform looks like, it’s highly noticeable.

    Players still have individuality with numbers and their own sponsorships, especially goaltenders with their masks, but everyone looks the same for most part – exactly what a uniform should look like.[/quote]

    wow…teebz…

    first time in a while we are in total and complete 100% agreement

    usually it’s pretty close, but you’re exactly right on this one

    +1[/quote]

    Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates… All that’s left is sweaters, breezers and socks. Not much room work with, but you get guys like Gretzky and Jagr who tuck their sweaters and the guy on the blackhawks who wears his socks low. I think it’s great. And how boring would it be if all goalies had to wear the same mask.

  • Teebz | July 23, 2009 at 2:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”341766″]
    Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates… All that’s left is sweaters, breezers and socks. Not much room work with, but you get guys like Gretzky and Jagr who tuck their sweaters and the guy on the blackhawks who wears his socks low. I think it’s great. And how boring would it be if all goalies had to wear the same mask.[/quote]

    True, to a degree, bourbon…

    However, if you and I worked at McDonald’s, I would expect that we wouldn’t be mandated to wear the same underwear brand. LOL

    The shirt, pants, cap, and shoes that MickeyDee’s hands out to its employees are similar in style and appearance, though. Yeah, you can add a piece of flair (a la Office Space, and Gretzky’s and Jagr’s tuck) like a button, but the overall appearance is identical between employees because it’s their accepted uniform. Or, in other words, we’re all uniform in uniforms. :o)

  • Teebz | July 23, 2009 at 2:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”341767″][quote comment=”341766″]
    Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates… All that’s left is sweaters, breezers and socks. Not much room work with, but you get guys like Gretzky and Jagr who tuck their sweaters and the guy on the blackhawks who wears his socks low. I think it’s great. And how boring would it be if all goalies had to wear the same mask.[/quote]

    True, to a degree, bourbon…

    However, if you and I worked at McDonald’s, I would expect that we wouldn’t be mandated to wear the same underwear brand. LOL

    The shirt, pants, cap, and shoes that MickeyDee’s hands out to its employees are similar in style and appearance, though. Yeah, you can add a piece of flair (a la Office Space, and Gretzky’s and Jagr’s tuck) like a button, but the overall appearance is identical between employees because it’s their accepted uniform. Or, in other words, we’re all uniform in uniforms. :o)[/quote]

    I think I just argued that we agree by the same defintion now that I re-read what Bourbon wrote. LOL

    I need this day to end shortly. I’m struggling.

  • JimV19 | July 23, 2009 at 2:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”341768″][quote comment=”341767″][quote comment=”341766″]
    Aside from individual sponsorships for gloves, helmets, sticks, and skates… All that’s left is sweaters, breezers and socks. Not much room work with, but you get guys like Gretzky and Jagr who tuck their sweaters and the guy on the blackhawks who wears his socks low. I think it’s great. And how boring would it be if all goalies had to wear the same mask.[/quote]

    True, to a degree, bourbon…

    However, if you and I worked at McDonald’s, I would expect that we wouldn’t be mandated to wear the same underwear brand. LOL

    The shirt, pants, cap, and shoes that MickeyDee’s hands out to its employees are similar in style and appearance, though. Yeah, you can add a piece of flair (a la Office Space, and Gretzky’s and Jagr’s tuck) like a button, but the overall appearance is identical between employees because it’s their accepted uniform. Or, in other words, we’re all uniform in uniforms. :o)[/quote]

    I think I just argued that we agree by the same defintion now that I re-read what Bourbon wrote. LOL

    I need this day to end shortly. I’m struggling.[/quote]

    We just need Bourbon to share some bourbon…

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 2:32 pm |

    And some guys tuck in theirs socks, and some wear tubes that look a little like leggings, blousing down over the skates. Others tape the bottom of their socks (or they used to back in the day) or tape around their shin pads differently.

