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

Ricko’s Rules, Volume I

Multi club smallBy Phil Hecken, with Rick Pearson

We haven’t heard from Ricko in a while. Well, we hear from him everyday on the boards with his anachronistic tirades and bad jokes sage advice and well placed humor. But, we haven’t had him help out with an entry in a while. He’s got a few opinions, ya know — of course, when you’re been on earth long enough to have caught the first two acts of Our American Cousin in ’65, you tend to look at certain things and just know there’s a “right way” and a “wrong way” to do things. And then, there’s Ricko’s way. In this installment, we’re going to look at “Ricko’s Rules” as they apply to stirrups, pant lengths, cleats, alternates, and other things about the great game of baseball. As you will see below, Rick’s got his opinions on the way things should be. I may agree with some, and I may disagree with some, but you gotta admit — the man has a point. I’ll be back after you read the rules with my thoughts on this. Here’s Ricko:

= = =

Ah, rules, don’t you hate ‘em.

So let’s call these “Rules of Thumb,” some of them anyway. Or maybe “Perspective on What Was Cool and Not Cool in the Era When Stirrups Weren’t an Optional Part of an MLB Uniform”. For this discussion, we’ll focus largely on the ‘60’s and ‘70s’, since that’s when players started individualizing the way they chose to wear their hose and britches.

From there, they’ll morph (or maybe that’s “devolve”) into some that apply to Today’s Style Guide or Lack Thereof.

Okay…

1. The Lower the Stirrup the Higher the Pants Can, and Should, Be. Exhibit A: Big Red Machine. Exhibit B: Mr. Cub. Exhibit c: Brendan Ryan (although his pants are just a smidge too short).

2. If You Pull Your Stirrups Up High, Your Pants Should Come Down to Meet Them (or even overlap them a bit). The Outman look, or Arizona State in recent CWS would have been considered Geekdom of the highest order in the waning days of the Stirrup Era. Very Little League. Hawk Harrelson, one of the earliest proponents of high stirrups and tight pants did it very well, most of the time. Even he pushed “geeky” from time to time, though. Same could be said for Vida Blue, who came along a few seasons later, who most times did the whole high stirrups/short pants thing to too much of an extreme.

3. Pants Rarely Look Good (with Stirrups) Lower Than Mid Calf. This was sorta of the routine look for a lot of nondescript MLBers at the time. Oh, some great players opted for it, but visually was just kinda “I put on my uniform and don’t care about how I look.”

4. Black Cleats Look Better With White Laces. Exceptions: Shoes with large, obvious logo identifiers, or if solid black footwear has become a team trademark. Exhibit B: Big Red Machine.

5. High or Medium Cut Cleats Should Never Be Worn With Stirrups. See Buckner, Bill, 1986 World Series (Stooooopid). If you do wear ‘em, wear stirrup-less high socks of a similar or identical color so the big, clunky things aren’t so obvious …or cover ‘em up with the pajama bottoms look. Think of your image. And if the whites are HIGH TOPS, well, cover ’em or get over to the basketball court where you belong.

6. White Cleats Look Good Only with Stirrups and Lighter-Colored Sanitaries…or with Pajama Pants…and are Best When Part of an Overall Uni Design. Examples: Oakland A’s beginning in late ‘60s, Tequila Sunrise Astros, Padres, both Taco and pre-Taco. Marginal: Giants orange sanis with white cleats (home only) in late ‘70s, early 80’s. Bad: 1975 Phillies, 1970’s Angels and last Senators keeping regular unis and just switching to white cleats for the hell of it.

7. Sanis NEVER NEVER NEVER Darker Than (or Similar Degree of Light-to Dark as) Stirrups. As much as I enjoyed the White Sox taking a shot at it in ’69 and ’70, it still looks like they’re wearing galoshes (rubber rain boots, for those who don’t know “galoshes”).

8. Do NOT Let Stirrup-less Dark Socks Show With Light Colored Shoes. Unless you LIKE looking like an 80-year-old working in his yard in Boca Raton. Or the girls phy. ed class at Our Lady of the Perpetual Self-Gratification. Then, hey, go for it. But you really should go with pajama pants or stirrups (with light-colored sanis). I mean, seriously, think of your image.

9. Pants Way, Way High (the football pants look) is Okay But Not Let’s Get Ridiculous About It. If your pants don’t overlap your socks (which should only be low, low stirrups or stirrup-less, btw), then you should you should be playing corner for the Packers.

10. You’re Either a Sleeveless Team or You’re Not. Stop with the alternate “vests,” already. And for the love of God, if you MUST wear a vest, at least make sure the undershirt is a different color from the vest. (Although even purple sleeves don’t save that thing.)

11. Pitchers Don’t Get to Pick the Jersey du Jour. Oh, please, wear the frickin’ uniform the team says to wear. Can you imagine the havoc if such nonsense had been around during the nine-basic-combos bumblebee Pirates era, or the A’s white-gold-seafoam days? Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

12. NEVER Dark-on-Dark. Alts appear to be here to stay. So, could we at least always have one of the teams in any game be in white or gray (depending on who’s the home team, of course)? Would avoiding this be so hard?

13. Blue Jays and Royals Need to Lose the Powder Blues at Home. Yeah, they’re fun, but — hello — those were ROAD uniforms. Says something about that era, though, doesn’t it…that many teams’ road unis were more memorable than their homes.

There you go, 13, a good place to stop.

Now, don’t beat me up too badly. This is just to give some perspective on today’s styles…based on the way things went in the years when color TV, double knit and logos-on-cleats changed the way baseball looked.

And that photo of me? At 55+ softball a couple years ago, I decided to wear as many colors as possible on my birthday. Hey, if you can’t have fun…

= = =

Other than that, how was the play? Thanks Rick, for this installment of “Ricko’s Rules.” Gotta say, I am wont to agree with almost all of your points. Although I grew up in the “high stirrup” era, I have since come around to liking the style of the generation of players immediately preceding that. Perfect example being Ernie Banks, who, no matter what year uniform he’s wearing, the stirrups were always perfect. Today’s players would do well not only to wear stirrups, but to emulate Mr. Cub.

I note Rick didn’t address some things I’d consider “my rules,” although if anyone were to ask me, (but no one did), I’ll tell you a couple anyway. 1) PINSTRIPES do NOT belong on a road uni. Period. No exceptions. As a codicil to this rule, I would add also that pinstripes do not belong on vests. 2) “Vests” as they exist today should be eliminated. They are not vests, but rather sleeveless jerseys. And, 3) A uniform is just that — Those wearing it should also be uniform. I know I’m in the minority, but I don’t mind if a team has a certain “look,” but I hate it when individual players feel they can go styling every which way — you say it’s individuality, and you’re right — but it’s a team game. Dress like a team, not 25 individuals who happen to roughly resemble each other. I’d rather 25 guys ALL dressed like ManRam than to have 25 different stylists all dressing as they see fit. I’m sure most of you disagree with me on that one, but that’s my rule. The aforepictured Colorado Rockies violate all three of these rules in one fell swoop. In fact, if I were to ever have to nominate a “worst baseball uniform ever,” that would certainly be a nominee. I have more rules, but I’ll leave you with those three.

So what do you guys think? Do you agree or disagree with the sage prophet of Uni Watch? Do you have any “rules” of your own? Let’s hear it. I’m sure Ricko will be back with more rules for other sports too, so if baseball stirrups and cleats aren’t your thing, fear not.

~~~~~~~~~~

helpResearch Request: In working on Ricko’s Rules, Mr. Pearson told me he’s 99.99% certain that during an All Star Game, at least one Cleveland Indians player sported a monochrome blue uniform(!). Now, most of you are aware that during the 1970’s, the Indians did sport the infamous all-red uniform from 1975 thru 1977. However, I was unaware they ever wore an all-blue get up. If they did wear such a thing, it most likely would have been during the same years, although the Indians wore a blue jersey from 1975 through 1985. What I’m looking for, particularly from you guys who have past All Star Games on tape or dvd, or anyone who may remember this, is photographic evidence of the all-blue uniform. If such a beast does exist, please either post it in the comments or shoot me an e-mail. Thanks!

~~~~~~~~~~

scoreboardGuess The Game From The Scoreboard: In honor of today’s “guest speaker,” I actually found a scoreboard that may predate Ricko. While you can probably easily figure out the year and the location, the actual date of the game may prove more difficult. As always, date, location & final score please, and do let us know how you went about figuring it out. OK? Guess The Game.

~~~~~~~~~~

benchies headerAnd, since today’s topic deals with, among other things, the wrong way to wear stirrups, today’s “Benchies” is rather apropos. Check out Mick — he’s the one on the right — and his lower leg stylings, which are in stark contrast to the big guy, Mike, seated next to him. Here’s Today’s Benchies. Enjoy.

