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

Can You Bring a Guillotine onto the Ice?

louis-xvi.jpg

I believe this is the first time I’ve seen an NOB with a hyphen and roman numerals. What’s it all about? Reader Jeff Nephew explains: “That’s Eric Louis-Seize, a forward from Quebec, who recently joined the Truro Bearcats of the Maritime Junior A Hockey League (MJAHL). ‘Louis-Seize’ translates literally to ‘Louis the 16th,’ which explains his unusual nameplate. This is in contrast to last year, when he played with Halifax of the QMJHL and had his name fully spelled out.” (Both photos taken by Richard Lafortune.)

New ESPN column today — the annual NHL season preview, which will cover uniforms and goalie masks (link coming soon). And then I’ll have another ESPN column tomorrow, devoted exclusively to goalie pads, blockers, and the like. And now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go collapse.

rafflet ticket by ben thoma.jpg

Sure, a new raffle, why the hell not?: Our friends at SportsCrack are once again making a free T-shirt available to one lucky reader — winner’s choice (although I can tell you they’re particularly pleased with this one).

To enter, send a blank e-mail with your name in the subject line to the NEW raffle address (note that this isn’t the old raffle address or the regular Uni Watch e-mail address) by 10pm next Monday, October 5th. One entry per person, but anyone enrolled in the Uni Watch membership program at the time of the drawing can send four entries. I’ll announce the winner next Tuesday. … Sorry, raffle canceled.

Uni Watch News Ticker: FNOB alert. That’s Mick Williams, who plays for Pitt. The funny thing is, Mick is just his nickname — his real first name is Ernest. Interestingly, the other two Williamses on the Pitt roster are Greg and Manny — no photos of them, but does anyone know if Greg has FNOB or just a first initial? (All this courtesy of Denis Kirstein.) … Hate to admit it, but Abercrombie & Fitch actually has some decent tees (with thanks to Matthew Gahm). … Not sure if I’ve mentioned this before, but have you ever noticed that the two design icons most frequently found on the back of a car — the Jesus fish and the yellow ribbon — are basically the exact same thing? … Two Houston football players misplaced their helmets after last weekend’s game (with thanks to Matt Mitchell). … Matt also claims that he heard a broadcaster saying that the UTEP Miners’ short, spiky helmet stripe is supposed to represent the business end of a rock hammer. Never heard that before. Can anyone confirm? … Good observation by Joseph de la Riva, who notes that the Cowboys’ old field at Texas Stadium had royal blue trim, but their new field has navy blue trim. … “Worst Uni Ever” articles are a penny a dozen, but this one has a small saving grace: a Sox in shorts photo I’d never seen before (with thanks to Keith Dow). … Not uni-related, but the prediction of the year — or maybe of all time — took place during Sunday’s Mariners/Jays game. Listen to the two audio clips here (as forwarded by my ESPN colleague Dave Schoenfield). … Then again, I’ve been predicting Daniel Murphy double-play grounders for months, so what’s the big deal? … Good tip from James Huening: “If you go here, you can hear some discussion with Bears linebacker Nick Roach about swapping out the helmet radio receivers (he was playing the strong side position at the start of Sunday’s game but moved to the middle when Hunter Hillenmeyer had to leave the game). Unfortunately, there’s no timer on the progress bar, but it’s about 20% of the way through the interview. If you drag the progress icon to the point right under the letter ‘h’ in the words ‘the future,’ you can go directly to that point in the conversation.” … You know, it’s not like I ever thought Desmond Tutu, Elie Wiesel, or Ghandi worked in the NFL offices. But when you read some of the quotes in a story like this one, the league comes off sounding disturbingly like the tobacco industry, at least in terms of its ability to lie about the health effects of its product. … Eleven new screen shots have been added to our AFL Full Color set. Among the highlights: a Texans logo with a spur (never seen that before) and Babe Parilli with FNOB (major thanks to Mako Mameli). … If you skip ahead to the 12:10 mark of this video, you’ll find a report on the Nets’ practice jersey ads (with thanks to Paul Wiederecht). … Tons of great goalie mask photos available here (big thanks to Jeff Brand). … I love socks, uniforms, and the color green, so you think I’d be all over a vintage baseball uni for a team called the Green Sox. But not at this price. … Matt Harris notes that Hideki Matsui’s bat logo appears to have a Godzilla tail motif. … Slideshow of Nebraska football uniform evolution here (with thanks to Eric Brown). … Tyler Hull was watching the Champions League match between Arsenal and Olympiakos and saw that Olympiakos players were wearing two different type of socks.

 

298 comments to Can You Bring a Guillotine onto the Ice?

  • Dane | September 30, 2009 at 8:44 am |

    I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

  • Robert Eden (formerly Robert in Dallas) | September 30, 2009 at 8:50 am |

    The Green Sox jersey reads “Green-Sox” – how odd.

  • Robert Eden (formerly Robert in Dallas) | September 30, 2009 at 8:56 am |

    The Nebraska football uniform evolution states that the team wore Shimmel jerseys in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. What is a Shimmel jersey?

  • Kent Skor | September 30, 2009 at 8:57 am |

    Once, after a UVa-VMI football game (we barely beat them, not sure we could do it this year), one of my fraternity brothers stole a VMI helmet. He grabbed it when the VMI players had to stand at attention while the flag was lowered.

    We thought it was funny to have it during the party that night but were kinda embarrassed on Sunday morning. So we sent the pledges to return it.

    We figured the guy who lost it probably had to do push-ups all week.

    Kent

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 9:01 am |

    Cowboys’ old field at Texas Stadium had royal blue trim, but their new field has navy blue trim. …

    You guys must have terrific eyesight. I can’t even begin to identify what color the cheerleaders are wearing.

  • ATLShaun | September 30, 2009 at 9:13 am |

    It looks like in that pic of Mick Wilson that his NOB is white and Mason’s is gold… is it just the light or something?

  • adam | September 30, 2009 at 9:19 am |

    Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point!

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 9:27 am |

    [quote comment=”351005″]Cowboys’ old field at Texas Stadium had royal blue trim, but their new field has navy blue trim. …

    You guys must have terrific eyesight. I can’t even begin to identify what color the cheerleaders are wearing.[/quote]

    I can tell you it’s most certainly ketchup and mustard like someone’s team..

    (ZING!)

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 9:29 am |

    RE: Cowboys Stadium

    You know, I noticed that almost immediately back in August, but it never occurred to me to point it out here. Does that make me a bad uniwatcher?

  • M.Princip | September 30, 2009 at 9:34 am |

    [quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    I assure you, there would not have been so much hate for those Seahawks lime green jerseys if they would have won the game. Difference between the Lime Green Riches, or, Slime Green Bitches.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 9:36 am |

    [quote comment=”351003″]The Nebraska football uniform evolution states that the team wore Shimmel jerseys in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. What is a Shimmel jersey?[/quote]

    A Schimmel is a jersey with the bottom of the body cut off. Doesn’t tuck into the pants. You remember the look, I’m sure.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 9:37 am |

    Nebraska QB Turner Gill in a Schimmel…
    http://www.tigerrag....

    —Ricko

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 9:39 am |

    [quote comment=”351012″]Nebraska QB Turner Gill in a Schimmel…
    http://www.tigerrag....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That’s hot.

  • kj | September 30, 2009 at 9:39 am |

    [quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 9:47 am |

    [quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

    I like the one with the name Knockturn Ali, which is a reference to Harry Potter. Well Played.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 9:47 am |

    [quote comment=”351004″]Once, after a UVa-VMI football game (we barely beat them, not sure we could do it this year), one of my fraternity brothers stole a VMI helmet. He grabbed it when the VMI players had to stand at attention while the flag was lowered.

    We thought it was funny to have it during the party that night but were kinda embarrassed on Sunday morning. So we sent the pledges to return it.

    We figured the guy who lost it probably had to do push-ups all week.

    Kent[/quote]
    And to think, there are some people in this world who have a negative perception of fraternity life.

  • Jordan Sogn | September 30, 2009 at 9:48 am |

    [quote comment=”351009″]RE: Cowboys Stadium

    You know, I noticed that almost immediately back in August, but it never occurred to me to point it out here. Does that make me a bad uniwatcher?[/quote]

    Me, too.

  • LennyT | September 30, 2009 at 9:48 am |

    http://www.greyflann...

    Went looking for a Kansas City A’s jersey and found this gem. That is a FiNOB (first name on back). Also, from the back it looks like a basketball jersey.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 9:49 am |

    [quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

    Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
    http://www.hollywood...

    Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

    —Ricko

  • Hank | September 30, 2009 at 9:49 am |

    NFL’s head-in-the-sand response to the early dementia study comes as no surprise. In fact, it reminds me of this http://www.youtube.c...

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    I hate to pee all over your sponsors, Paul, but looking at their site for the drawing – does the level of gay-bashing bother anybody else?

  • Matt Brosseau | September 30, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    Wow, some particularly misogynistic and homophobic shirts over there at Sports Crack. Stay classy, you guys.

    In non-offensive-asshole news, I’m surprised Eric Louis-Seize doesn’t wear #16.

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 9:52 am |

    [quote comment=”351022″]I hate to pee all over your sponsors, Paul, but looking at their site for the drawing – does the level of gay-bashing bother anybody else?[/quote]
    Since I can’t edit, “gay bashing” isn’t really the best word choice. But using “gay” and “homo” as slurs isn’t really on, is it?

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 9:53 am |

    [quote comment=”351019″][quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

    Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
    http://www.hollywood...

    Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Try this link…
    http://www.hollywood...

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 9:55 am |

    [quote comment=”351025″][quote comment=”351019″][quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

    Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
    http://www.hollywood...

    Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Try this link…
    http://www.hollywood...

    Or just watch the trailer there. That’s probably enough. LOL

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 10:05 am |

    [quote comment=”351022″]I hate to pee all over your sponsors, Paul, but looking at their site for the drawing – does the level of gay-bashing bother anybody else?[/quote]

    Actually, yes — it bothers me. Which is why I recently asked them to create a mirror site without any of the objectionable product, and they readily complied:
    http://sportscrack.c...

    That’s the link that their ad (top of the left-hand rail) leads to. My bad for linking to their less savory site in today’s raffle announcement.

    Of course, you may feel that the more objectionable product poisons the well entirely. It’s a fair point — one that I’m still wrestling with, frankly.

  • peter | September 30, 2009 at 10:05 am |

    Hey Chance, then you’d really love Tshirthell.com

    Any way, I was at the Jets game Sunday and saw someone wearing an Future Jets 80’s Namath Jersey…this is so wrong!!

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 10:08 am |

    Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
    http://farm3.static....

    Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

    All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

    “Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

    —Ricko

  • mmwatkin | September 30, 2009 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment=”351023″]Wow, some particularly misogynistic and homophobic shirts over there at Sports Crack. Stay classy, you guys.

    In non-offensive-asshole news, I’m surprised Eric Louis-Seize doesn’t wear #16.[/quote]

    Which shirts are you referring to?

  • Matt Brosseau | September 30, 2009 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment=”351027″]
    Actually, yes — it bothers me. Which is why I recently asked them to create a mirror site without any of the objectionable product, and they readily complied:
    http://sportscrack.c...
    [/quote]

    Paul, you should follow your own link, as the “GINAS” and “HOMO” shirt indeed both appear in it. I know it’s not your fault, and I’m glad you’re bothered by it–we all should be–but I fear that your sponsor is merely placating you and not addressing the real issue at hand.

  • Robert Eden (formerly Robert in Dallas) | September 30, 2009 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment=”351011″][quote comment=”351003″]The Nebraska football uniform evolution states that the team wore Shimmel jerseys in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. What is a Shimmel jersey?[/quote]

    A Schimmel is a jersey with the bottom of the body cut off. Doesn’t tuck into the pants. You remember the look, I’m sure.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Thanks, Ricko. I remember the look well, and always thought that it was damn cool, particularly if a t-shirt was worn under the jersey. Somehow I missed that it was called a Schimmel, though. (I hang my head in shame.)

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 10:12 am |

    Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.

  • Robert Eden (formerly Robert in Dallas) | September 30, 2009 at 10:12 am |

    [quote comment=”351019″][quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

    Now this here is Roller Derby, yessir…
    http://www.hollywood...

    Wanna have some laughs? Watch that aptly named “bomb” sometime.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I love “Kansas City Bomber.” The DVD occupies a prominent place in my collection and in my heart.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:12 am |

    [quote comment=”351031″][quote comment=”351027″]
    Actually, yes — it bothers me. Which is why I recently asked them to create a mirror site without any of the objectionable product, and they readily complied:
    http://sportscrack.c...
    [/quote]

    Paul, you should follow your own link, as the “GINAS” and “HOMO” shirt indeed both appear in it. I know it’s not your fault, and I’m glad you’re bothered by it–we all should be–but I fear that your sponsor is merely placating you and not addressing the real issue at hand.[/quote]Yep. Right there on the main page.

  • Matt Brosseau | September 30, 2009 at 10:16 am |

    [quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    Good on you, Paul. To show you my gratitude, I’m buying a Uni Watch membership in support of tolerance and equality.

  • Jordan Sogn | September 30, 2009 at 10:17 am |

    I’m not sure if this has been posted as of yet…KU vs Joe

    http://www.kansascit...

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:20 am |

    [quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
    http://farm3.static....

    Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

    All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

    “Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

    —Ricko[/quote]
    This comes to mind.

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 10:21 am |

    [quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    Paul,

    I’d like to applaud you for that. I find the shirts in poor taste, but I can handle them. At the same time i’m not sure there is really any place for a Homo shirt regardless of what other teams fans call tony romo.

    the fact that you asked them to create a mirror site and they still couldn’t comply with your request is just bad business on their part.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:21 am |
  • Juke Early | September 30, 2009 at 10:24 am |

    Being an old & frugal guy, I’d enjoy winning a T. However, having had a look at the stuff offered by Sportscrack, I wouldn’t take or much less buy anything from a place that sells Yankee hater crap. Know I know where the “crack” is located too. . ..

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 10:25 am |

    [quote comment=”351039″][quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
    http://farm3.static....

    Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

    All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

    “Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

    —Ricko[/quote]
    This comes to mind.[/quote]

    Not exactly sure what the question is, but Jon Kitna for Anthony Henry?

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 10:26 am |

    [quote comment=”351043″][quote comment=”351039″][quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
    http://farm3.static....

    Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

    All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

    “Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

    —Ricko[/quote]
    This comes to mind.[/quote]

    Not exactly sure what the question is, but Jon Kitna for Anthony Henry?[/quote]

    Or are we talking same position?

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 10:27 am |

    [quote comment=”351040″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    Paul,

    I’d like to applaud you for that. I find the shirts in poor taste, but I can handle them. At the same time i’m not sure there is really any place for a Homo shirt regardless of what other teams fans call tony romo.

    the fact that you asked them to create a mirror site and they still couldn’t comply with your request is just bad business on their part.[/quote]

    In hindsight, I should have insisted that they stop selling the less tasteful product altogether as soon as I became aware of it, instead of having them create a mirror site. My bad for not having done that.

    Thanks again for speaking out on this — much appreciated.

  • Matt H. | September 30, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    Ginas and Homos you really think were gay bashing?

    Come on.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 10:29 am |

    [quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    good on you

    ya gotta admit, tho…the “hide your beagle — vick’s an eagle” shirt was classic

    the others, particularly the questionable ones…not so much

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 10:32 am |

    [quote comment=”351047″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    good on you

    ya gotta admit, tho…the “hide your beagle — vick’s an eagle” shirt was classic

    the others, particularly the questionable ones…not so much[/quote]

    LOL! I was hoping I would win the raffle so I could get that shirt..

  • Robert Eden (formerly Robert in Dallas) | September 30, 2009 at 10:35 am |

    I like the way the issue with the sportscrack.com site has been handled.

    The Glorious Leader does not like the content of their site and opts against doing further business with them. Straightforward, simple, and supportive of his position.

    The sportscrack.com will no doubt continue to sell the objectionable shirts for as long as it is profitable to do so. Beautiful. That is America.

    As for me, I think that the homo shirts are stupid and would never own one. I like a lot of the other items sold on sportscrack.com, however, and will continue to make purchases from them, as I am not ideological enough to boycott them due to an insensitive shirt selection.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 10:36 am |

    [quote comment=”351047″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    good on you

    ya gotta admit, tho…the “hide your beagle — vick’s an eagle” shirt was classic

    the others, particularly the questionable ones…not so much[/quote]

    For the sake of argument (I know, unusual here) I’d like to keep things in perspective by quoting one of our great philosophers, Mike Tyson: “If you don’t like it, turn off your station”.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”351048″]It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.[/quote]
    Jay Cutler for Kyle Orton.

    It’s the link I fucked up in my original reply to Ricko and then re-linked like 2 comments after that.