    Still a bit of individuality there. Which is okay, I think. Makes it easy to ID certain players.

    Some much of sport is about individual moments when an individual’s skill and instinct come into play. Hard (and perhaps inadvisable) to completely legislate it out of things for the sake of some kind of ersatz military or Orwellian conformity.

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | July 23, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”341756″]Really cool articles and video on Page 2 today, Paul. How much input did you have on putting together the video segments – script, music, editing, etc.? I thought it came out very nicely![/quote]

    Thanks, man — glad you enjoyed.

    The video was shot way back in late March, but it didn’t take that long to produce the finished footage (for various reasons not worth explaining here, the piece was originally supposed to run in April but then was bumped back to now). There was no script — never is for my video pieces. Basically, I just show up, a local video crew is hired and shows up, and we shoot a few hrs’ worth of footage at the site. Ideally, the story just tells itself via the process of my asking questions.

    The tapes are sent to Bristol, where an editor boils everything down to a manageable length and adds music, graphics, etc. That usually takes a few days. I’m not present for the editing, but the editor consults with me, asks me what should definitely be cut, what should definitely NOT be cut, etc.

    I usually wait until the video is edited before I start writing the accompanying text, because I want the text to complement the video. In this case, I didn’t initially intend to run the Jeff Idelson interview as a separate page/column (my plan was just to use a few quotes from him), but I thought there was too much good stuff in that interview to let it go to waste, so I decided to transcribe the whole thing and make it a “bonus” column.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 2:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”341765″][quote comment=”341764″] Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

    Surely there were many in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1984 NLCS between the Cubs and Padres, neither team had any gray in any of their uniforms.[/quote]

    You’re a winner! Darn, that was easier than I thought. I’ll see, when time permits, if I can determine whether this ever happened any other time.[/quote]

    If you don’t include powder blue as merely another version of the traditional grey road uniform, then the 1982 NLCS (St. Louis vs. Atlanta) would also qualify as a grey-less series, but I don’t think it’s the same thing as 1984, when both Cubs and Pads wore dark jerseys and white pants on the road.

  • Judd | July 23, 2009 at 2:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”341772″][quote comment=”341765″][quote comment=”341764″] Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

    Surely there were many in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1984 NLCS between the Cubs and Padres, neither team had any gray in any of their uniforms.[/quote]

    You’re a winner! Darn, that was easier than I thought. I’ll see, when time permits, if I can determine whether this ever happened any other time.[/quote]

    If you don’t include powder blue as merely another version of the traditional grey road uniform, then the 1982 NLCS (St. Louis vs. Atlanta) would also qualify as a grey-less series, but I don’t think it’s the same thing as 1984, when both Cubs and Pads wore dark jerseys and white pants on the road.[/quote]

    The 1980 World Series Philly vs KC was another powder blue-for-all..

  • John English | July 23, 2009 at 2:48 pm |

    Paul, pleasew don’t encourage MLB to institute standards wth re to stirrups.

    You HAVE to know that if they did that we’d never see another stirrup again.

    Beggars can’t be choosers. Embrace Rajai’s wonderful hose.

  • Kek | July 23, 2009 at 2:52 pm |

    85 ALCS: Toronto/KC, I don’t think there would have been gray in that one.

  • Kek | July 23, 2009 at 2:57 pm |

    Also, are we counting the World Series, there would have been three in the 80s:
    1980: Philly/KC
    1982: St.L/Milwuaukee
    1985: KC/St.L

  • Namhob | July 23, 2009 at 3:02 pm |

    A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?

  • JimV19 | July 23, 2009 at 3:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”341727″][quote comment=”341706″]Today’s ESPN columns are up. This one has a two-part video component:
    http://sports.espn.g...

    And this one supplements the first one:
    http://sports.espn.g...