~~~~~~~~~~

mets red cap recordIt’s almost that time again, as we head for the homestretch of the final third of the season — the time when you know whether your team is a contender or a pretender. Sadly, it looks like the Mets are playing the role of pretender this year. And I, for one, lay partial blame on the uniforms. As of last night, they had worn the black caps and jerseys six straight games, dropping five. Tell me there’s not bad karma there. Of course, they could have worn orange unis and the results would probably have been the same. They’ve also decided to drop their practice of wearing the pinstripes on Sundays. Don’t ask me why, it’s only their “official” home uniform. But there is probably some cause and effect thing going on there too. Or maybe not. But hey, that’s why the OCD among us track the uniforms. And now it’s time for the second round. Response to the first call for “uni trackers” was tremendous, and I’m interested to see how everyone’s team is faring now that we’re almost 2/3rds of the way through the season. So, if you’re one of the many insane dedicated people who put yourselves through this exercise, contact me this week and I’ll think about how we’ll go about round 2 of the tracking. I think we need to keep the “replies” a bit shorter, but we still need the important info. I’ll come up with “guidelines” in the next week, and let you know when the next round (figure the second weekend in August) will transpire. Thanks to everyone who has participated thus far. I look forward to your updated tracking and trends. When you send me your email, please put Uni Tracking in the “subject” line. OK? OK.

~~~~~~~~~~

Have a great Saturday everyone! Sic semper tyrannis!

 

151 comments to Ricko’s Rules, Volume I

  • TMD | July 25, 2009 at 7:47 am |

    Rule No. 13 should be made in a type 72 font, underlined, and then nailed onto the clubhouse doors of every major league stadium.

  • HC | July 25, 2009 at 8:02 am |

    Scoreboard info
    http://www.baseball-...

  • Joe Barrie | July 25, 2009 at 8:50 am |

    Trivial point, but Brandan Ryan (whose pants really are too short) ought to wear authentic-looking striped socks. His stripes are all the same thickness, whereas the Cardinals always he the two mddle stripes thicker than the upper and lower ones.

  • A. Tama | July 25, 2009 at 9:10 am |

    I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 9:13 am |

    [quote comment=”342058″]Trivial point, but Brandan Ryan (whose pants really are too short) ought to wear authentic-looking striped socks. His stripes are all the same thickness, whereas the Cardinals always he the two mddle stripes thicker than the upper and lower ones.[/quote]

    That is something I always wondered about. Thought maybe it was the way white “blumes” in older photos and films (esp. black-and-white), making white appear larger. Based on TV viewing, when I was kid I used to think football teams with white home numbers wore smaller numbers on the road…until I figured out it was an optical illusion.

    Anyway, now that better quality photos of older Cardinals are turning up, I’m starting to think the striping has always been the way Ryan’s current stripes are…in terms of relative to each other. BUT, all the stripes and spacing have been significantly larger in the past.

    Only the other hand, every once in a while something shows up where the size and spacing DOES look different…so I’m really not sure. Perhap some seasons they were one way, and some seasons the other?

    I’m not disagreeing at all. Saying I honestly don’t know. Perhaps some serious student of Cardinal unis here knows precisely.

    —Ricko

  • TMD | July 25, 2009 at 9:18 am |

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 9:23 am |

    Very old Musial photo, and two centermost white stripes do look thicker. This when the centerstripe was navy with outer stripes red. I think when they switched to red center with two navy, the stripes became all the same width maybe?
    http://www.baseballf...

    –Ricko

  • Patrick in MI | July 25, 2009 at 9:25 am |

    I’m usually not into the “Guess the Scoreboard” portion of your weekend posts but today’s was too easy! You probably should have clipped the lower right of the image. BTW, I may have a good one to submit for the game. Just waiting to scan a slide or two.

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 9:31 am |

    I have one rule. Wear you damn hat the way it is suppose to be worn. Not cocked to the side but straight on you head and not with a flat brim.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 9:31 am |

    Nope. Two navy stripes here and center whites still a bit thicker.
    http://barrettsports...

    Still so on Lou Brock.
    http://static.howstu...

    You’re looking pretty right there, Joe Barrie, still the same on Ozzie, too.
    http://mlb.imageg.ne...

    Rick Ankiel’s knit-in stirrups (ick) show stipes all the same width, though.
    http://sportsillustr...

    How’s that for some quick, inch-deep research? LOL

    —Ricko

  • Sarran | July 25, 2009 at 9:42 am |

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]
    I always liked this team with that look
    https://www.ecoupons...

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 9:45 am |

    FYI, the Indian who worn all navy in the All-Star game was somebody like Paul Dade. That era, anyway.

    —Ricko

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 10:04 am |

    [quote comment=”342067″]FYI, the Indian who worn all navy in the All-Star game was somebody like Paul Dade. That era, anyway.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It would have had been a year that the game was at a National League park, right? I mean the blue would have been a road jersey more than likely.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:13 am |

    [quote comment=”342068″][quote comment=”342067″]FYI, the Indian who worn all navy in the All-Star game was somebody like Paul Dade. That era, anyway.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It would have had been a year that the game was at a National League park, right? I mean the blue would have been a road jersey more than likely.[/quote]

    I think was an All-Star Game. We’re talking about a brief glimpse that made me sit right up, cuz I’d never seen that all navy. Might even have been just catching a highlight that wasn’t ASG (not likely cuz whole team would have been in all navy).

    Anyway, searching box scores, most likely candidates would be Jorge Orta in 1980 (he didn’t play, so might have seen him only in player intros) or Manny Trillo in ’82 (but he started at 2b, so would have seen more of him).

    Again, was a brief glimpse, so perhaps was the intros in ’80. Aw, shoot, I dunno, I just know it surprised the hell out of me, and wasn’t a very long look at it.

    —Ricko

  • Johnny Bacardi | July 25, 2009 at 10:14 am |

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    Amen to that. Looks like they’re wearing pajamas. And that means you, Browns!

    And on the baseball vest topic, except for the hideous red ones, I say cut the Pirates slack for wearing them- in the pre-disco era, they wore them regularly, and I think they look pretty good now.

  • Tris Wykes | July 25, 2009 at 10:15 am |

    Black cleats look better with white laces?! Uh… no thanks.

  • Johnny Bacardi | July 25, 2009 at 10:16 am |

    [quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:20 am |

    I guess could have been George Hendrick, too. He was in ASG a couple times in ’75 or so.

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 10:22 am |

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]I can live with my Bears wearing white over white. The blue pants remind me of the Super Bowl, and given some of the performances in recent years that’s just mocking one of the greatest years of my life.

    Also, white/white has that whole Sayers/Butkus/Brian’s Song look to it. Works for me.

  • Mike Engle | July 25, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    I think in general, baseball jerseys should pick either ornate sleeve piping or a logo patch, but preferably not both. Immune from this rule is “skinny” sleeve piping of only one color: this can co-exist with a patch. But sometimes, triple-stripe sleeve piping patterns, a logo patch, AND the unfortunate Majestic mark can be too busy for my taste.

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    [quote comment=”342071″]Black cleats look better with white laces…[/quote]All I know is that yellow laces are for hot dogs.

  • Mike Engle | July 25, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    [quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.

  • Flip | July 25, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    Pretty good rules, Mr. Pearson. MLB should have you design the uniform posers, then hire you to enforce ’em.

  • Nick N. | July 25, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    #14 Managers and base coaches need to wear the baggy pants of the current generations especially if theyre packing a couple extra pounds, no one likes seeing Charlie Manuel’s chicken legs during a pitching change

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    [quote comment=”342071″]Black cleats look better with white laces?! Uh… no thanks.[/quote]

    You like looking like you’re wearing wingtips to play?
    You an accountant or an athlete? LOL

    Again, the exception—and it’s quite common–is if there’s plenty of white trim on the shoes. All-black is just…dull, and makes your feet look heavy, like you’re clumping along in your combat boots.

    (Realize now, a lot of these “rules” were formulated when the world was black and white…and some white on clunky black shoes was pretty damn flashy). ;)

    —Ricko

  • Flip | July 25, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    And, oh yeah, pretty good benchies.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”342077″][quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.[/quote]

    This (with the striped socks, not the solid brown socks of today)…
    http://farm3.static....
    …is one of the great-looking classic NFL unis.

    —Ricko

  • ren | July 25, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    I think that the cubs should make carlos zambrano wear a normal gray or white jersey. it is getting on my nerves always seeing him in blue

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:43 am |

    [quote comment=”342078″]Pretty good rules, Mr. Pearson. MLB should have you design the uniform posers, then hire you to enforce ’em.[/quote]

    Well, if the pay is right and they give me the necessary clout…

    I mean, they’d better pay me a ton (and provide high-quality health insurance) if the job consists of nothing more than walking up to MLBers and saying, “Excuse me, but you look kinda dorky like that.”

    I’d have to work on my getaway speed, too.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:46 am |

    Well, if Steve Spurrier gets to change his vote on Tim Tebow then I guess Michael Vick deserves another chance.

    I mean, if “Oops, I’m really a jerk but I’ll say I just messed up” is good enough…

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”342084″]I think that the cubs should make carlos zambrano wear a normal gray or white jersey. it is getting on my nerves always seeing him in blue[/quote]

    How about putting Zambrano in black, since it is a slimming color.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:50 am |