  • MBReed | September 30, 2009 at 10:39 am |

    from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October

  • bourbon soaked idiot | September 30, 2009 at 10:39 am |

    [quote comment=”351045″][quote comment=”351040″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    Paul,

    I’d like to applaud you for that. I find the shirts in poor taste, but I can handle them. At the same time i’m not sure there is really any place for a Homo shirt regardless of what other teams fans call tony romo.

    the fact that you asked them to create a mirror site and they still couldn’t comply with your request is just bad business on their part.[/quote]

    In hindsight, I should have insisted that they stop selling the less tasteful product altogether as soon as I became aware of it, instead of having them create a mirror site. My bad for not having done that.

    Thanks again for speaking out on this — much appreciated.[/quote]

    I haven’t gone on to Sportscrack’s site and don’t plan to, but from what I heard I comend Paul for canceling the raffle and the ads.

    I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 10:41 am |

    [quote comment=”351037″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    Good on you, Paul. To show you my gratitude, I’m buying a Uni Watch membership in support of tolerance and equality.[/quote]
    I just bought a t-shirt from Tararrel & Sons, and specifically mentioned their ad here.

  • steve | September 30, 2009 at 10:41 am |

    im pretty sure Greg Williams just has first initial

  • MR | September 30, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 10:43 am |

    [quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]
    Like it was somehow his idea? That figures.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 10:43 am |

    [quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]

    way to ruin a good lookin uni

  • adam | September 30, 2009 at 10:44 am |

    Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical

  • Jeff | September 30, 2009 at 10:50 am |

    Nike gets a conscious?

    http://thinkprogress...

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 10:50 am |

    [quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]

    What about at the games?

  • John T | September 30, 2009 at 10:52 am |

    Mr. Johnson’s latest kicks…..

    http://twitpic.com/j...

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 10:59 am |

    [quote comment=”351058″][quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]
    Like it was somehow his idea? That figures.[/quote]

    The best part is that PFT is having a hissy fit about how his decision to wear them all month instead of just week 4(they think it is a week 4 only deal) typifies the look at me attitude. I called them on it referencing paul’s page 2 post that says “throughout october”. doubt they’ll do an update though.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 11:05 am |

    [quote comment=”351063″]Mr. Johnson’s latest kicks…..

    http://twitpic.com/j...
    I don’t know how to feel about this. The only sensible comment on there is this one:

    Dude wtf is this ; c’mon SON! Why y’all lyinq deez UGLY !

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

    Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

    —Ricko

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 11:10 am |

    [quote comment=”351045″][quote comment=”351040″][quote comment=”351034″]Shit, now I see that one of the less tasteful tees is on the mirror site as well.

    That’s it, I’m gonna cancel their ad and cancel the raffle.

    Thanks for pointing this out, guys.[/quote]

    Paul,

    I’d like to applaud you for that. I find the shirts in poor taste, but I can handle them. At the same time i’m not sure there is really any place for a Homo shirt regardless of what other teams fans call tony romo.

    the fact that you asked them to create a mirror site and they still couldn’t comply with your request is just bad business on their part.[/quote]

    In hindsight, I should have insisted that they stop selling the less tasteful product altogether as soon as I became aware of it, instead of having them create a mirror site. My bad for not having done that.

    Thanks again for speaking out on this — much appreciated.[/quote]

    Paul, this has nothing to do with the above topic, but I sent you an email relevant to your hockey article that’s due on ESPN. You may want to peek at it before the article has run.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:12 am |

    [quote comment=”351052″][quote comment=”351048″]It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.[/quote]
    Jay Cutler for Kyle Orton.

    It’s the link I fucked up in my original reply to Ricko and then re-linked like 2 comments after that.[/quote]

    Ah, yes, how could I forget Orton for Cutler.
    Either way, such things don’t happen often these days.

    Thanks for waking me up. LOL

    —Ricko

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 11:16 am |

    [quote comment=”351069″][quote comment=”351052″][quote comment=”351048″]It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.[/quote]
    Jay Cutler for Kyle Orton.

    It’s the link I fucked up in my original reply to Ricko and then re-linked like 2 comments after that.[/quote]

    Ah, yes, how could I forget Orton for Cutler.
    Either way, such things don’t happen often these days.

    Thanks for waking me up. LOL

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Rick,
    are you talkin player for player? or prime player for prime player?

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    [quote comment=”351071″][quote comment=”351069″][quote comment=”351052″][quote comment=”351048″]It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.[/quote]
    Jay Cutler for Kyle Orton.

    It’s the link I fucked up in my original reply to Ricko and then re-linked like 2 comments after that.[/quote]

    Ah, yes, how could I forget Orton for Cutler.
    Either way, such things don’t happen often these days.

    Thanks for waking me up. LOL

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Rick,
    are you talkin player for player? or prime player for prime player?[/quote]

    Players on relatively same level, I guess. Not so much where there’s a throw-in body. Mostly was just thinking that much of the time it’s “Player for draft choice(s).”

    “Trades” as they used to be are rare these days. Even in other sports.

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 11:24 am |

    [quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

    So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

    True, every word of it.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 11:27 am |

    [quote comment=”351072″][quote comment=”351071″][quote comment=”351069″][quote comment=”351052″][quote comment=”351048″]It isn’t the most recent, but Clinton Portis for Champ Bailey comes to mind.[/quote]
    Jay Cutler for Kyle Orton.

    It’s the link I fucked up in my original reply to Ricko and then re-linked like 2 comments after that.[/quote]

    Ah, yes, how could I forget Orton for Cutler.
    Either way, such things don’t happen often these days.

    Thanks for waking me up. LOL

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Rick,
    are you talkin player for player? or prime player for prime player?[/quote]

    Players on relatively same level, I guess. Not so much where there’s a throw-in body. Mostly was just thinking that much of the time it’s “Player for draft choice(s).”

    “Trades” as they used to be are rare these days. Even in other sports.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Yesterday was a perfect example of this. Thigpen to the Dolphins; a draft pick to the Chiefs.

  • Andrew Wagner | September 30, 2009 at 11:27 am |

    I am about 99% positive that those Olympiakos socks are the same, but the one player simply has his twisted around so that it isn’t lined up on the leg correctly. Its just an issue with the way the player is wearing it. In the top picture, the player with his back to us is wearing them correctly, as is the player facing us in the bottom picture. The player with his back to us in the bottom picture simply has his socks twisted around. Also, you cannot see the Puma logo on his sock because he has folded the sock over at the top.

  • mike 2 | September 30, 2009 at 11:29 am |

    Eric Louis-Seize should wear number 16, not 97. Complete missed opportunity on his part.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 11:31 am |

    [quote comment=”351074″][quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

    So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

    True, every word of it.[/quote]
    No, no, no, no, no, no, no! You’ve got it all wrong. Everything that’s ever been wrong with this country can be attributed to Bill Clinton.

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    [quote comment=”351054″]I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.[/quote]

    Actually, there are several betting ads on the site — we’ve had them around for about two years now. I was wondering if anyone would ever comment on them, and to my knowledge this is the first time anyone has.

    I know some people think betting is evil or offensive. Personally, I think it’s more silly than anything else, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Yes, some people have gambling problems, but some people also have drinking problems — doesn’t mean I wouldn’t run a Yuengling ad if that company came calling (which seems unlikely, but still…).

    Anyway: We all know what betting is. If you’re into it, feel free to patronize our betting sponsors; if not, ignore their ads (which should be easy enough, since they’re all plain text ads — not display ads like our other sponsors). They mainly run those ads to boost their google search status anyway — they don’t much care if you click on them or not.

    The SportsCrack situation was trickier, because you could go to their site and stumble upon offensive material without realizing what you were getting into. I’m no longer comfortable being associated with their product, so that relationship is now over.

    Anyway: If anyone has a major problem with the betting ads, feel free to speak up — your feedback on this topic is welcome.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 11:34 am |
  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:36 am |

    [quote comment=”351078″][quote comment=”351074″][quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

    So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

    True, every word of it.[/quote]
    No, no, no, no, no, no, no! You’ve got it all wrong. Everything that’s ever been wrong with this country can be attributed to Bill Clinton.[/quote]

    LOL
    Was just gonna post….

    Let’s make it easy.
    “Everything wrong,
    in the whole freakin’ world,
    is the fault of President (current or former president),
    who is really Satan, btw,
    and those goddamn (his party).”

    There, now just fill in the parentheses based on your political leanings…and we’ll be done.

    —Ricko

  • Luke | September 30, 2009 at 11:37 am |

    Does anyone know why my Uniwatch page shows up in generic HTML format now? I don’t know what happened, but it’s only on my home computer. I tried resetting the browser, checked for updates on everything, I dunno. It really sucks because it’s must less enjoyable to look at now and has subsequently demoted me from an avid daily reader to a casual two-three times a week browser.