    Great stuff, Paul![/quote]

    Indeed. I need to get to the Hall of Fame someday. Thanks for the reminder.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 3:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”341773″][quote comment=”341772″][quote comment=”341765″][quote comment=”341764″] Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

    Surely there were many in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1984 NLCS between the Cubs and Padres, neither team had any gray in any of their uniforms.[/quote]

    You’re a winner! Darn, that was easier than I thought. I’ll see, when time permits, if I can determine whether this ever happened any other time.[/quote]

    If you don’t include powder blue as merely another version of the traditional grey road uniform, then the 1982 NLCS (St. Louis vs. Atlanta) would also qualify as a grey-less series, but I don’t think it’s the same thing as 1984, when both Cubs and Pads wore dark jerseys and white pants on the road.[/quote]

    The 1980 World Series Philly vs KC was another powder blue-for-all..[/quote]

    I guess I should have phrased the question this way: Has there ever been a postseason series were both teams wore white pants for every game?

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 3:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”341779″][quote comment=”341773″][quote comment=”341772″][quote comment=”341765″][quote comment=”341764″] Name an MLB postseason playoff series where neither team wore grey? (And, yes, games were played at both teams’ home ball parks.)

    Surely there were many in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1984 NLCS between the Cubs and Padres, neither team had any gray in any of their uniforms.[/quote]

    You’re a winner! Darn, that was easier than I thought. I’ll see, when time permits, if I can determine whether this ever happened any other time.[/quote]

    If you don’t include powder blue as merely another version of the traditional grey road uniform, then the 1982 NLCS (St. Louis vs. Atlanta) would also qualify as a grey-less series, but I don’t think it’s the same thing as 1984, when both Cubs and Pads wore dark jerseys and white pants on the road.[/quote]

    The 1980 World Series Philly vs KC was another powder blue-for-all..[/quote]

    I guess I should have phrased the question this way: Has there ever been a postseason series were both teams wore white pants for every game?[/quote]

    I mean, except for 1984, has there ever been a postseason series where both teams wore white pants for every game?

  • M.Princip | July 23, 2009 at 3:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”341771″][quote comment=”341756″]Really cool articles and video on Page 2 today, Paul. How much input did you have on putting together the video segments – script, music, editing, etc.? I thought it came out very nicely![/quote]

    Thanks, man — glad you enjoyed.

    The video was shot way back in late March, but it didn’t take that long to produce the finished footage (for various reasons not worth explaining here, the piece was originally supposed to run in April but then was bumped back to now). There was no script — never is for my video pieces. Basically, I just show up, a local video crew is hired and shows up, and we shoot a few hrs’ worth of footage at the site. Ideally, the story just tells itself via the process of my asking questions.

    The tapes are sent to Bristol, where an editor boils everything down to a manageable length and adds music, graphics, etc. That usually takes a few days. I’m not present for the editing, but the editor consults with me, asks me what should definitely be cut, what should definitely NOT be cut, etc.

    I usually wait until the video is edited before I start writing the accompanying text, because I want the text to complement the video. In this case, I didn’t initially intend to run the Jeff Idelson interview as a separate page/column (my plan was just to use a few quotes from him), but I thought there was too much good stuff in that interview to let it go to waste, so I decided to transcribe the whole thing and make it a “bonus” column.[/quote]

    Thanks for the additional information here on how it all comes together Paul. Gotta say I really enjoyed the article/video as well. Somehow I knew you didn’t have a hand at the music, since, it seemed a wee bit generic.

  • iLO | July 23, 2009 at 3:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”341726″][quote comment=”341725″][quote comment=”341719″][quote comment=”341718″]But the larger issue is that this really speaks to how MLB has completely lost control of lower-leg styling.

    Just curious, but why should the commissioner be in control of something like that? I’d rather have each team decide on their look individually.[/quote]

    Fine — have each team come up with its own standard look and make them stick to it. That’s all I meant. But it’s crazy that there’s essentially NO protocol for pants and socks.[/quote]

    Odd thing about that is that only the NFL and NCAA footballhave sprta strict policies on such things. MLB and NBA/NCAA hoops have, comparatively speaking, traditionally left “from the knees down and the elbows down” as areas of relatively free expression.