    [quote comment=”342087″][quote comment=”342084″]I think that the cubs should make carlos zambrano wear a normal gray or white jersey. it is getting on my nerves always seeing him in blue[/quote]

    How about putting Zambrano in black, since it is a slimming color.[/quote]

    Worked for Orson Welles.
    (spit take)

  • leon | July 25, 2009 at 10:56 am |

    This is probably not news but I believe that in Ball Four (maybe not-could be a senior moment), Jim Bouton described Frank Robinson as cutting his stirrups under the heel and reattaching them up a bit so as to create a longer look.

    As someone who attended public schools in Virginia for twelve years, the motto Sic Semper Tyrannis (“Thus Always to Tyrants”) greeted me most every day, hanging in the front of the classroom on the state flag.

    Veni, Vidi, Vici !

  • A. Tama | July 25, 2009 at 10:56 am |

    [quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    Dark Blue Pants would be a huge improvement. They usually violate what woudl be Rule #2 if I had a Rule #2: “Gray Facemasks shoudld be the rare exception.”

  • A. Tama | July 25, 2009 at 11:04 am |

    [quote comment=”342082″][quote comment=”342077″][quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.[/quote]

    This (with the striped socks, not the solid brown socks of today)…
    http://farm3.static....
    …is one of the great-looking classic NFL unis.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That is one of the ugliest uniforms of all time in my opinion. Looks like it belongs on a high school team that barely had enough money to afford uniforms. No style, nothing memorable about it. Only reason it is any good is that it was easy to replicate on those electric football games you could play as a kid where you lined up all the guys and when you hit the switch the field vibrated and everyone went the wrong direction. They players usually “fumbled” the foam ball and you simply COULDN’T complete a pass…all very realistic for a Browns team.

    Oops, looks like even the guys who made electic football knew better. http://farm4.static....

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 11:06 am |

    [quote comment=”342089″]As someone who attended public schools in Virginia for twelve years, the motto Sic Semper Tyrannis [/quote]I thought of tyranny every day when attending elementary school in Chicago.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment=”342090″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    Dark Blue Pants would be a huge improvement. They usually violate what woudl be Rule #2 if I had a Rule #2: “Gray Facemasks shoudld be the rare exception.”[/quote]

    Dark pants? Colts tried that. Looked like that football powerhouse, Duke. Very high school.
    http://farm4.static....

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 11:12 am |

    [quote comment=”342091″][quote comment=”342082″][quote comment=”342077″][quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.[/quote]

    This (with the striped socks, not the solid brown socks of today)…
    http://farm3.static....
    …is one of the great-looking classic NFL unis.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That is one of the ugliest uniforms of all time in my opinion. Looks like it belongs on a high school team that barely had enough money to afford uniforms. No style, nothing memorable about it. Only reason it is any good is that it was easy to replicate on those electric football games you could play as a kid where you lined up all the guys and when you hit the switch the field vibrated and everyone went the wrong direction. They players usually “fumbled” the foam ball and you simply COULDN’T complete a pass…all very realistic for a Browns team.

    Oops, looks like even the guys who made electic football knew better. http://farm4.static....

    I imagine that fact that it’s a uniform that’s basically been around for about 60 years automatically makes it bad, too, huh.

    Yankees and Dodgers should change for that reason? Hardly. CFSOC usually is a mistake.

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:20 am |

    Scoreboard answer: I believe this is the game being tracked, but this is a tough one. It could possibly be like three other games from that Series.

    How’d I figure it out?

    A) I cheated. I went to Shorpy and searched “Scoreboard” and found this page.

    B) From there, I looked at all the box scores/PBP of that Series on Baseball-reference.com until I found one that seemed like it matched. I’m still not 100% sure I’m right, though.

  • Ric | July 25, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    Saw a minor league ball game last night. No pics (sorry), but both the Bowling Green Hot Rods and Hagerstown Suns (Single-A, SAL) were completely high-cuffed. Is this a common occurrence in the minors?

  • A. Tama | July 25, 2009 at 11:23 am |

    [quote comment=”342094″][quote comment=”342091″][quote comment=”342082″][quote comment=”342077″][quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.[/quote]

    This (with the striped socks, not the solid brown socks of today)…
    http://farm3.static....
    …is one of the great-looking classic NFL unis.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That is one of the ugliest uniforms of all time in my opinion. Looks like it belongs on a high school team that barely had enough money to afford uniforms. No style, nothing memorable about it. Only reason it is any good is that it was easy to replicate on those electric football games you could play as a kid where you lined up all the guys and when you hit the switch the field vibrated and everyone went the wrong direction. They players usually “fumbled” the foam ball and you simply COULDN’T complete a pass…all very realistic for a Browns team.

    Oops, looks like even the guys who made electic football knew better. http://farm4.static....

    I imagine that fact that it’s a uniform that’s basically been around for about 60 years automatically makes it bad, too, huh.

    Yankees and Dodgers should change for that reason? Hardly. CFSOC usually is a mistake.[/quote]

    Not at all a fan of CFSOC. Dodgers have one of the best unis in baseball. Simple. Has stood the test of time. Looked good 40 years ago. Looks good today. I’m a Yankee fan and while I’ve never been moved by their uniform the way some are, you simply can’t make huge changes to the pinstripes nor would I want to.

    I just think the white on white football uniform is ugly. That’s all.

  • Craig | July 25, 2009 at 11:31 am |

    [quote comment=”342057″]Scoreboard info
    http://www.baseball-...

    Wouldn’t it have to be game 4 though? Game 1 opened with a walk, and it looks to me like Yerkes is up, so that’s the top of the 1st. Game 4 opened with a Hooper hit. The other possibility, game 7, was at Fenway, and I don’t think a National League team would get the “Nationals” designation (the Nationals being an AL club.)

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    [quote comment=”342097″][quote comment=”342094″][quote comment=”342091″][quote comment=”342082″][quote comment=”342077″][quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.[/quote]

    This (with the striped socks, not the solid brown socks of today)…
    http://farm3.static....
    …is one of the great-looking classic NFL unis.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That is one of the ugliest uniforms of all time in my opinion. Looks like it belongs on a high school team that barely had enough money to afford uniforms. No style, nothing memorable about it. Only reason it is any good is that it was easy to replicate on those electric football games you could play as a kid where you lined up all the guys and when you hit the switch the field vibrated and everyone went the wrong direction. They players usually “fumbled” the foam ball and you simply COULDN’T complete a pass…all very realistic for a Browns team.

    Oops, looks like even the guys who made electic football knew better. http://farm4.static....

    I imagine that fact that it’s a uniform that’s basically been around for about 60 years automatically makes it bad, too, huh.

    Yankees and Dodgers should change for that reason? Hardly. CFSOC usually is a mistake.[/quote]

    Not at all a fan of CFSOC. Dodgers have one of the best unis in baseball. Simple. Has stood the test of time. Looked good 40 years ago. Looks good today. I’m a Yankee fan and while I’ve never been moved by their uniform the way some are, you simply can’t make huge changes to the pinstripes nor would I want to.

    I just think the white on white football uniform is ugly. That’s all.[/quote]

    A bit of background on why white pants are associated with top-level programs:
    Back in the day, it took time and money to keep white pants clean, and only the higher-budget organizations could—and would—bother with it (same reason very few softball teams that fully uni-up choose white pants; too much trouble for the players to maintain, what with grass stains and all).

    Anyway, lower budget programs such as high schools and some universities and colleges would opt for dark pants to keep expenses down, often creating monochrome at home. So when I see dark pants it can’t help but look very second- or third-tier to me.

    From my perspective, which is understandably different than yours, white pants say “big-time”. Granted, it may not be true anymore, but so many of our uni opinions are formed when we were kids. And those opinions become pretty ingrained.

    —Ricko

  • Bob | July 25, 2009 at 11:34 am |

    How about we just ban vests, period? Bad idea, every team that wears it looks like a Little League team. Do they get to go to Chuck E. Cheese’s when the game is over?

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 11:37 am |

    [quote comment=”342089″]This is probably not news but I believe that in Ball Four (maybe not-could be a senior moment), Jim Bouton described Frank Robinson as cutting his stirrups under the heel and reattaching them up a bit so as to create a longer look.

    As someone who attended public schools in Virginia for twelve years, the motto Sic Semper Tyrannis (“Thus Always to Tyrants”) greeted me most every day, hanging in the front of the classroom on the state flag.

    Veni, Vidi, Vici ![/quote]

    re: Frank Robinson’s two-piece socks (which I back then of course copied)…
    http://farm3.static....
    Closeup…
    http://farm3.static....
    If you look closely, you can see that the Hawk did the same thing…
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko

  • mtjaws | July 25, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    Add the Dolphins to the ugly all-white look. I hate it, and wish they’d wear the teal or all-teal more.

    As for today’s “rules”, I agree with most of them. The one stirrup thing I hate most is the long thin type, as seen on Arizona State. I like the mid-length like Outman, and the short length like Ernie Banks, but the longest type is the worst.

  • mtjaws | July 25, 2009 at 11:42 am |

    Oh, I forgot to add that I loved seeing Eric Davis and the 75 Big Red Machine pictures. Late 80s Davis was awesome to watch hit and run.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 11:45 am |

    [quote comment=”342100″]How about we just ban vests, period? Bad idea, every team that wears it looks like a Little League team. Do they get to go to Chuck E. Cheese’s when the game is over?[/quote]

    This is a sleeveless tunic…
    http://farm1.static....
    THIS is a vest…
    http://www.laruiz.co...
    (and that’s a big part of why the current versions looks dumb)