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    [quote comment=”351081″][quote comment=”351078″][quote comment=”351074″][quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

    So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

    True, every word of it.[/quote]
    No, no, no, no, no, no, no! You’ve got it all wrong. Everything that’s ever been wrong with this country can be attributed to Bill Clinton.[/quote]

    LOL
    Was just gonna post….

    Let’s make it easy.
    “Everything wrong,
    in the whole freakin’ world,
    is the fault of President (current or former president),
    who is really Satan, btw,
    and those goddamn (his party).”

    There, now just fill in the parentheses based on your political leanings…and we’ll be done.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The most important word there is “done.” Let’s move on.

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 11:39 am |

    [quote comment=”351082″]Does anyone know why my Uniwatch page shows up in generic HTML format now? I don’t know what happened, but it’s only on my home computer. I tried resetting the browser, checked for updates on everything, I dunno. It really sucks because it’s must less enjoyable to look at now and has subsequently demoted me from an avid daily reader to a casual two-three times a week browser.[/quote]

    Probably ad-blocker plug-in on Firefox. Disable that and see what happens.

  • The Jeff | September 30, 2009 at 11:41 am |

    [quote comment=”351080″]ocho pinko?[/quote]

    I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

    I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:43 am |

    [quote comment=”351083″][quote comment=”351081″][quote comment=”351078″][quote comment=”351074″][quote comment=”351060″]Welcome to the USA in the 21st century… thanks to liberals, democrats and this president’s administration people are offended by a T-shirt… but other ones on the same site are equally stupid and childish which the fearless leader likes… typical[/quote]

    So true. Up until Obama came along, you could walk around with a “Kill the Homos” tee — in Greenwich Village, even! — and nobody would bat an eye. But the White House personally called me and asked me to take down the SportsCrack ad, and I caved under their socialist mind-control tactics.

    True, every word of it.[/quote]
    No, no, no, no, no, no, no! You’ve got it all wrong. Everything that’s ever been wrong with this country can be attributed to Bill Clinton.[/quote]

    LOL
    Was just gonna post….

    Let’s make it easy.
    “Everything wrong,
    in the whole freakin’ world,
    is the fault of President (current or former president),
    who is really Satan, btw,
    and those goddamn (his party).”

    There, now just fill in the parentheses based on your political leanings…and we’ll be done.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The most important word there is “done.” Let’s move on.[/quote]

    My point exactly.

    So if pink is okay for Ocho Cinco, what’s so horrible about Neon Green on the Seahawks? I know, I know, wasn’t for a “cause”. Was just for fun. Can’t have THAT.

    —Ricko

  • John T | September 30, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”351085″][quote comment=”351080″]ocho pinko?[/quote]

    I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

    I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.[/quote]

    this from an earlier Chad Johnson comment

    Oh and as for getting fined I probably will because my entire shoe is pink, gloves are all pink and wrist bands I’ll match the fine n donate

    as was mentioned earlier, should do that Cincy uni proud….ugh

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”351085″][quote comment=”351080″]ocho pinko?[/quote]

    I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

    I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.[/quote]

    Gloves, shoes, etc., pretty much up to individual players, isn’t it?
    They’re neither being told TO do such things or NOT to do such things, correct?

    So it’s a wideout being flashy. Nothing new there (see: Lennie Moore, spatted shoes, mid 50’s or so).

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 11:51 am |

    [quote]So if pink is okay for Ocho Cinco, what’s so horrible about Neon Green on the Seahawks? I know, I know, wasn’t for a “cause”. Was just for fun. Can’t have THAT.[/quote]

    i bet shirts vs. skins would be “fun” too

    and who says pink on the uniforms, in this case accoutrements…is good?

    i didn’t hate the neon greens as much as i was prepared to, and as long as that uni is one and done, fine

    why doesn’t the NFL just, say, give a shitload of money to breast cancer research and be done with it? oh that’s right, they have to pat themselves on the back first

    pink gloves, pink sweats, pink shoes?

    c’mon…this shit is just ridiculous

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”351089″][quote]So if pink is okay for Ocho Cinco, what’s so horrible about Neon Green on the Seahawks? I know, I know, wasn’t for a “cause”. Was just for fun. Can’t have THAT.[/quote]

    i bet shirts vs. skins would be “fun” too

    and who says pink on the uniforms, in this case accoutrements…is good?

    i didn’t hate the neon greens as much as i was prepared to, and as long as that uni is one and done, fine

    why doesn’t the NFL just, say, give a shitload of money to breast cancer research and be done with it? oh that’s right, they have to pat themselves on the back first

    pink gloves, pink sweats, pink shoes?

    c’mon…this shit is just ridiculous[/quote]

    Hey, I get it now! The Browns brown pants are for Irritable Bowel Syndrome Awareness…a malady that is, appropriately enough, exacerbated by the Great Mangini’s coaching and people management skills.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | September 30, 2009 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”351088″][quote comment=”351085″][quote comment=”351080″]ocho pinko?[/quote]

    I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

    I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.[/quote]

    Gloves, shoes, etc., pretty much up to individual players, isn’t it?
    They’re neither being told TO do such things or NOT to do such things, correct?

    So it’s a wideout being flashy. Nothing new there (see: Lennie Moore, spatted shoes, mid 50’s or so).

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’d prefer flashy with team colors over flashy and pink.

    I’m sorry, but the whole thing just seems really empty to me. I’m all for cancer research, but I just don’t see any point at all in the pink thing. Wearing pink, or red… or any other color is nothing more than an empty symbolic gesture. You’re a player making 5 million dollars a year.. you want to help cancer research? Donate 100k. That’ll do a lot more than wearing pink gloves on TV.

    Same for the pink fan merchandise. If the NFL wants to donate a percentage they earn on sales to charity – great. But there’s no way in hell I’m ever buying or wearing a pink Raiders shirt.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 12:03 pm |

    Never said I liked the pink, just making sure the dismay was over the differentiation from team colors and not about the color itself.

    Also was saying a WR seizing an opportunity to go overboard and draw attention to himself is to be expected.

    (Said the skinny split end who constantly got shit from coaches back in ’62 and ’63 because he taped his shoes, LOL)

    —Ricko

  • Corey | September 30, 2009 at 12:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”351056″]im pretty sure Greg Williams just has first initial[/quote]

    Not the best photo, but here’s evidence that Greg Williams (#38) has just his first initial on back (FIOB):
    http://www.flickr.co...

  • Greenie | September 30, 2009 at 12:10 pm |

    Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie

  • CowboyBlue | September 30, 2009 at 12:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”351015″][quote comment=”351014″][quote comment=”351001″]I’m just gonna let the uniform number speak for itself in this picture:

    http://sportsillustr...

    I’m sure Paul could have a field day with modern roller derby uniforms. There’s a heavy DIY ethic in derby, so you do get a lot of non-conformity within the same team. The numbers don’t have a set pattern; for example, on my men’s team, we have a few odd numbers: 24601, A1, *25, and i.

    Oh, yeah, and I’m number 767, and skate under the name Killsbury Doughboy.[/quote]

    I like the one with the name Knockturn Ali, which is a reference to Harry Potter. Well Played.[/quote]

    I thought the same thing, but more than likely, it is a play on the word “nocturnally,” as is J.K. Rowling’s Knockturn Alley, a haven for the Dark Arts of magic in Harry Potter’s world. Of course, Diagon Alley is “diagonally,” referring to the not-quite parallel universe that the witches and wizards inhabit in the books.

    “Knockturn Ali” is one of the great roller-derby nicks.

  • CowboyBlue | September 30, 2009 at 12:19 pm |

    Wasn’t pink a secondary, or even tertiary, color for the Spurs back in the 80’s? Black, silver, pink … or maybe my memory is colorblind.

    Rather than a red team, I would suggest a team with a dark navy, black, or dark green primary color. Red and pink clash, in my opinion.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 12:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    Q & D, and probably not who you were thinkin

    care to ID the sport you had in mind andrew?

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 12:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”351096″]Wasn’t pink a secondary, or even tertiary, color for the Spurs back in the 80’s? Black, silver, pink … or maybe my memory is colorblind.

    Rather than a red team, I would suggest a team with a dark navy, black, or dark green primary color. Red and pink clash, in my opinion.[/quote]

    Hell, Fiesta Spurs of the mid-90s

  • Greenie | September 30, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”351097″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    Q & D, and probably not who you were thinkin

    care to ID the sport you had in mind andrew?[/quote]

    Actually, that was the only team in my mind. I couldn’t get the image out so i figured i’d ask around for others.