    Not saying what’s right or wrong, just what has been.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The NFL may have regulations, but they don’t always enforce them.[/quote]

    That first picture is definitely a redone Deion Sanders illustration.

  • Berto | July 23, 2009 at 3:44 pm |

    “Embrace Rajai’s wonderful hose.”

    -Who wants to sex Mutumbo?

  • joe | July 23, 2009 at 3:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”341709″][quote comment=”341674″][quote comment=”341669″]Wilt could do it all…I seem to recall that he played in a pro volleyball and considered boxing.[/quote]

    I recall a show featuring Howard Cosell, Muhammad Ali, and Wilt (yeah, when originally shown) and Ali kept baiting Wilt to box him. Wilt’s response each time was to produce a contract and it would be a done deal. Wilt was also quite a swordsman, coxswain, and bareback equestrian![/quote]

    Yeah, but could he teach German shepherds to bark in Russian? Did his blood smell like cologne? Did the sun come up later on May 6, in case his Cinco party ran late?[/quote]
    that would be German Shepard in Spanish, he could speack french, in russian.

  • Clay | July 23, 2009 at 4:11 pm |

    Does anyone know if the stirrups from Roberts “Stirrup Club” have logos? I bought a pair of Cardinal stirrups and now am curious if they will have the STL or not.

  • adam | July 23, 2009 at 4:12 pm |

    Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game

  • Kek | July 23, 2009 at 4:14 pm |

    Perfect game…..put it on the boooooooooooooard

    YES!

  • aflfan | July 23, 2009 at 4:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”341786″]Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game[/quote]

    He owes his CF something special for that catch in the ninth.

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 4:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”341788″][quote comment=”341786″]Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game[/quote]

    He owes his CF something special for that catch in the ninth.[/quote]
    Can you really call it “perfect” even though they wore these?

  • Paul W | July 23, 2009 at 4:35 pm |

    Next year’s all star game released:

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

  • Paul W | July 23, 2009 at 4:36 pm |

    All star game [logo]

  • Jeff | July 23, 2009 at 4:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”341789″][quote comment=”341788″][quote comment=”341786″]Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game[/quote]

    He owes his CF something special for that catch in the ninth.[/quote]
    Can you really call it “perfect” even though they wore these?[/quote]

    Is this the first perfect game in an alternate uniform?

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 4:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”341789″]Can you really call it “perfect” even though they wore these?[/quote]

    Jealousy is ugly on you, old friend. :-)

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 4:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”341792″]
    Is this the first perfect game in an alternate uniform?[/quote]First perfecto in five years if that helps.

    In history, this is # 18. I’m guessing we don’t have to research the first 15 or so for uniforms.

  • Jeff | July 23, 2009 at 4:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”341777″]A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?[/quote]

    2002 World Series.

  • Jeff | July 23, 2009 at 4:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”341794″][quote comment=”341792″]
    Is this the first perfect game in an alternate uniform?[/quote]First perfecto in five years if that helps.

    In history, this is # 18. I’m guessing we don’t have to research the first 15 or so for uniforms.[/quote]

    #17 looks clean: http://a.espncdn.com...

  • Nick | July 23, 2009 at 4:47 pm |

    I was going to post this a few days ago but it somehow slipped my mind.

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

    You know how MLB pitchers write messages on the underbrim of their caps? This article talks about what Philly Police officers keep under their hats – things like pamphlets, prayer cards and pictures of friends who lost their lives in the line of duty.

  • LI Phil | July 23, 2009 at 4:48 pm |

    did wells or cone wear alts?

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 4:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”341798″]did wells or cone wear alts?[/quote]

    Cone: typical home Yankee pinstripes.

    http://lens.blogs.ny...