  • tominantarctica | July 25, 2009 at 12:01 pm |

    In Bill Buckner’s defense, he was a great ballplayer, who is remembered for one play. One stupid play. High top shoes probably extended his career for many extra years as he had horrible, injured ankles and had an all star career in spite of them.
    Do not be so quick to judge Bill so harshly as he’s also a great guy. Can’t say the same for many players these days.

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 12:04 pm |

    WHEW…

    my cable was out all morning…and while that may not be a big deal for most of us, not only could i only access the site thru my crackberry, it (possibly) meant no column for tomorrow…fortunately, the problem seems to have been solved (would actually have to have gone into the office to load something had this persisted)…anyway…

    JTH, supersleuth that he is, is correct…the scoreboard answer is sequential (that’s all im gonna say) and i had to figure it out the same way he did (by going onto shorpy) since there were THREE games in that world series featuring the same starting pitchers facing each other and the same lineups

    this one was indeed tricky…of course, we could have just asked ricko, who was in attendance

  • DenverGregg | July 25, 2009 at 12:06 pm |

    Phil’s rule 2 is the best comment on baseball uni’s I’ve ever seen. I agree with Phil’s rule 3 and with Ricko’s rules, except 10 (covered by the best of today’s rules) and 11. For teams that have multiple unis, why not let the starting pitcher pick instead of someone who’s less known to the fans? My additions would be: (no team should have more than three jerseys (white, grey, alt) in the usual rotation – only exceptions would be one-off throwbacks.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 12:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”342105″]In Bill Buckner’s defense, he was a great ballplayer, who is remembered for one play. One stupid play. High top shoes probably extended his career for many extra years as he had horrible, injured ankles and had an all star career in spite of them.
    Do not be so quick to judge Bill so harshly as he’s also a great guy. Can’t say the same for many players these days.[/quote]

    Oh, I know why he was wearing high tops, bad ankle and such. Just unforunate was in the stirrup era and the “look” ended up not so good.

    —Ricko

  • Hibbsy | July 25, 2009 at 12:19 pm |

    Rule: The majority color of the stirrup should match either the bill, or the crown of the cap (or both). That goes for the Red Sox, too. I’m all for the Fisk era cap.

    Rule: The cap should have ALL team colors represented. If the White Sox include gray, or they (meaning we) wish to use red, place it on the cap somehow, someway.

    Rule: No striped stirrups with pin stripes.

    Rule: Road uni should sync up with the home. If a team wears pins at home, the road uni should be very plain. Imagine the home uni with out pin stripes, then paint it gray. Lose the sleeve piping Yankees. Phillies, take it off of the pants as well. There are others.

    Rule: If you aren’t going to wear black cleats (and some teams white), apply my initial stirrup rule.

    These rules are mostly in addition to Ricko’s. I agree with much of what he said.

    If we were talking football, I could go on and on. Big time.

  • Patrick in MI | July 25, 2009 at 12:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”342096″]Saw a minor league ball game last night. No pics (sorry), but both the Bowling Green Hot Rods and Hagerstown Suns (Single-A, SAL) were completely high-cuffed. Is this a common occurrence in the minors?[/quote]

    Hot Rods? They could have been named the Stingrays seeing as where they’re from…but Hot Rods is good too. I like the hot rod logo! They do have a flickr page for photos here -> http://www.flickr.co...

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    “why not let the starting pitcher…pick the jersey”?

    Because I see no reason to indulge particular players on a game-to-game basis.

    Why doesn’t the catcher get to choose? After all, if it’s gonna be a hot, humid August day, shouldn’t he be the one to consider? “No, not the dark alt, please.”

    Just sayin’. Seems like another gimmick. Another example of pedestal-putting.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 12:40 pm |

    [quote]“why not let the starting pitcher…pick the jersey”?[/quote]

    i believe the starting pitchers for the yankees, dodgers, giants, cardinals, phillies and perhaps a few other teams are always given this option

    works out ok

  • Flip | July 25, 2009 at 12:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”342109″]Rule: The majority color of the stirrup should match either the bill, or the crown of the cap (or both). That goes for the Red Sox, too. I’m all for the Fisk era cap.

    Rule: The cap should have ALL team colors represented. If the White Sox include gray, or they (meaning we) wish to use red, place it on the cap somehow, someway.

    Rule: No striped stirrups with pin stripes.

    Rule: Road uni should sync up with the home. If a team wears pins at home, the road uni should be very plain. Imagine the home uni with out pin stripes, then paint it gray. Lose the sleeve piping Yankees. Phillies, take it off of the pants as well. There are others.

    Rule: If you aren’t going to wear black cleats (and some teams white), apply my initial stirrup rule.

    These rules are mostly in addition to Ricko’s. I agree with much of what he said.

    If we were talking football, I could go on and on. Big time.[/quote]

    I’d have to disagree. One of the charming things about the Yaz-era BoSox look was, particularly with the road uniforms, only the bottom part of the stirrup was red. Hence Red Sox. The fancy script on the home uniform and cap logo were OK, but I really yearn for that simple road look with a splash of pizazz.

    Oh yeah, I like the white-on-white look for the Chiefs, Bears, Dolphins, et. al.

  • Brett Stillman | July 25, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”342111″]”why not let the starting pitcher…pick the jersey”?

    Because I see no reason to indulge particular players on a game-to-game basis.

    Why doesn’t the catcher get to choose? After all, if it’s gonna be a hot, humid August day, shouldn’t he be the one to consider? “No, not the dark alt, please.”

    Just sayin’. Seems like another gimmick. Another example of pedestal-putting.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Because the starting pitcher is the most important guy out there that day, and you want him to be the most comfortable and in the uni that he likes best

  • Brett Stillman | July 25, 2009 at 12:48 pm |

    and I disagree with rule #13, the Royals powder blue alts, are not the road versions of old, they’re just using the third color as the base for the alternate. I love those alts

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 1:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”342114″][quote comment=”342111″]”why not let the starting pitcher…pick the jersey”?

    Because I see no reason to indulge particular players on a game-to-game basis.

    Why doesn’t the catcher get to choose? After all, if it’s gonna be a hot, humid August day, shouldn’t he be the one to consider? “No, not the dark alt, please.”

    Just sayin’. Seems like another gimmick. Another example of pedestal-putting.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Because the starting pitcher is the most important guy out there that day, and you want him to be the most comfortable and in the uni that he likes best[/quote]

    Yeah, think how many more games Bob Gibson would have won if he could have picked the jersey.

    And DeWayne Wise had nothing to do with the perfecto.

    It just smacks of prima donna-ism. To me, anyway.

    —Ricko

  • rpm | July 25, 2009 at 1:08 pm |

    the tribe for sure wore an all blue in the crooked C era, and i just might have a picture of paul dade, coincidentally enough, in that look.

    benchies was a good one today for sure

    no white on white football uniforms? are you daft? i don’t even know where to begin with this, so i won’t, i’ll just say you have a screw loose.
    ________________________________
    ricko~
    first off, great pixture of hondo and the flea, i glued that one to hondo’s 1970 strat-o-matic card back in 1983, i got it off the microfiche at the public library.
    i was all ready to disagree with you, because we are both pretty hard headed, but you pretty much nailed 1-9(the sock/pants section). although i would disagree with 7 as a rule, and see it more as more a rule of thumb(there are ways to rock that look). as for the rest(10-13), i am with you, and phil’s no pins on the road addition. torn on the pitcher’s choice, but the one where i disagree with you is #13. first off the royals wear white pants with it at home, so on it’s face, it is a home uniform as much as any sofball jersey is, so i have to hit the survey says wrong answer buzzer on you on that one. and the blue jays, yes, it was a road uniform, i can’t argue with you, but i personally have less then zero problem with them trotting that out on sundays.
    i know i disagreed with you on 2, but you really did a great job on that ricko, thanks.
    ~roberto

  • rpm | July 25, 2009 at 1:09 pm |

    i ump for the next 6/7 hours, so i’ll debate you on 7/13 later ricko:)

  • Kek | July 25, 2009 at 1:11 pm |

    Sorry if this has been addressed already, but I have a few comments on the Ricko Rules:

    1. In fairness, Bill Buckner wasn’t trying to be a fashion plate, he kind of need those because of injury. Also, is just me, or pajama bottoms hiding them them, but have high tops really fallen out of favor? They were very fashionable in the mid to late 90s but I don’t see them that much anymore and I don’t recall even seeing a lot of models in Eastbay. Does anyone remember Tanel 360? They had a circular cleat design.

    2. In fairness to the Pirates, they did drop all the vest save for the Sunday alt pin. I have come to the conclusion that I like the traditional unis better, but I still really dig the sunday pins. Maybe to be inline with the rule, they should switch to a pinstriped jersey for 2010.

    3. Great shots of the Phils, Angels and Senators in white shoes. Haven’t seen a lot of inaction shots of those looks.

    4. Sorry, ’69 and ’70 Chisox were beautiful.

    5. Regarding your Benchies comics, do simply do those for UW or do you archive them online? I really enjoy them.

    6. In light of the Vick chatter in yesterday’s comments: do you have the legal right to wear that uniform in the picture of this post?!!?!?!?

    All in all, like Phil said, don’t really agree with some of what you wrote, but really appreciate the work on the post. Really great job!

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 1:16 pm |

    I suppose wearing white pants does kinda get the Royals by, technically. But powder isn’t one of their team colors, so isn’t it a bit like wearing a gray jersey at home? Given the place powder blue held in the ’70s and ’80s, that is?

    —-Ricko

  • Squiddie | July 25, 2009 at 1:21 pm |

    From a Life photo essay about “Occupational Faces”:

    Translucent face guard

    Catcher’s mask

    Unusual face mask (3/4 view)

  • Eddie | July 25, 2009 at 1:21 pm |

    Regarding the rule that all players look uniform, this seems to go against the whole Uni Watch “fascination” of stirrups. IMO, it’s much easier to make 25 players wear baggy pants to the heel, then it is to make 25 players wear stirrups AND make sure each player has them facing the correct way and the same length.