  • The Jeff | September 30, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

    Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.

  • mmwatkin | September 30, 2009 at 12:26 pm |

    [quote comment=\”351096\”]Wasn\’t pink a secondary, or even tertiary, color for the Spurs back in the 80\’s? Black, silver, pink … or maybe my memory is colorblind.

    Rather than a red team, I would suggest a team with a dark navy, black, or dark green primary color. Red and pink clash, in my opinion.[/quote]

    The 90\’version:

    http://www.sportslog...

    The current:

    http://www.sportslog...

    And for the hell of it…a mix of both

    http://i729.photobuc...

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 12:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”351099″][quote comment=”351097″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    Q & D, and probably not who you were thinkin

    care to ID the sport you had in mind andrew?[/quote]

    Actually, that was the only team in my mind. I couldn’t get the image out so i figured i’d ask around for others.[/quote]
    Here’s one that I think works nicely.

  • John T | September 30, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

    Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

    Are you sure about that…..

    http://www.zimbio.co...
    (Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops

  • bourbon soaked idiot | September 30, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”351079″][quote comment=”351054″]I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.[/quote]

    Actually, there are several betting ads on the site — we’ve had them around for about two years now. I was wondering if anyone would ever comment on them, and to my knowledge this is the first time anyone has.

    I know some people think betting is evil or offensive. Personally, I think it’s more silly than anything else, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Yes, some people have gambling problems, but some people also have drinking problems — doesn’t mean I wouldn’t run a Yuengling ad if that company came calling (which seems unlikely, but still…).

    Anyway: We all know what betting is. If you’re into it, feel free to patronize our betting sponsors; if not, ignore their ads (which should be easy enough, since they’re all plain text ads — not display ads like our other sponsors). They mainly run those ads to boost their google search status anyway — they don’t much care if you click on them or not.

    The SportsCrack situation was trickier, because you could go to their site and stumble upon offensive material without realizing what you were getting into. I’m no longer comfortable being associated with their product, so that relationship is now over.

    Anyway: If anyone has a major problem with the betting ads, feel free to speak up — your feedback on this topic is welcome.[/quote]

    I noticed the betting ad a while ago. I never bother to say anything, but once the SportsCrack topic came up i decided to chime in.

    The difference I see betwen a betting ad and a Yuengling ad is if my 15 tear old nephew were to decided he wanted a beer he would still have to go to a liquor store and purchase it. Hopefully most liquor stores would realize he’s 15 and not sell it to him even if he did have a fake ID. The gambling ads make it easy for teenagers to gamble and get in way over their heads. Especially since it’s probably pretty easy to gamble even if one is underage.

    Sure 44 year old men like you and I for the most part understand all about gambling and either go to the sports betting site or not. A lot kids think it’s cool and don’t fully understand the pitfalls of gambling.

  • BaltimoreFan | September 30, 2009 at 12:31 pm |

    Paul,

    Not to be a nitpicker here but where do you find the offensive shirts on Sportscrack.com? I don’t see any “Kill the Homos” or anything like that on there. All I see is some play of words that a lot of people including myself find humorous.

    I’m kind of offended you are offended. It’s a t-shirt. Get over it.

  • concealed78 | September 30, 2009 at 12:32 pm |

    This was posted on the Scout Broncos board, by user cubuffintx, which would quite possibly explain the brown helmet decal. Any merit to this claim? :

    “I have a book called “Barely Aubible” and the orange and blue was a complete mistake by the Uni company. they had ordered uni’s almost exactly like the Cle. Browns colors (old color, burnt orange or something similar) they were going to the colored jersey with the stupid looking bucking horse logo (they wore them on monday night in Buffalo in the mid-90’s) and when they opened the boxes they were UF Gator orange. There was no time to have them re-made so the blue and orange was born, by total circumstance.”

  • Namhob | September 30, 2009 at 12:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”351059″][quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]

    way to ruin a good lookin uni[/quote]
    http://profootballta... He plans to do more than that, and he intends on doing it throughout October; even if the league is only allowing players for Week 4 only.

  • John T | September 30, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”351103″][quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

    Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

    Are you sure about that…..

    http://www.zimbio.co...
    (Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops[/quote]

    Here is a video of their club shop (not too sure if it can be viewed in US though), player also tries to explain some of the shirts

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”351099″][quote comment=”351097″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    Q & D, and probably not who you were thinkin

    care to ID the sport you had in mind andrew?[/quote]

    Actually, that was the only team in my mind. I couldn’t get the image out so i figured i’d ask around for others.[/quote]

    so…wait…you were actually thinking of the chiefs? that was the one team that came instantly to my mind, but i was sure you had someone else in yours

    [quote]No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue[/quote]

    man, when i suggested putting the chisox in “powder red” i was vilified…so much so that i had to tone it down to mostly grayish-red

    ok, maybe the chisox weren’t the best team to choose for that treatment, but it seems putting any team in a pinkish hue is a no-go

    as an accent color, i think it could work

  • John T | September 30, 2009 at 12:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”351108″][quote comment=”351103″][quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

    Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

    Are you sure about that…..

    http://www.zimbio.co...
    (Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops[/quote]

    Here is a video of their club shop (not too sure if it can be viewed in US though), player also tries to explain some of the shirts[/quote]

    http://www.skysports...

    damn……

  • Namhob | September 30, 2009 at 12:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”351107″][quote comment=”351059″][quote comment=”351053″]from Chad Ochocinco’s twitter
    OGOchoCinco I’ll be wearing all pink gloves, shoes and wrist bands in support of breast cancer awareness throughout the Month of October[/quote]

    way to ruin a good lookin uni[/quote]
    http://profootballta... He plans to do more than that, and he intends on doing it throughout October; even if the league is only allowing players for Week 4 only.[/quote]
    This is what I get for trying to do this while at work. I would like to have my last statement stricken from the record. I will now read EVERYTHING before posting.

  • mmwatkin | September 30, 2009 at 12:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”351106″]This was posted on the Scout Broncos board, by user cubuffintx, which would quite possibly explain the brown helmet decal. Any merit to this claim? :

    “I have a book called “Barely Aubible” and the orange and blue was a complete mistake by the Uni company. they had ordered uni’s almost exactly like the Cle. Browns colors (old color, burnt orange or something similar) they were going to the colored jersey with the stupid looking bucking horse logo (they wore them on monday night in Buffalo in the mid-90’s) and when they opened the boxes they were UF Gator orange. There was no time to have them re-made so the blue and orange was born, by total circumstance.”[/quote]

    Looks like it is pretty cheap

    http://www.amazon.co...

  • DJ | September 30, 2009 at 12:34 pm |

    (Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops)

    Also Palermo, in the Italian Serie A (pink and black).

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”351100″][quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    No, not really. I could see a baseball team using pink similar way that some teams use powder blue.

    Pink can work as a uniform color, but it’s gotta be designed that way. Magenta worked for the Sun in old WFL.[/quote]

    Kinda of an exercise in futility. In western culture, pink is seen as feminine (with the possible exception of men’s golf shirts), so getting a team here to wear pink as regular thing would be tough. Isn’t so much that way worldwide, but in U.S., yes.

    Maybe a WNBA team? If Charlotte had a team choosing its name (as most in that league do) to relate to the NBA team, could be the Charlotte Pink Panthers. Ooo, think of the commercial tie-ins.

    —Ricko

    —Ricko

  • Kenny Jacobson | September 30, 2009 at 12:38 pm |

    The Canadian Women’s National Hockey Team wore pink uniforms when they were first around 1n 1990 or so. I kinda liked them. I could only find this pic. Maybe someone else can find another of the road unis.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 12:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”351114″]Maybe a WNBA team? [/quote]

    been there

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 12:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”351114″]
    Maybe a WNBA team? If Charlotte had a team choosing its name (as most in that league do) to relate to the NBA team, could be the Charlotte Pink Panthers. Ooo, think of the commercial tie-ins.
    [/quote]
    Owens Corning jerseys a la the L.A. Farmers Insurances and the Phoenix LifeLocks!

  • mike 2 | September 30, 2009 at 12:48 pm |

    The original Calgary Hitmen jerseys were black and grey with pink accents, basically using Bret Hart’s colours. After he sold the team, they kept the name and logo but went to a red and copper scheme with more conventional striping.

    http://pics.classica...

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 12:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”351116″][quote comment=”351114″]Maybe a WNBA team? [/quote]

    been there[/quote]

    and there too

  • Namhob | September 30, 2009 at 12:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”351080″]ocho pinko?[/quote]
    Based off his comments, it’d be more like this:

    http://i400.photobuc...