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 4:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”341799″]Cone: typical home Yankee pinstripes.[/quote]
    And the same for Wells, if you trust YouTube.

    I’m sure that Cooperstown will want Buhrle’s uniform, but Uniwatch should consider putting in a request anyway. ;-)

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 4:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”341798″]did wells or cone wear alts?[/quote]
    Does a size 68 count as an alt?

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 5:00 pm |

    Damn. Mr. Pedia, you are right on top of things.

  • Geeman | July 23, 2009 at 5:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”341795″][quote comment=”341777″]A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?[/quote]

    2002 World Series.[/quote]

    Sure. Except for 1979 (Pirates-Orioles), and 1972-74 (all the Series the A’s were in), I don’t think alternates were worn until the Indians did it in 1995.

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 5:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”341792″]
    Is this the first perfect game in an alternate uniform?[/quote]

    Probably the first in an alt uniform; and undoubtedly the first time Barack Obama has called the pitcher to offer congratulations. :-)

    (I think Barack would have called even if the Sox were in their home pinstripes today.)

  • Christopher | July 23, 2009 at 5:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”341792″][quote comment=”341789″][quote comment=”341788″][quote comment=”341786″]Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game[/quote]

    He owes his CF something special for that catch in the ninth.[/quote]
    Can you really call it “perfect” even though they wore these?[/quote]

    Is this the first perfect game in an alternate uniform?[/quote]

    I want to say Randy Johnson was wearing an alt?

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 5:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”341805″]
    I want to say Randy Johnson was wearing an alt?[/quote]
    It was a vest, so whatever that counts as:

    http://nbcsports.msn...

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 5:55 pm |

    I’d say a vest was an Alt.

  • Mike Engle | July 23, 2009 at 5:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”341795″][quote comment=”341777″]A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?[/quote]

    2002 World Series.[/quote]
    Even more recent. The last World Series, Rays and Phillies. The Rays debuted their double-blue scheme that year and did not have their softball top at that time. The Phillies also do not have a softball top.
    It’s also the last consistent “name v name” series, i.e.: no “Philadelphia” or “Tampa Bay” jerseys. Always read as “Phillies” v “Rays.” Personally, I was rooting for the cream alts to make an appearance, as it would have been a WS matchup of two brand new jerseys.

  • =bg= | July 23, 2009 at 6:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”341788″][quote comment=”341786″]Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game[/quote]

    He owes his CF something special for that catch in the ninth.[/quote]

    I see a Rolex in someone’s future.

  • Mike Engle | July 23, 2009 at 6:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”341809″][quote comment=”341788″][quote comment=”341786″]Burhle of the Chi SOX fisnished a perfect game[/quote]

    He owes his CF something special for that catch in the ninth.[/quote]

    I see a Rolex in someone’s future.[/quote]
    $56 says Buehrle wears the black jersey next home start.

  • Jeff | July 23, 2009 at 6:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”341807″]I’d say a vest was an Alt.[/quote]

    I’d say NOT an alt. The vest, to my knowledge, was Arizona’s “official” road uniform that year.

  • Jeff P | July 23, 2009 at 6:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”341800″][quote comment=”341799″]Cone: typical home Yankee pinstripes.[/quote]
    And the same for Wells, if you trust YouTube.

    I’m sure that Cooperstown will want Buhrle’s uniform, but Uniwatch should consider putting in a request anyway. ;-)[/quote]
    I think we have a certain guy in mom jeans and a white sox jacket ahead of us too.

  • Mike Engle | July 23, 2009 at 6:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”341790″]Next year’s all star game released:

    http://shop.mlb.com/...
    I REALLY like that logo.