    To that extent, I tend to think that sometimes the player who goes out there with the fancy hosiery (or some other of uniform modification), is in a way trying to get noticed. I see it similarly to the wide receiver who’s wearing tights in the middle of July.

  • rpm | July 25, 2009 at 1:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”342120″]I suppose wearing white pants does kinda get the Royals by, technically. But powder isn’t one of their team colors, so isn’t it a bit like wearing a gray jersey at home? Given the place powder blue held in the ’70s and ’80s, that is?

    —-Ricko[/quote]
    i am way late, but quickly…i understand your point, and totally see why you feel the way you do, but powder is sort of an “unofficial” colour of the royals, that gets a stupid softball pass from me. how bout this, we are both right on that one. and when i finally get some pixtures of the softball team, you might give me a rule 7 exception too:)
    okay, i rewally have to fly!

  • Ryan B | July 25, 2009 at 2:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”342096″]Saw a minor league ball game last night. No pics (sorry), but both the Bowling Green Hot Rods and Hagerstown Suns (Single-A, SAL) were completely high-cuffed. Is this a common occurrence in the minors?[/quote]
    Some organizations will mandate high cuffs throughout their systems. I know the Phillies do it, but I’m not sure of any others.

  • tommy forrester | July 25, 2009 at 2:55 pm |

    i’m sorry but everyone who is anti white on white is a philistine. the look is pristine.

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 3:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”342121″]From a Life photo essay about “Occupational Faces”:

    Translucent face guard[/quote]
    AKA the world’s largest single bar facemask.

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 3:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”342116″]… prima donna-ism… [/quote]
    Yeah, I got that from my first Donna too.

    But a quick trip the doc and a shot of penecillin cleared it right up.

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 3:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”342112″]
    i believe the starting pitchers for the yankees, dodgers, giants, cardinals, phillies and perhaps a few other teams are always given this option[/quote]
    AFAIK the White Sox too.

  • anotherguy | July 25, 2009 at 3:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”342106″] have just asked ricko, who was in attendance[/quote]
    Ricko told me he was the guy working that scoreboard in DC.

  • Craig Costello | July 25, 2009 at 3:29 pm |

    Interesting execution of a long NOB for Hull FC’s Mark Calderwood.

    http://www.hullfc.co...

    Get those socks pulled up.

  • Leaky | July 25, 2009 at 3:46 pm |

    http://www.allstarnb...

    First time seeing this. Hopefully last time too. I can help Commish Stern just give me a call.

    Now the 2010 MLB All-Star logo is a better example of using a star as the primary icon although wordmark is heavy handed.

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

  • DenverGregg | July 25, 2009 at 3:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”342125″]i’m sorry but everyone who is anti white on white is a philistine. the look is pristine.[/quote]
    Most of the time it’s great. There are some instances where it doesn’t work as well, such as the 1966-1997 Broncos. It doesn’t work if the colors are too light.

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 3:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”342069″][quote comment=”342068″][quote comment=”342067″]FYI, the Indian who worn all navy in the All-Star game was somebody like Paul Dade. That era, anyway.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It would have had been a year that the game was at a National League park, right? I mean the blue would have been a road jersey more than likely.[/quote]

    I think was an All-Star Game. We’re talking about a brief glimpse that made me sit right up, cuz I’d never seen that all navy. Might even have been just catching a highlight that wasn’t ASG (not likely cuz whole team would have been in all navy).

    Anyway, searching box scores, most likely candidates would be Jorge Orta in 1980 (he didn’t play, so might have seen him only in player intros) or Manny Trillo in ’82 (but he started at 2b, so would have seen more of him).

    Again, was a brief glimpse, so perhaps was the intros in ’80. Aw, shoot, I dunno, I just know it surprised the hell out of me, and wasn’t a very long look at it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I found this but it is the Indians Blue but it is with white paints.

    http://www.thatsmybo...

    I also found this which I had to share

    http://www.thatsmybo...

  • Kyle | July 25, 2009 at 4:06 pm |

    So according to Ricko, I guess this is the geek look? :(

    http://photos-d.ak.f...

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 4:10 pm |

    Here is a shot of the Indians in solid red.

    http://www.thatsmybo...

  • Kyle | July 25, 2009 at 4:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”342102″]Add the Dolphins to the ugly all-white look. I hate it, and wish they’d wear the teal or all-teal more.

    As for today’s “rules”, I agree with most of them. The one stirrup thing I hate most is the long thin type, as seen on Arizona State. I like the mid-length like Outman, and the short length like Ernie Banks, but the longest type is the worst.[/quote]

    I disagree on the Dolphins statement. As a Dolphins fan, all teal is evil. Everyone goes for that solid one color look, the Dolphins don’t need to. All white works at home so the other team suffers in the heat. Its also a classic look.

  • The Ghost of Ross Gload | July 25, 2009 at 4:17 pm |

    Long time Chiefs fans know that when it comes to pants, red is the color of failure.

    Len Dawson? White pants. Derrick Thomas? White pants. Hundreds of lousy players in between? Red pants.

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

  • =bg= | July 25, 2009 at 4:26 pm |

    Love the Phils look today, the home creme with red/blue cap. Third best look in the majors. Second: creme Indians. First: ta-dah: creme Giants. Guess I like creme. Honorable mention: Cards home..Cubs home..Boston home..Mets (the one with the piping around the collar and down the front) and Tigers home. Did I forget the Yankees? No, I didn’t.

  • Flip | July 25, 2009 at 4:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”342125″]i’m sorry but everyone who is anti white on white is a philistine. the look is pristine.[/quote]

    I love it.

  • Flip | July 25, 2009 at 4:57 pm |

    The more I see those Phillies’ home alts, the more I like ’em. They ought to can the pins and make the creams the primary uniform.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 5:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”342134″]So according to Ricko, I guess this is the geek look? :(

    http://photos-d.ak.f...

    Borderline. Don’t pull either your pantlegs or your stirrups any higher, though. :)

    Or, if your stirrups get higher, the pantlegs should get lower.

    But, honestly, I’d never tell anyone what to wear, just giving a ’60s-’70s take on things.

    —Ricko

  • Flip | July 25, 2009 at 5:20 pm |

    Guess Matt Holliday couldn’t talk Pujols out of No. 5. Going w/15, Edmunds’ old number.

  • gusto | July 25, 2009 at 5:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”342119″]Sorry if this has been addressed already, but I have a few comments on the Ricko Rules:

    1. In fairness, Bill Buckner wasn’t trying to be a fashion plate, he kind of need those because of injury. Also, is just me, or pajama bottoms hiding them them, but have high tops really fallen out of favor? They were very fashionable in the mid to late 90s but I don’t see them that much anymore and I don’t recall even seeing a lot of models in Eastbay. Does anyone remember Tanel 360? They had a circular cleat design.

    2. In fairness to the Pirates, they did drop all the vest save for the Sunday alt pin. I have come to the conclusion that I like the traditional unis better, but I still really dig the sunday pins. Maybe to be inline with the rule, they should switch to a pinstriped jersey for 2010.

    3. Great shots of the Phils, Angels and Senators in white shoes. Haven’t seen a lot of inaction shots of those looks.

    4. Sorry, ’69 and ’70 Chisox were beautiful.

    5. Regarding your Benchies comics, do simply do those for UW or do you archive them online? I really enjoy them.

    6. In light of the Vick chatter in yesterday’s comments: do you have the legal right to wear that uniform in the picture of this post?!!?!?!?

    All in all, like Phil said, don’t really agree with some of what you wrote, but really appreciate the work on the post. Really great job![/quote]

    Tek, I gotta disagree with your take on the Pirates and the pinstripes uniform. Let the Yankess keep the black pinstripes, no reason to
    copy them. The ONLY pinstripes the Bucs should be wearing are the sharp gold ones of the 1970s. Of course, you could update that look by losing the black/gold banding at the end of the sleeves, but that’s a really great uniform. It’s interesting to note whenever the Pirate uniforms of the mid to late 70’s are criticized, no one ever mentions the solid gold pinstripe uniform

  • gusto | July 25, 2009 at 5:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”342143″][quote comment=”342119″]Sorry if this has been addressed already, but I have a few comments on the Ricko Rules:

    1. In fairness, Bill Buckner wasn’t trying to be a fashion plate, he kind of need those because of injury. Also, is just me, or pajama bottoms hiding them them, but have high tops really fallen out of favor? They were very fashionable in the mid to late 90s but I don’t see them that much anymore and I don’t recall even seeing a lot of models in Eastbay. Does anyone remember Tanel 360? They had a circular cleat design.

    2. In fairness to the Pirates, they did drop all the vest save for the Sunday alt pin. I have come to the conclusion that I like the traditional unis better, but I still really dig the sunday pins. Maybe to be inline with the rule, they should switch to a pinstriped jersey for 2010.

    3. Great shots of the Phils, Angels and Senators in white shoes. Haven’t seen a lot of inaction shots of those looks.

    4. Sorry, ’69 and ’70 Chisox were beautiful.

    5. Regarding your Benchies comics, do simply do those for UW or do you archive them online? I really enjoy them.

    6. In light of the Vick chatter in yesterday’s comments: do you have the legal right to wear that uniform in the picture of this post?!!?!?!?

    All in all, like Phil said, don’t really agree with some of what you wrote, but really appreciate the work on the post. Really great job![/quote]

    Tek, I gotta disagree with your take on the Pirates and the pinstripes uniform. Let the Yankess keep the black pinstripes, no reason to
    copy them. The ONLY pinstripes the Bucs should be wearing are the sharp gold ones of the 1970s. Of course, you could update that look by losing the black/gold banding at the end of the sleeves, but that’s a really great uniform. It’s interesting to note whenever the Pirate uniforms of the mid to late 70’s are criticized, no one ever mentions the solid gold pinstripe uniform[/quote]