    He wants to wear a pink chin strap & mouth guard as well.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 12:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”351106″]This was posted on the Scout Broncos board, by user cubuffintx, which would quite possibly explain the brown helmet decal. Any merit to this claim? :

    “I have a book called “Barely Aubible” and the orange and blue was a complete mistake by the Uni company. they had ordered uni’s almost exactly like the Cle. Browns colors (old color, burnt orange or something similar) they were going to the colored jersey with the stupid looking bucking horse logo (they wore them on monday night in Buffalo in the mid-90’s) and when they opened the boxes they were UF Gator orange. There was no time to have them re-made so the blue and orange was born, by total circumstance.”[/quote]

    I see. So his contention is the Broncos discovered that the fans only hated the gold, but loved the brown? And Jack Faulkner’s decision, when he took over, to go to orange and blue was made because of manufacturer’s mistake? Even though Faulkner announced the color change LONG before unis would have been ordered? And all the promotions and promotional material were created only AFTER the unis arrived? Puh-leeze.

    Okay, here’s something that DID happen (from my partner, sports editor at Denver Post in ’62). Back in ’71, when I was asking him the unis, he offered the following, totally without any prompting whatsoever from me (and I paraphrase at bit)…

    “Y;know, what Faulkner wanted was the color of Texas. Ordered ‘burnt orange’ thinking it was that color. When the uniforms came, they were regular orange so they just stayed with it.”

    And THAT’s the uni-screwup story. There WAS an orange problem, but it was NOT that they wore Tennessee/Bucs Orange when they were looking for Browns-Orioles-Knicks regular orange. They NEVER wore Tennessee orange. Period.

    —Ricko

  • Ryan B | September 30, 2009 at 12:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”351113″](Stade Francais, French Rugby Union team) They have had several interesting pink tops)

    Also Palermo, in the Italian Serie A (pink and black).[/quote]
    Palermo? I though it was Juventus (away kit).

  • timmy b | September 30, 2009 at 12:56 pm |

    On two items from the early 60’s:

    Oakland Raiders, 1960 and 1961:
    DURING the 1960 season, the Raiders went from NNOB to FNOB. They also had FNOB for all of 1961.

    Kansas City Athletics 1963:
    This was the first year of the green & gold get-up courtesy fo one Charlie O. Finley. For at least a good portion of the season, he had FiNOB’s on the homes only. Whether he did this to poke fun of the AFL or Bill Veeck or not, I dunno. The A’s wouldn’t have NOB’s again until 1970.

    Meanwhile, while, we’re tripping on the Brown vs Blue bronco on the 1962 Denver helmets, as a uni historian, this little thing means everything to me. If we are to have an accruate visual database for NFL-AFL-AAFC uniforms, then this is vitally important. Like LIPhil, I don’t give a rip if the bronc was brown, blue or pink or purple. I just want some sort of proof as to the EXACT color of the little fella.

    -fin-

  • We Got Ns In The Backfield | September 30, 2009 at 12:59 pm |

    I’ve always been offended by the Naming Wrongs shirts, but I’ve never said anything.

  • JohnnyO | September 30, 2009 at 1:03 pm |

    Can anyone post a link to the list of player who will be wearing pink this weekend? Page 2 doesn’t have it anymore. Thanks in advance!

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 1:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”351091″][quote comment=”351088″][quote comment=”351085″][quote comment=”351080″]ocho pinko?[/quote]

    I think you’re a smidge too bright…but… god it’s going to be an ugly October.

    I still don’t see how this is possibly a good idea. Hell, paint a big pink ribbon on the field if you want, but pink shoes and gloves and anything else on the players is just bad.[/quote]

    Gloves, shoes, etc., pretty much up to individual players, isn’t it?
    They’re neither being told TO do such things or NOT to do such things, correct?

    So it’s a wideout being flashy. Nothing new there (see: Lennie Moore, spatted shoes, mid 50’s or so).

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’d prefer flashy with team colors over flashy and pink.

    I’m sorry, but the whole thing just seems really empty to me. I’m all for cancer research, but I just don’t see any point at all in the pink thing. Wearing pink, or red… or any other color is nothing more than an empty symbolic gesture. You’re a player making 5 million dollars a year.. you want to help cancer research? Donate 100k. That’ll do a lot more than wearing pink gloves on TV.

    Same for the pink fan merchandise. If the NFL wants to donate a percentage they earn on sales to charity – great. But there’s no way in hell I’m ever buying or wearing a pink Raiders shirt.[/quote]

    Jeff’s in the running for comment of the day.

  • Aaron | September 30, 2009 at 1:04 pm |

    Interesting use of pink by Everton this year. I’m still not sure if it works or what I think about it.

    http://evertondirect...

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 1:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”351105″]Paul,

    Not to be a nitpicker here but where do you find the offensive shirts on Sportscrack.com? I don’t see any “Kill the Homos” or anything like that on there. All I see is some play of words that a lot of people including myself find humorous.

    I’m kind of offended you are offended. It’s a t-shirt. Get over it.[/quote]

    You know, it says something when a shirt containing the word “homo” is considered unspeakably offensive, but a shirt about “Purple Jesus” isn’t. It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    By the way, I’m not offended by either shirt. I just thought it was revealing to see what people consider offensive and what they don’t.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 1:12 pm |

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    Guess I’d better throw away my “Jesus is a hetero honkie” tee shirt.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 1:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 1:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”351129″]It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    Guess I’d better throw away my “Jesus is a hetero honkie” tee shirt.[/quote]

    Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”351128″][quote comment=”351105″]Paul,

    Not to be a nitpicker here but where do you find the offensive shirts on Sportscrack.com? I don’t see any “Kill the Homos” or anything like that on there. All I see is some play of words that a lot of people including myself find humorous.

    I’m kind of offended you are offended. It’s a t-shirt. Get over it.[/quote]

    You know, it says something when a shirt containing the word “homo” is considered unspeakably offensive, but a shirt about “Purple Jesus” isn’t. It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    By the way, I’m not offended by either shirt. I just thought it was revealing to see what people consider offensive and what they don’t.[/quote]
    I’m not offended by anything on that site, but “Purple Jesus” is used in a positive manner, whereas “Volunqueers”, “Gaytors”, “Cowgirls/Homo”, etc. are clearly used derisively.

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”351124″]there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.[/quote]

    Who are purple.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 1:19 pm |

    whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack

    Oops, guess there is one other group that’s fair game for ridicule, after all!

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 1:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”351131″]
    Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

    say what?

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 1:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”351132″]I’m not offended by anything on that site, but “Purple Jesus” is used in a positive manner, whereas “Volunqueers”, “Gaytors”, “Cowgirls/Homo”, etc. are clearly used derisively.[/quote]

    Thank Jesus (purple or otherwise) someone can actually analyze the situation rationally. Thanks, JTH.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 1:21 pm |

    Jesus was a straight white guy

    Says who?

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 1:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”351135″][quote comment=”351131″]
    Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

    say what?[/quote]
    Ah, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. Jesus was all about the pussy.

  • Noelski y que! | September 30, 2009 at 1:22 pm |

    too bad the abercrombie and fitch shirts only fit anorexics

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 1:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”351138″][quote comment=”351135″][quote comment=”351131″]
    Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

    say what?[/quote]
    Ah, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. Jesus was all about the pussy.[/quote]

    say what?

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 1:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”351140″][quote comment=”351138″][quote comment=”351135″][quote comment=”351131″]
    Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

    say what?[/quote]
    Ah, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. Jesus was all about the pussy.[/quote]

    say what?[/quote]
    My point exactly.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”351133″][quote comment=”351124″]there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.[/quote]

    Who are purple.[/quote]

    No, see, that just proves my point. You don’t even understand why “Purple Jesus” might be offensive in the first place. It has nothing to do with the “purple” part, it has to do with comparing someone’s God to a sporting figure.

    But like I said, neither shirt offends me in the least. I’m not the type to be offended by a tshirt. I just think it’s funny how people can be so offended about one thing, but completely oblivious to something else that’s just as offensive.

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”351141″][quote comment=”351140″][quote comment=”351138″][quote comment=”351135″][quote comment=”351131″]
    Well, technically speaking, Jesus was a straight white guy, so that would be a historically accurate shirt.[/quote]

    say what?[/quote]
    Ah, but there’s one thing we can all agree on. Jesus was all about the pussy.[/quote]

    say what?[/quote]
    My point exactly.[/quote]

    I’m a little slow today. What?

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 1:28 pm |

    Wasn’t he a straight Jewish guy?

    And wasn’t his robe, the one the Roman soldiers rolled dice for, purple?

    Which is also, I suppose, why purple is the color for Easter?