  • Rich | July 23, 2009 at 7:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”341795″][quote comment=”341777″]A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?[/quote]

    2002 World Series.[/quote]

    ….and what a GREAT series it was! Seven full games and one hell of a comeback to stay alive in game 6. There is a reason my lisence plate reads 02 GAME6.

    ps, dig the ASG logo too

  • Mike Engle | July 23, 2009 at 7:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”341808″][quote comment=”341795″][quote comment=”341777″]A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?[/quote]

    2002 World Series.[/quote]
    Even more recent. The last World Series, Rays and Phillies. The Rays debuted their double-blue scheme that year and did not have their softball top at that time. The Phillies also do not have a softball top.
    It’s also the last consistent “name v name” series, i.e.: no “Philadelphia” or “Tampa Bay” jerseys. Always read as “Phillies” v “Rays.” Personally, I was rooting for the cream alts to make an appearance, as it would have been a WS matchup of two brand new jerseys.[/quote]
    And also the 2006 World Series between the Tigers and the Cardinals. Notable because each team had distinct home and road caps (a marketing dream: FOUR authentic hats that could legitimately be sold with patches) and because Sparky Anderson’s “two WS, two leagues” claim to fame would be shared regardless.

  • Momofuku | July 23, 2009 at 7:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”341664″]”the President of Kenya ”

    Paul:

    I know that this is your site, and I, too, do not like the health care plan, But I find that comment a little too offensive.[/quote]

    Peter,

    Don’t be upset, you see the Mets have begun their annual September slide two months early this year. You couple that with the Yankees being in first place – Paul probably had a mini-stroke or something. Wait until Pedro blanks them in a couple of weeks – then the fur will fly.

  • Aaron Scholder | July 23, 2009 at 7:51 pm |

    Solid uni list done by the NY Daily News:
    http://www.nydailyne...

  • Pflava | July 23, 2009 at 8:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”341817″]Solid uni list done by the NY Daily News:
    http://www.nydailyne...

    Solid list indeed…until they mentioned the Chargers current light blues and the pinstriped Magic.

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 8:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”341810″]$56 says Buehrle…[/quote]

    ;-)))

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 8:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”341809″]I see a Rolex in someone’s future.[/quote]
    Already asked, but not answered: In the post-game Buehrle said that for his no-no he gave everyone on the squad a watch, and he noted that now he’ll have to top that for this perfecto.

    Some of the talking heads here have noted that there was only the briefest of glances towards the wall as Wise took off full steam ahead.

  • anotherguy | July 23, 2009 at 8:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”341820″][quote comment=”341809″]I see a Rolex in someone’s future.[/quote]
    Already asked, but not answered… [/quote]

    Interesting trivia on who actually asked the question about what Burhle owes Dewayne Wise: I think the local reporter who asked that is the owner of the original tape of Lee Elia’s tirade at Cubs fans. :-) Elia tried to get it back, but the genie was long out of the bottle.

  • Casey (Davis, CA) | July 23, 2009 at 9:52 pm |

    Rajai Davis is wearing the logo stirrups again tonight.

  • Lou | July 23, 2009 at 9:54 pm |

    Paul,

    Great piece, but I have a question for you. If the video was shot in March, did they make up 2 extra Gossage plaques just for your piece? I see in the facts that only 1 plaque is made of each player. What is going to happen to these Extra Gooses? It would have been cool if you could have since the Rice and Henderson plaques actually being made.

  • ATLShaun | July 23, 2009 at 9:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”341657″]It can’t be McCann’s helmet on the Braves coach. McCann’s would come down in the back, like a regular batting helmet. That coach is sporting the John Olerud, on-field version.[/quote]

    McCann’s catching helmet from the ASG, not his batting helmet

  • ATLShaun | July 23, 2009 at 9:57 pm |

    he doesnt use the hockey style

  • LI Phil | July 23, 2009 at 10:00 pm |

    anyone watching MLB network (cards/nats)…

    brendan ryan just flew out to nyjer morgan

    and all was right with the world

  • MPowers1634 | July 23, 2009 at 10:02 pm |

    Solid uni list done by the NY Daily News:
    http://www.nydailyne

    Speaking of which, the New York Times has a GREAT article on how Branch Rickey and William Shea attempted to start a third Continental League in the majors which enede up just being a ruse to get the league to expand.