    Oops, my bad. Should be Kek, not Tek. While I’m here again, I wonder if any team in baseball history ever wore gold pinstripes like those Pirate clubs did. It’s such a great, unique look, IMO. I would agree with those who say mixing the pinstripe jersey and pants with black and gold jerseys and pants was not a good idea.

  • Bernard Shakey | July 25, 2009 at 5:40 pm |

    I’ll tell ya, I don’t think the Indians ever had blue pants. I’ve done a whole lotta research into the 1975-77 color combinations, including a long afternoon at the library looking at microfilm of old sports pages. I did so to find evidence that at least once, they wore white jerseys with red pants. I knew that a few times they wore the navy jerseys with the red pants, a photograph is included in this discussion link from baseball fever:

    http://www.baseball-...

  • the rAKe | July 25, 2009 at 5:43 pm |

    Ricko, I agree with all 13. My number one rule for fans is, “dont wear a uni shirt of a player younger than you”. It makes you look like a complete ass, either wear one with no name and/or number, or go throwback. There is nothing worse than seeing a 55 year old guy with ab 87 Pens sweater.

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 5:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”342145″]I’ll tell ya, I don’t think the Indians ever had blue pants. I’ve done a whole lotta research into the 1975-77 color combinations, including a long afternoon at the library looking at microfilm of old sports pages. I did so to find evidence that at least once, they wore white jerseys with red pants. I knew that a few times they wore the navy jerseys with the red pants, a photograph is included in this discussion link from baseball fever:

    http://www.baseball-...

    you must be a member of b-f to view that…any chance you can post a direct link here? i’d LOVE to see that blue/red combo

  • gusto | July 25, 2009 at 6:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”342146″]Ricko, I agree with all 13. My number one rule for fans is, “dont wear a uni shirt of a player younger than you”. It makes you look like a complete ass, either wear one with no name and/or number, or go throwback. There is nothing worse than seeing a 55 year old guy with ab 87 Pens sweater.[/quote]

    rAKE, have to disagree with your take on that one. If you’re a fan of a team with a great young player, can’t see anything wrong with wearing a jersey. Sidney Crosby is only 21, does that also mean a 31 year old fan shouldn’t wear a # 87 jersey to a hockey game? Of course not.

  • gusto | July 25, 2009 at 6:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”342137″]Long time Chiefs fans know that when it comes to pants, red is the color of failure.

    Len Dawson? White pants. Derrick Thomas? White pants. Hundreds of lousy players in between? Red pants.

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote][/quote]

    Ghost, I’m not a Chiefs fan, but surprised you are so anti-red pants. Remember your 1969 world championship season? KC wore red pants often that year, including road playoff games wins over the Jets and Raiders.

  • Hibbsy | July 25, 2009 at 6:10 pm |

    The Phillies cremes look funny on TV.
    In the shade, they look bleached white.
    In the sun, they look yellow.

  • Jeff P | July 25, 2009 at 6:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”342148″][quote comment=”342146″]Ricko, I agree with all 13. My number one rule for fans is, “dont wear a uni shirt of a player younger than you”. It makes you look like a complete ass, either wear one with no name and/or number, or go throwback. There is nothing worse than seeing a 55 year old guy with ab 87 Pens sweater.[/quote]

    rAKE, have to disagree with your take on that one. If you’re a fan of a team with a great young player, can’t see anything wrong with wearing a jersey. Sidney Crosby is only 21, does that also mean a 31 year old fan shouldn’t wear a # 87 jersey to a hockey game? Of course not.[/quote]
    Actually, I’m pretty sure that that’s exactly what it means to him. And I get what he’s saying. It does seem a little odd to hero worship a guy younger then you, which is kinda what it means to be wearing an individual player’s jersey.

  • Momofuku | July 25, 2009 at 6:28 pm |

    The MBL Network is broadcasting the 1978 All-Star game today:

    1)Vida Blue, pitching for the Giants has his NOB as “VIDA”, was that the norm for him?

    2) Cindy Garvey was freaking hot in 1978.

  • Eric S. | July 25, 2009 at 6:38 pm |

    Even though the Royals powder blue with white pants violates several uni watch rules, I won’t budge on this one. That uni just looks damn good, in my opinion.

  • Thomas | July 25, 2009 at 7:04 pm |

    The scoreboard date is October 8th, 1912 at the Polo Grounds V. The final score was Boston 4, New York Giants 3. I found this with wikipedia:
    (http://en.wikipedia....)
    and found the date at
    (http://www.baseball-...)

  • Nicole | July 25, 2009 at 7:22 pm |

    At the Brewers/Braves Negro leagues game. Al the Brewers are in mid calf royal socks, but Kotchman of the Braves either has on pajamas or really really low ” high” socks and Nate McClouth didn’t make an effort at all. Pics tomorrow!

  • Brian | July 25, 2009 at 8:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”342152″]The MBL Network is broadcasting the 1978 All-Star game today:

    1)Vida Blue, pitching for the Giants has his NOB as “VIDA”, was that the norm for him?

    2) Cindy Garvey was freaking hot in 1978.[/quote]
    Yes, it was. He and another Giants teammate (drawing a blank on the name) were the last two to wear their given names on the back of their jerseys in the majors until Ichiro in 2001.

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 8:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”342156″][quote comment=”342152″]The MBL Network is broadcasting the 1978 All-Star game today:

    1)Vida Blue, pitching for the Giants has his NOB as “VIDA”, was that the norm for him?

    2) Cindy Garvey was freaking hot in 1978.[/quote]
    Yes, it was. He and another Giants teammate (drawing a blank on the name) were the last two to wear their given names on the back of their jerseys in the majors until Ichiro in 2001.[/quote]

    you’re not thinking of this guy are ya ;)

  • Hibbsy | July 25, 2009 at 8:42 pm |

    Late last night, I found my New Era Rockies hat I bought in 1996. I put it on, and I was fairly pleased with it.
    It dawned on me, with Arizona and Tampa Bay abandoning the color purple, Colorado is the only team that has it.
    Every league needs a little purple. Would anybody be happy if the Lakers and Vikings went away from it?
    I ended with a lot of “its”.

  • rpm | July 25, 2009 at 8:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”342141″][quote comment=”342134″]So according to Ricko, I guess this is the geek look? :(

    http://photos-d.ak.f...

    Borderline. Don’t pull either your pantlegs or your stirrups any higher, though. :)

    Or, if your stirrups get higher, the pantlegs should get lower.

    But, honestly, I’d never tell anyone what to wear, just giving a ’60s-’70s take on things.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    all bets are off for softball anyway.

  • gusto | July 25, 2009 at 9:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”342158″]Late last night, I found my New Era Rockies hat I bought in 1996. I put it on, and I was fairly pleased with it.
    It dawned on me, with Arizona and Tampa Bay abandoning the color purple, Colorado is the only team that has it.
    Every league needs a little purple. Would anybody be happy if the Lakers and Vikings went away from it?
    I ended with a lot of “its”.[/quote]

    Couldn’t agree with you more, it would be strange if the Vikes and Lakers switched colors. IMO, Arizona and Tampa should not have switched from purple, either. Both the Dbacks and Rays have boring, unimaginative uniforms.

  • James Craven | July 25, 2009 at 9:26 pm |

    I’m a “traditionalist” and prefer the white with red pinstripes for the Phightin’ Phillies.

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 9:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”342152″]The MBL Network is broadcasting the 1978 All-Star game today:
    2) Cindy Garvey was freaking hot in 1978.[/quote]

    Damn and me without a wayback machine

  • Hibbsy | July 25, 2009 at 9:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”342160″][quote comment=”342158″]Late last night, I found my New Era Rockies hat I bought in 1996. I put it on, and I was fairly pleased with it.
    It dawned on me, with Arizona and Tampa Bay abandoning the color purple, Colorado is the only team that has it.
    Every league needs a little purple. Would anybody be happy if the Lakers and Vikings went away from it?
    I ended with a lot of “its”.[/quote]

    Couldn’t agree with you more, it would be strange if the Vikes and Lakers switched colors. IMO, Arizona and Tampa should not have switched from purple, either. Both the Dbacks and Rays have boring, unimaginative uniforms.[/quote]

    I’m glad TB and AZ ditched it. It is one of those colors that only one or two teams should sport.

    The Rockies deserve the purple mountain majesty.

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 9:53 pm |

    There is something very, very wrong about the White Sox wearing black socks. It would be like the Patroits having a British flag on their helmet.

  • Hibbsy | July 25, 2009 at 9:58 pm |

    If they wore their shit properly, they’d be fine.
    Technically, they would all be wearing white socks. They would just have black stirrups over them.

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 10:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”342165″]If they wore their shit properly, they’d be fine.
    Technically, they would all be wearing white socks. They would just have black stirrups over them.[/quote]

    well…white sanitaries anyway…i believe stirrups are technically considered socks

    stay tuned later this week, marty…we’re a-fixin’ to fix that

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”342159″][quote comment=”342141″][quote comment=”342134″]So according to Ricko, I guess this is the geek look? :(

    http://photos-d.ak.f...

    Borderline. Don’t pull either your pantlegs or your stirrups any higher, though. :)

    Or, if your stirrups get higher, the pantlegs should get lower.

    But, honestly, I’d never tell anyone what to wear, just giving a ’60s-’70s take on things.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    all bets are off for softball anyway.[/quote]

    Absolutely.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”342165″]If they wore their shit properly, they’d be fine.
    Technically, they would all be wearing white socks. They would just have black stirrups over them.[/quote]

    By that standard, in 1959 (for ex.) EVERYONE could have been the White Sox. LOL

    That’s why I liked (and still do) their look for the early games of the W-S that year.
    http://farm4.static....

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”342168″][quote comment=”342165″]If they wore their shit properly, they’d be fine.
    Technically, they would all be wearing white socks. They would just have black stirrups over them.[/quote]

    By that standard, in 1959 (for ex.) EVERYONE could have been the White Sox. LOL

    That’s why I liked (and still do) their look for the early games of the W-S that year.
    http://farm4.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Not, I should add, because they’re so good looking (because that’s debatable, I suppose), but because they are, indeed, white-socked.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:33 pm |