    Asking. Just seems to me that’s the story.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 1:29 pm |

    [quote]I’m a little slow today. What?[/quote]

    today?

    think with yer dipstick, jimmy!

  • The Jeff | September 30, 2009 at 1:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”351142″][quote comment=”351133″][quote comment=”351124″]there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.[/quote]

    Who are purple.[/quote]

    No, see, that just proves my point. You don’t even understand why “Purple Jesus” might be offensive in the first place. It has nothing to do with the “purple” part, it has to do with comparing someone’s God to a sporting figure.

    But like I said, neither shirt offends me in the least. I’m not the type to be offended by a tshirt. I just think it’s funny how people can be so offended about one thing, but completely oblivious to something else that’s just as offensive.[/quote]

    Jesus wasn’t even the guy’s real name… so… yeah. Purple Jesus = Vikings Savior. It works.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 1:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”351136″][quote comment=”351132″]I’m not offended by anything on that site, but “Purple Jesus” is used in a positive manner, whereas “Volunqueers”, “Gaytors”, “Cowgirls/Homo”, etc. are clearly used derisively.[/quote]

    Thank Jesus (purple or otherwise) someone can actually analyze the situation rationally. Thanks, JTH.[/quote]

    So, if the shirt said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Muhammad” would you consider that okay or offensive?

  • Noelski y que! | September 30, 2009 at 1:30 pm |

    the jesus pic is the painter’s uncle

  • Dane | September 30, 2009 at 1:33 pm |

    I’m watching the Red Wings vs. Farjestad BK on NHL.tv… the team is NOB, but the Farjestad goalie is NNOB. Also looks like they got some extra uniform numbers from the Anaheim Ducks.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 1:33 pm |
  • BaltimoreFan | September 30, 2009 at 1:35 pm |

    It’s called selective Political Correctness AP. 95% of people aren’t offended by those shirts but it’s the 5% that bitch and moan about it that ruins it for everybody else. The Gina shirt for example. It refers to a woman’s vagina. Oh my God! How offensive!

    I think the New Yorkers won this case. They were offended.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 1:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”351151″]kelly & gold jesus?[/quote]
    Black & teal Muhammad

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 1:39 pm |

    So, if the shirt said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Muhammad” would you consider that okay or offensive?

    Neither. It would make no sense it the context for which it was created. Purple Jesus is actually an attempt at ironic humor which makes fun of the athlete as savior. Sometimes irony is lost on people. Now, Pink Muhammad, I’d crucify someone if I saw ’em wearing that.

  • Noelski y que! | September 30, 2009 at 1:39 pm |

    the people who bitch and moan are the ones that disagree with the disagreers

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 1:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”351145″][quote]I’m a little slow today. What?[/quote]

    today?

    think with yer dipstick, jimmy![/quote]
    …and check your e-mail if you haven’t already.

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 1:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”351142″][quote comment=”351133″][quote comment=”351124″]You don’t even understand why “Purple Jesus” might be offensive in the first place. It has nothing to do with the “purple” part, it has to do with comparing someone’s God to a sporting figure.[/quote]

    Amen. And I’ll bet if there was a “Purple Mohammed” shirt there would be a huge uproar.

    No matter what your religions are, I don’t think any of them should be trivialized like this, even if they’re used in a positive sense. That’s why I bristle every time I hear someone use the term “the football gods.” Enough already.

    Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

  • Kent Skor | September 30, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”351054″][quote comment=”351045″][quote comment=”351040″][quote comment=”351034″]

    I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.[/quote]

    I am more troubled by the way that sports teams have embraced gambling.

    In the old days, Mickey Mantle was banned for being associated with a casino. Now the Braves’ club level is named after a casino. Last time I was there, they gave my 14-year old son a hat with a casino logo on it (he wears it when I make him mow the lawn, so I don’t complain).

    The Falcons have their logo on Georgia Lotto tickets (while at the same time the NFL is trying to ban sports betting in Delaware).

    What do y’all think?

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

    He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

    So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

    Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

    Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

    Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

    Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

    —Ricko

  • ry co 40 | September 30, 2009 at 1:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”351094″]Just out of curiosity, is there any team (any sport) that you guys can think of where pink would be a GOOD complementary color to the scheme already in place. I’m thinking something that’s already red, but who knows. Anybody have an idea?

    -Greenie[/quote]

    if i HAD to pick an NHL team… no jokes… i’d pick the thrashers. pink might fit into that scheme better than any other teams…

    http://thrashers.nhl...

    teebz, agree?

  • We Got Ns In The Backfield | September 30, 2009 at 1:52 pm |

    This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 1:53 pm |

    Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)

  • Christopher | September 30, 2009 at 1:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”351079″][quote comment=”351054″]I don’t mean to pile on and at the risk being accused of being naive, I have been troubled by the sports betting ad that appears on Uniwatch.[/quote]

    Actually, there are several betting ads on the site — we’ve had them around for about two years now. I was wondering if anyone would ever comment on them, and to my knowledge this is the first time anyone has.

    I know some people think betting is evil or offensive. Personally, I think it’s more silly than anything else, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Yes, some people have gambling problems, but some people also have drinking problems — doesn’t mean I wouldn’t run a Yuengling ad if that company came calling (which seems unlikely, but still…).

    Anyway: We all know what betting is. If you’re into it, feel free to patronize our betting sponsors; if not, ignore their ads (which should be easy enough, since they’re all plain text ads — not display ads like our other sponsors). They mainly run those ads to boost their google search status anyway — they don’t much care if you click on them or not.

    The SportsCrack situation was trickier, because you could go to their site and stumble upon offensive material without realizing what you were getting into. I’m no longer comfortable being associated with their product, so that relationship is now over.

    Anyway: If anyone has a major problem with the betting ads, feel free to speak up — your feedback on this topic is welcome.[/quote]

    I’ve always thought it looks a little strange and cheapens the site a tiny bit- but I’m certainly not offended in any way.

    Then again, I’m rarely offended by anything.

    I always take the “its his site, not mine- and he has to pay the bills, while I get free content” attitude.

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 1:57 pm |

    Today’s ESPN column is up (it would have been ready sooner, but I threw in some last-minute Jesus references just so AP could feel a little more persecuted):
    http://sports.espn.g...

    As you’ll see, the column has a new logo. But it’s actually the WRONG new logo. It’s supposed to be this:
    http://espn.go.com/i...

    They’ll swap in the right one shortly.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 1:58 pm |

    I always take the “its his site, not mine- and he has to pay the bills, while I get free content” attitude.

    I’ll bet a lot of your readers feel this way.

  • Christopher | September 30, 2009 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”351159″][quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

    He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

    So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

    Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

    Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

    Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

    Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Excellent post. I never really thought of that.

    I like the Seahawks neon green. The overall design isn’t great, where colors are placed, etc. But I like neon green as their primary color.

    “classic” uniforms are nice, but if they’re all modeled to be “classic” it tends to get boring.

    Plus, there is so little variation in football uniforms. Mostly because the numbers and name take up 90% of the design area. So color is all you have.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 2:04 pm |

    Statistically speaking, I believe white straight males are now a minority in the U.S.

    Not arguing for or against anything, Just saying that makes it one of those strange “perception” things.

    And this, btw…
    “the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.”
    …is an EXTREMELY valid point.

    Although, to be honest, what they’re REALLY saying is “Jews take their holidays much more seriously than Christians, so we’d better move the game to keep TV ratings numbers up.”

    At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

    —Ricko

  • Christopher | September 30, 2009 at 2:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”351164″]Today’s ESPN column is up (it would have been ready sooner, but I threw in some last-minute Jesus references just so AP could feel a little more persecuted):
    http://sports.espn.g...

    As you’ll see, the column has a new logo. But it’s actually the WRONG new logo. It’s supposed to be this:
    http://espn.go.com/i...

    They’ll swap in the right one shortly.[/quote]

    Those Wild alts are beau-tee-ful!

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 2:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.

    Now about those Caps and Bruins…ah, I got nothin’. It’s curling season for me…

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 2:06 pm |

    At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

    Hey, they played 2 days after the President was assassinated.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    [quote]those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like[/quote]

    ok, now im offended

    [quote]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought[/quote]

    maybe they should stop scheduling christmas on a sunday then

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    on a serious note — i agree about moving the jets game…that was bullshit…my PIP sucks and i decided not to DVR the giants game, so i had to flip channels

    good thing the giants kicked the everliving shit out of the bucs, or there would have been real hell to pay

    im more pissed off about not getting the seahawks game at all than about moving the jets game tho

    jeebus, where’s the NFL’s consideration of my uni-centric views? biggest game of the season and i can’t see it???? frankly that’s more offensive than any of those damn t-shirts

  • bourbon soaked idiot | September 30, 2009 at 2:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”351167″]Statistically speaking, I believe white straight males are now a minority in the U.S.