    BTW…here is John Lester and Russell martin wearing some Livestrong gear:

    http://d.yimg.com/a/...

    http://d.yimg.com/a/...

    http://cache3.asset-...

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 10:09 pm |

    On the subject of today being the only perfect game pitched in an alt uni, I’ve done some less-than-thorough research today.

    Here are the pitchers who were on teams that I know for sure had an alt during the season of the perfect game:

    Randy Johnson (Arizona, 2004) – clearly not wearing an alt.
    Len Barker (Cleveland, 1981) – also not an alt.
    Catfish Hunter (Oakland, 1968) – Ummm… maybe an alt? That’s the best picture I could find. You tell me if those unis are yellow or white.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Watching the replay of today’s game now. Hawk Harrelson clearly in violation of the “don’t mention you-know-what” rule: “CALL YOUR SONS! CALL YOUR DAUGHTERS! CALL YOUR FRIENDS! CALL YOUR NEIGHBORS! MARK BUEHRLE HAS A PERFECT GAME GOING TO THE NINTH!”

  • Ricko | July 23, 2009 at 10:24 pm |

    Was just now looking for a photo of the Twins’ “vests” so I searched google images for Livan Hernandez. Amazing. Looks like an album of MLB unis. He has been SO many places.

    LOL

    —Ricko

  • MPowers1634 | July 23, 2009 at 10:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”341829″]Was just now looking for a photo of the Twins’ “vests” so I searched google images for Livan Hernandez. Amazing. Looks like an album of MLB unis. He has been SO many places.

    LOL

    —Ricko[/quote]

    He is the Jimmy Jackson of MLB.
    imagine what you could find if you were to look up Kenny Lofton or Gary Sheffield.

  • =bg= | July 23, 2009 at 10:35 pm |

    Anyone heard if the Cowboys have a new uni refresh for this season, when they open the new place?

  • JTH | July 23, 2009 at 10:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”341831″]Anyone heard if the Cowboys have a new uni refresh for this season, when they open the new place?[/quote]
    Neither this guy nor this one will be wearing one. That’s gotta be pretty refreshing.

  • Patrick in MI | July 23, 2009 at 11:28 pm |

    Do the Chargers really need 6 different unis this season?! I sure hope the equipment manager gets a HUGE bonus for Christmas. Six different unis, is that a record for one team in a season?

  • troy | July 23, 2009 at 11:38 pm |

    Some help for anyone who has trouble with those 5950 stickers
    http://www.flipflopf...

  • Kek | July 24, 2009 at 8:39 am |

    [quote comment=”341803″][quote comment=”341795″][quote comment=”341777″]A better question would be, since the heyday of of the alt jersey, has there been a post season series that featured nothing but white jerseys versus gray jerseys?[/quote]

    2002 World Series.[/quote]

    Sure. Except for 1979 (Pirates-Orioles), and 1972-74 (all the Series the A’s were in), I don’t think alternates were worn until the Indians did it in 1995.[/quote]
    No on the Pirates and A’s. Neither of those teams was in a true alternate. To me, alternate jersey means something in place of the standard white home or gray road. The A’s green and gold and the Pirates’ black and gold were standard issue in lieu of gray roads.

    The O’s orange, on the other ahand was a true alt, because it was worn at home in place of the white.

  • Anthony | July 24, 2009 at 10:19 am |

    Scored a 18, the batting helmet ? is a good one. The “42” ? was difficult to understand.

    It used to be common when a new player joined the team on a road trip or something, he would play with no name on the back of his jersey. This hasn’t happened in years. Can anyone remember who the last player was that had this happen?

  • Bucket | July 24, 2009 at 1:07 pm |

    That HS football slideshow is not about Nebraska. Those are NFHS rules which are used by 48 states. It is not a Nebraska thing.