    And, no, the sanis aren’t a different color. They’re just dusty…which is problem with white stirrups over white sanis.

    That’s why I think they should just wear white stirrupless socks with either stipes or a logo.

    Maybe like this one, only with a white sock on a black disc.
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:35 pm |

    Or this one…
    http://en.wikipedia....

  • aflfan | July 25, 2009 at 10:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”342170″]And, no, the sanis aren’t a different color. They’re just dusty…which is problem with white stirrups over white sanis.

    That’s why I think they should just wear white stirrupless socks with either stipes or a logo.

    Maybe like this one, only with a white sock on a black disc.
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I like those but then again I like the red and blue look of the early 70’s.

  • =bg= | July 25, 2009 at 10:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”342163″][quote comment=”342160″][quote comment=”342158″]Late last night, I found my New Era Rockies hat I bought in 1996. I put it on, and I was fairly pleased with it.
    It dawned on me, with Arizona and Tampa Bay abandoning the color purple, Colorado is the only team that has it.
    Every league needs a little purple. Would anybody be happy if the Lakers and Vikings went away from it?
    I ended with a lot of “its”.[/quote]

    Couldn’t agree with you more, it would be strange if the Vikes and Lakers switched colors. IMO, Arizona and Tampa should not have switched from purple, either. Both the Dbacks and Rays have boring, unimaginative uniforms.[/quote]

    I’m glad TB and AZ ditched it. It is one of those colors that only one or two teams should sport.

    The Rockies deserve the purple mountain majesty.[/quote]

    “Every league needs a little purple. Would anybody be happy if the Lakers and Vikings went away from it?”

    I can think of one guy.

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 10:40 pm |

    [quote]Rule: The cap should have ALL team colors represented. If the White Sox include gray, or they (meaning we) wish to use red, place it on the cap somehow, someway.[/quote]
    I could not possibly disagree with this rule more.

    White Sox caps look great in black and white. Look at this clusterfuck is that really the logo you want to see on the cap?

    Do the Dodgers need red on their caps to match their jerseys, too? The answer to that one had better be a resounding “no”.

  • Ricko | July 25, 2009 at 10:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”342160″][quote comment=”342158″]Late last night, I found my New Era Rockies hat I bought in 1996. I put it on, and I was fairly pleased with it.
    It dawned on me, with Arizona and Tampa Bay abandoning the color purple, Colorado is the only team that has it.
    Every league needs a little purple. Would anybody be happy if the Lakers and Vikings went away from it?
    I ended with a lot of “its”.[/quote]

    Couldn’t agree with you more, it would be strange if the Vikes and Lakers switched colors. IMO, Arizona and Tampa should not have switched from purple, either. Both the Dbacks and Rays have boring, unimaginative uniforms.[/quote]

    Rays at least have a certain classic feel.
    D-Backs seemed to have decided that instead of looking a little like the Rockies, they should look a lot like the Astros.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 10:57 pm |

    [quote]3. Pants Rarely Look Good (with Stirrups) Lower Than Mid Calf. This was sorta of the routine look for a lot of nondescript MLBers at the time. Oh, some great players opted for it, but visually was just kinda “I put on my uniform and don’t care about how I look.”[/quote]
    Cut Billy some slack. Look at the clown suit that poor bastard had to wear at the time. He probably figured “well, I can’t polish this turd so why bother trying?” The only thing that uni had going for it was the sleeve patch (which, by the way they need to bring back).
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Oh, and the Billy Buck lovefest must continue. (I know you weren’t criticizing the man, just the way he was wearing his socks.) Growing up, he was one of my favorite players. In 2003, if the Cubs and Red Sox had both won their respective LCS, I would have been sitting in Fenway watching one of the games in a #22/BUCKNER NOB powder blue pintstriped throwback.

    …but we all know how that turned out. *sigh*

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 10:57 pm |

    pintstriped?

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”342106″]JTH, supersleuth that he is, is correct…the scoreboard answer is sequential (that’s all im gonna say) and i had to figure it out the same way he did (by going onto shorpy) since there were THREE games in that world series featuring the same starting pitchers facing each other and the same lineups[/quote]
    Gotta admit that I’m pretty proud of myself for figuring this one out (even though I did cheat) because:
    A) I was rushing out the door
    II) I have gotten very little sleep lately
    3) I had a fairly nasty hangover (those who read my last two comments on yesterday’s post might be less than surprised to find this out).

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:05 pm |

    Crap. I hate it when I screw up the quote tags.

    I hope this turns out better.

    [quote]JTH, supersleuth that he is, is correct…the scoreboard answer is sequential (that’s all im gonna say) and i had to figure it out the same way he did (by going onto shorpy) since there were THREE games in that world series featuring the same starting pitchers facing each other and the same lineups[/quote]

    Gotta admit that I’m pretty proud of myself for figuring this one out (even though I did cheat) because:
    A) I was rushing out the door
    II) I have gotten very little sleep lately
    3) I had a fairly nasty hangover (those who read my last two comments on yesterday’s post might be less than surprised to find this out).

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 11:08 pm |

    [quote]those who read my last two comments on yesterday’s post might be less than surprised to find this out[/quote]

    those were the ones posted at 3 AM?

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:18 pm |

    OK, last one — I promise.

    To the anti-white on white football uni crowd: you are all truly cracked.

    If you wear a white helmet you must wear white pants no matter what color the jersey is. ALWAYS… with one possible exception. This looks OK to me — not as good as the all-white, but acceptable. I’m not sure why, maybe because the sleeves match the pants?

    Dark helmet/white jersey: pants should be white or match the helmet. I’m looking at you, Pittsburgh Steelers. (Of course, there’s an exception to this rule as well.)

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”342180″][quote]those who read my last two comments on yesterday’s post might be less than surprised to find this out[/quote]

    those were the ones posted at 3 AM?[/quote]
    What gave it away?

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”342182″]What gave it away?[/quote]

    Joe DiMaggio? What the fuck did he ever do besides make coffee maker commercials?

  • studio time | July 25, 2009 at 11:33 pm |

    okay, i’ll stay away for the rest of the night:)

  • Chuck | July 25, 2009 at 11:45 pm |

    it boggles my mind that the Mets just dont get it! they had a great chance to go back to square one with the new stadium, and wear the traditional pinstripes and road grays (keep it simple). now they are wearing black Mets jerseys on the road, WTF? who is running this ship?

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”342183″][quote comment=”342182″]What gave it away?[/quote]

    Joe DiMaggio? What the fuck did he ever do besides make coffee maker commercials?[/quote]
    Uh, yeah. I was attempting to make reference to one of those stupid ESPN SportsNation polls where they were asking who the greatest player to wear number 5 is. The baseball savants from Missouri bestowed that honor upon Albert Pujols. I think George Brett won Kansas. DiMaggio was the winner of like every other state.

    I can’t remember who else was nominated.

  • Chuck | July 25, 2009 at 11:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    sorry, but the Browns white pants with white jerseys are awesome!

  • LI Phil | July 25, 2009 at 11:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”342186″]I can’t remember who else was nominated.[/quote]

    i can’t believe this guy didn’t win

  • JTH | July 25, 2009 at 11:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”342188″][quote comment=”342186″]I can’t remember who else was nominated.[/quote]

    i can’t believe this guy didn’t win[/quote]
    He won Strong Island.

  • mtjaws | July 26, 2009 at 1:11 am |

    [quote comment=”342136″][quote comment=”342102″]Add the Dolphins to the ugly all-white look. I hate it, and wish they’d wear the teal or all-teal more.

    As for today’s “rules”, I agree with most of them. The one stirrup thing I hate most is the long thin type, as seen on Arizona State. I like the mid-length like Outman, and the short length like Ernie Banks, but the longest type is the worst.[/quote]

    I disagree on the Dolphins statement. As a Dolphins fan, all teal is evil. Everyone goes for that solid one color look, the Dolphins don’t need to. All white works at home so the other team suffers in the heat. Its also a classic look.[/quote]

    I’m not saying they should do all-teal every time, but maybe once per year would work for me. And I know they wear all-white so the other team suffers in the heat, but I would prefer the teal pants with the white jerseys. But despite that heat-based choice, I think the home team in football should always wear dark jerseys.

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 1:12 am |

    [quote comment=”342077″][quote comment=”342072″][quote comment=”342061″][quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote]

    I’m assuming this isn’t your favorite NFL uniform then?

    http://media3.washin...

    That’s the best looking of a sorry lot.[/quote]
    The Jets in all-white look awesome.
    Piggy-backing off your rule, I have my own with white in football: “all white” (helmet + jersey + pants) looks fine, but matching helmet and pants stripes are encouraged, as well as colorful socks to inject some color into the look. If the monochrome body suit (matching jersey and pants) must happen with a mismatched helmet, my “favorite” is white jersey, white pants, and some other color helmet, like the Cleveland Browns of today.[/quote]

    I pretty much agree with this. If the helmet is light, then you may go all-white. Dark helmets need dark pants (and black shoes with white laces, Ricko).

    The Giants, Bills and Chiefs all look better with dark pants. Gray is my first choice for the Giants, but I did like that mid-70s stint with the blue pants.

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 1:33 am |

    [quote comment=”342149″][quote comment=”342137″]Long time Chiefs fans know that when it comes to pants, red is the color of failure.

    Len Dawson? White pants. Derrick Thomas? White pants. Hundreds of lousy players in between? Red pants.

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote][/quote]

    Ghost, I’m not a Chiefs fan, but surprised you are so anti-red pants. Remember your 1969 world championship season? KC wore red pants often that year, including road playoff games wins over the Jets and Raiders.[/quote]

    Yeah, plus Len Dawson lost Super Bowl I in white pants. I think of Mike Garrett and Curley Culp when I see the red pants – hardly “lousy players in between.”

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 1:40 am |

    [quote comment=”342151″][quote comment=”342148″][quote comment=”342146″]Ricko, I agree with all 13. My number one rule for fans is, “dont wear a uni shirt of a player younger than you”. It makes you look like a complete ass, either wear one with no name and/or number, or go throwback. There is nothing worse than seeing a 55 year old guy with ab 87 Pens sweater.[/quote]

    rAKE, have to disagree with your take on that one. If you’re a fan of a team with a great young player, can’t see anything wrong with wearing a jersey. Sidney Crosby is only 21, does that also mean a 31 year old fan shouldn’t wear a # 87 jersey to a hockey game? Of course not.[/quote]
    Actually, I’m pretty sure that that’s exactly what it means to him. And I get what he’s saying. It does seem a little odd to hero worship a guy younger then you, which is kinda what it means to be wearing an individual player’s jersey.[/quote]

    I can see both sides here. I don’t have a problem with older people wearing younger guys’ jerseys, but it does seem odd at times. I’m sort of a Cavs fan, and I saw a “throwback jersey” t-shirt of LeBron James. It looked cool, but I just couldn’t buy it. If they make the same thing with Shaq this year I might pull the trigger. I’d rather have a Campy Russell or Hot Rod Williams shirt, though.

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 1:43 am |

    [quote comment=”342164″]There is something very, very wrong about the White Sox wearing black socks. It would be like the Patroits having a British flag on their helmet.[/quote]

    Amen!

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 1:54 am |

    [quote comment=”342181″]OK, last one — I promise.

    To the anti-white on white football uni crowd: you are all truly cracked.

    If you wear a white helmet you must wear white pants no matter what color the jersey is. ALWAYS… with one possible exception. This looks OK to me — not as good as the all-white, but acceptable. I’m not sure why, maybe because the sleeves match the pants?

    Dark helmet/white jersey: pants should be white or match the helmet. I’m looking at you, Pittsburgh Steelers. (Of course, there’s an exception to this rule as well.)[/quote]

    Steelers in white pants? No, no, a thousand times no. They did that in 1970 and it looked bad. If they wear the gold throwback helmet with a white jersey, then yes.

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 2:10 am |

    Okay, one more post…

    Great job, Ricko. Only one thing was wrong with your birthday uniform – you should have worn the red shoe on the blue sock and vice versa. Otherwise, great look. That beats the time I wore a green and white horizontal striped soccer jersey with red and white vertical striped basketball breakaway pants (it was Christmas and I wanted to look festive).

    As for the rules, I like alternate vests, but otherwise you appear to be spot on with them.

    Phil, I was going to agree with your first rule…until I saw those Korean all-orange unis with white pinstripes. That would be an exception for me. Come to think of it, these http://cache.daylife... rock too. We’ll talk about your rules another day, my friend.

  • Hibbsy | July 26, 2009 at 2:15 am |

    [quote comment=”342174″][quote]Rule: The cap should have ALL team colors represented. If the White Sox include gray, or they (meaning we) wish to use red, place it on the cap somehow, someway.[/quote]
    I could not possibly disagree with this rule more.

    White Sox caps look great in black and white. Look at this clusterfuck is that really the logo you want to see on the cap?

    Do the Dodgers need red on their caps to match their jerseys, too? The answer to that one had better be a resounding “no”.[/quote]

    Fuck that cluster.
    Trim the white in gray. Don’t offset it with black trim in between. There is a tasteful way of handling it.
    And no, the Dodgers red is an entirely different realm of inconspicuous. Gnarly, but acceptable.
    Hypocritically sound.

  • Hibbsy | July 26, 2009 at 2:16 am |

    [quote comment=”342183″][quote comment=”342182″]What gave it away?[/quote]

    Joe DiMaggio? What the fuck did he ever do besides make coffee maker commercials?[/quote]

    I believe that he dunked at Dinky’s.

  • hncreature | July 26, 2009 at 2:19 am |

    Funny that this is mentioned – Just the other day I was talking about the MLB Network showing old All-Star Games and someone talked about an Indian wearing BLUE at an All-Star Game…George Hendrick…he didn’t know the Indians had a blue jersey with the “Caveman” letters – So it was either the ’74 or ’75 All-Star Game

  • hncreature | July 26, 2009 at 2:27 am |

    Just found the 1977 All-Star Game photo with both Indians Jim Kern and Dennis Eckersley…Jim in Red top and Dennis in Blue??? That is weird that they are in the two different colors but then someone asked me the other day…again with the MLB Network showing past All-Star Games…if I saw one of the early 70’s games with the A’s in all different color combinations – That would be cool to see

  • Hibbsy | July 26, 2009 at 2:33 am |

    Off uniforms, but aesthetically sound, I found a CCR album tonight. Man. I often forget how good CCR sounds. No one has yet to sound like them. Kind of like the greatest American band of all time.
    The Minutemen.
    And I realized, the Minutemen started out playing mostly CCR covers.
    Fuck DYI.
    We jam econo.

  • Hibbsy | July 26, 2009 at 3:17 am |

    [quote comment=”342201″]Off uniforms, but aesthetically sound, I found a CCR album tonight. Man. I often forget how good CCR sounds. No one has yet to sound like them. Kind of like the greatest American band of all time.
    The Minutemen.
    And I realized, the Minutemen started out playing mostly CCR covers.
    Fuck DYI.
    We jam econo.[/quote]
    I need to stop. My apologies. Rants are rants. And that’s that. I do love the Minutemen. I wish everyone on Uneewatch did, too.
    I have conversations with myself in the basement, then I come up here and type them.
    I put in a small section of a brick patio today.
    What’s everyone else doing tonight?
    Are you celebrating a construction project?
    My dogs, and the one we are dog sitting, are being really funny.

  • japanjohnny | July 26, 2009 at 7:19 am |

    The “Guess the Game” is Game 4 of the 1912 World Series between the Giants and Red Sox. It was easy enough to get without googling, etc. I went to Baseball-Reference.com and looked for the pitching match-up. Found they had three starts, 2 at the Polo Grounds and one at Fenway. I looked at each of the games to see who had a hit in the top of the first with nobody out. It happened twice, once by Harry Hopper and once by J. Devore, but since Hopper played for the Red Sox and the scoreboard was from an AL city (the original Nats before becoming the Senators) and the hit is credited to the “home” (AL) team it must be that game. Final score was 3-1 Red Sox.

  • The Ghost of Ross Gload | July 26, 2009 at 9:19 am |

    No one will read this, since Saturday’s done, but….

    I was four years old during Super Bowl IV, so I have no useful memories of good Chiefs football in red pants. My formative memories of red pantsed Chiefs include a lot of guys who were way past their primes, year after year of blown first round draft picks (including Steve Fuller, who neither passed like lightning nor ran like thunder in red pants), and a team that fired John Mackovic after their first playoff trip in forever because the kicker didn’t like him.

    Marty Schottenheimer washed all that away. For all his playoff failings, he made the Chiefs into something resembling a professional football team again.

    So I’m a white pants man. Now and forever.

    [quote comment=”342149″][quote comment=”342137″]Long time Chiefs fans know that when it comes to pants, red is the color of failure.

    Len Dawson? White pants. Derrick Thomas? White pants. Hundreds of lousy players in between? Red pants.

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote][/quote]

    Ghost, I’m not a Chiefs fan, but surprised you are so anti-red pants. Remember your 1969 world championship season? KC wore red pants often that year, including road playoff games wins over the Jets and Raiders.[/quote]

  • JimV19 | July 26, 2009 at 10:37 am |

    [quote comment=”342209″]No one will read this, since Saturday’s done, but….

    I was four years old during Super Bowl IV, so I have no useful memories of good Chiefs football in red pants. My formative memories of red pantsed Chiefs include a lot of guys who were way past their primes, year after year of blown first round draft picks (including Steve Fuller, who neither passed like lightning nor ran like thunder in red pants), and a team that fired John Mackovic after their first playoff trip in forever because the kicker didn’t like him.

    Marty Schottenheimer washed all that away. For all his playoff failings, he made the Chiefs into something resembling a professional football team again.

    So I’m a white pants man. Now and forever.

    [quote comment=”342149″][quote comment=”342137″]Long time Chiefs fans know that when it comes to pants, red is the color of failure.

    Len Dawson? White pants. Derrick Thomas? White pants. Hundreds of lousy players in between? Red pants.

    [quote comment=”342059″]I have one NFL rule. No white pants with white jerseys. The Giants, Bills, Chiefs have all viotlated this rule and it looks like they are wearing practice unis.[/quote][/quote]

    Ghost, I’m not a Chiefs fan, but surprised you are so anti-red pants. Remember your 1969 world championship season? KC wore red pants often that year, including road playoff games wins over the Jets and Raiders.[/quote][/quote]

    Can’t say no one will read this now…

    At least you have a good reasoning behind your argument. Therefore, If I become owner of the Chiefs I will have white pants as an option. I’m still going with red pants, though, because they’re part of their history. We older folks will appreciate them (besides, a good craftsman never blames his tools, or his pants). I think that’s a good compromise. I’d agree if I were you, or I may have them wear red pants with red jerseys. ;)

  • The Ghost of Ross Gload | July 26, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”342213″][quote comment=”342209″]
    Can’t say no one will read this now…

    At least you have a good reasoning behind your argument. Therefore, If I become owner of the Chiefs I will have white pants as an option. I’m still going with red pants, though, because they’re part of their history. We older folks will appreciate them (besides, a good craftsman never blames his tools, or his pants). I think that’s a good compromise. I’d agree if I were you, or I may have them wear red pants with red jerseys. ;)[/quote]

    Well, if you’re going to get mean about it, I’ll behave.

    My son has a McFarlane figure of Priest Holmes, clad in all red. The horror…..

  • Chad | August 1, 2009 at 7:49 pm |

    Actually all the “Guess the game” posts are wrong. It is actually Game 7. When looking at the lineup in the picture, Devore is playing RF. In the three games with the same pitching matchups, Devore plays RF in Game 7 only — and LF in the others.