    Not arguing for or against anything, Just saying that makes it one of those strange “perception” things.

    And this, btw…
    “the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.”
    …is an EXTREMELY valid point.

    Although, to be honest, what they’re REALLY saying is “Jews take their holidays much more seriously than Christians, so we’d better move the game to keep TV ratings numbers up.”

    At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    or could it be that Jewish law forbids the watching of a Jets game during Yom Kipper.

    Many Christians including my family would watch a Jets game on Christmas while exchanging gifts and enjoying a Holiday turkey.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 2:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”351159″][quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

    He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

    So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

    Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

    Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

    Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

    Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yeah, I totally understand that it’s only recently that custom colors have become readily available and affordable. And I totally understand that we’ve been culturally conditioned because of that to only accept a certain standard palette for uniforms.

    My only point is that now that we can explore new palettes and distinctive colors, we should be open-minded enough to allow teams to experiment with new things with instinctively ridiculing it for being different.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 2:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”351115″]The Canadian Women’s National Hockey Team wore pink uniforms when they were first around 1n 1990 or so. I kinda liked them. I could only find this pic. Maybe someone else can find another of the road unis.[/quote]

    One road jersey worn by this fan at the World Deaf hockey Championships this past spring.

    And here is the second time they wore the pink jerseys in 2007 in a game against the USA.

  • RaoulDuke | September 30, 2009 at 2:12 pm |

    The statue on Chris Masons mask is a statue of Louis XVI (our namesake) that stands outside of the St. Louis Art Museum in Forest Park.

    http://1.bp.blogspot...

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”351161″]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.[/quote]

    Actually, they do have a little consideration. There’s never been a night game on Christmas Eve, as far as I can recall.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 2:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”351170″]At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

    Hey, they played 2 days after the President was assassinated.[/quote]

    They sure did. I was getting ready to go to Lions at Vikings when—what the hell?—some guy in a hat gunned down Lee Harvey Oswald right there in front of me on TV.

    I decided it was better to stay home and watch history happen.

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 2:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity!

  • bourbon soaked idiot | September 30, 2009 at 2:17 pm |

    Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

    Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 2:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”351173″][quote comment=”351159″][quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

    He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

    So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

    Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

    Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

    Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

    Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yeah, I totally understand that it’s only recently that custom colors have become readily available and affordable. And I totally understand that we’ve been culturally conditioned because of that to only accept a certain standard palette for uniforms.

    My only point is that now that we can explore new palettes and distinctive colors, we should be open-minded enough to allow teams to experiment with new things with instinctively ridiculing it for being different.[/quote]

    And I totally agree with you. Was just giving background.

    —Ricko

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 2:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”351164″]Today’s ESPN column is up (it would have been ready sooner, but I threw in some last-minute Jesus references just so AP could feel a little more persecuted):
    http://sports.espn.g...

    As you’ll see, the column has a new logo. But it’s actually the WRONG new logo. It’s supposed to be this:
    http://espn.go.com/i...

    They’ll swap in the right one shortly.[/quote]

    Dude, not cool. I even went out of my way to point out (several times) that I’m not personally offended in the least by Jesus jokes. I was just making an observation about the double standard people have when it comes to what’s offensive.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 2:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”351173″][quote comment=”351159″][quote comment=”351130″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    While I don’t agree with everything he says, he does make a good point about too many teams only using the colors from the cheap box of crayons. There are many colors in the spectrum, many of which can be utilized to create quality, distinctive looks. And yet, it seems that whenever a team tries something from the 64 color crayon pack, they inevitably get ridiculed by those who assume everything new is bad, and are forced to go back to the small crayon box.[/quote]

    He’s not understanding the history of things. PMS computer color matching technology is relatively new. In U.S. sporting history from the 20’s through the ’60s, suppliers offered a limited palette of standard colors. “You want blue that’s not navy or royal, that’s gonna cost you extra.” Texas, Tennessee, Redskins, Columbia and a few others wore uni colors you couldn’t order from a typical sporting goods catalog.

    So, certain colors just came to be thought of as sport uniform colors. Yeah, the Crayola box was pretty small, but those were, by god, what uniforms were supposed to look like.

    Back then there was Orange in the catalogs. Period. Not Tennessee Orange, Orange and Texas Orange.

    Or Red. 49ers, Reds, Red Sox, Cardinals (baseball and football), St. Louis Hawks, Phillies, Nebraska and others all wore the same color until the 70’s. That’s when the variations began to become commonplace. Also, teams began to prosper, so the addiitional expense wasn’t an issue.

    Just sayin’, can’t blame teams for not being too much for variety. A certain palette is kind of “socially imprinted.”

    Which is why I like the Neon Green. Or the WFL Sun’s magenta, for that matter. In Crayola terms, definitely “outside the box.”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Yeah, I totally understand that it’s only recently that custom colors have become readily available and affordable. And I totally understand that we’ve been culturally conditioned because of that to only accept a certain standard palette for uniforms.

    My only point is that now that we can explore new palettes and distinctive colors, we should be open-minded enough to allow teams to experiment with new things with instinctively ridiculing it for being different.[/quote]

    Whoops, obviously that should say “withOUT instinctively…”

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 2:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”351176″][quote comment=”351161″]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.[/quote]

    Actually, they do have a little consideration. There’s never been a night game on Christmas Eve, as far as I can recall.[/quote]

    I believe Vikings had a 3 p.m. CT start on Christmas Eve in the past few years. Think was against Packers. That’s about as close as they’ve come.

    —Ricko

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 2:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 2:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”351177″][quote comment=”351170″]At it’s core, it’s about money, not tolerance or respect for someone else’s faith.

    Hey, they played 2 days after the President was assassinated.[/quote]

    They sure did. I was getting ready to go to Lions at Vikings when—what the hell?—some guy in a hat gunned down Lee Harvey Oswald right there in front of me on TV.

    I decided it was better to stay home and watch history happen.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Conversely, the AFL did not play.
    BTW, that Showtime show is on tonite (today is Wednesday, isn’t it)?

  • Peter | September 30, 2009 at 2:26 pm |

    apparently no one read post #78

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 2:27 pm |

    Not to mention the totally sexiest idea of a
    PURPLE NURPLE
    shirt for women.

    That’s just disgusting.
    (How’d I do? Did I sound like Joe Buck?)

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | September 30, 2009 at 2:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”351184″][quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

    Actually, no, I’d have no problem with those. But it’s a false choice anyway, because those shirts WOULDN’T MAKE SENSE, because Mohammad and Allah aren’t iconic figures in American culture. Calling Brett Favre “purple Allah” leads to “Wha..?”; calling him “purple Jesus” is a straightforward metaphor, because he’s the Vikings’ savior.

    I don’t think it’s a particularly brilliant or funny metaphor, incidentally. But the logic behind it is simple enough. And, again, it’s POSITIVE. Pretending that this is a “double standard” compared to the “VolunQueers” is beyond willful on your part.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 2:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”351187″]Not to mention the totally sexiest idea of a
    PURPLE NURPLE
    shirt for women.

    That’s just disgusting.
    (How’d I do? Did I sound like Joe Buck?)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    did you mean sexiest (as written) or sexest?
    either way, humorous

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 2:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”351186″]apparently no one read post #78[/quote]

    over? did you say “over”? nothing is over until we decide it is! was it over when the jews bombed pearl harbor? hell no!

  • mightyjoeyoung | September 30, 2009 at 2:36 pm |

    You trying to tell me that Jesus Christ can’t hit a curveball?!

  • JimV19 | September 30, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

    Why are you putting words in my mouth? “If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem”?

    I never said I wasn’t offended. I even said you did the right thing. I even agreed that the Jesus shirt was intended as a compliment. I never said the shirts were equally offensive. That’s why I didn’t complain about them. So yeah, I dig. Doesn’t mean I think it’s appropriate.

    I have no problem with the “Jesus is my homey” shirts I’ve seen, or other ones like that. I just don’t like it when we start calling people a savior or a messiah. In that particular case I think AP DOES have a point.

    Whatever.

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 2:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”351188″][quote comment=”351184″][quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

    Actually, no, I’d have no problem with those. But it’s a false choice anyway, because those shirts WOULDN’T MAKE SENSE, because Mohammad and Allah aren’t iconic figures in American culture. Calling Brett Favre “purple Allah” leads to “Wha..?”; calling him “purple Jesus” is a straightforward metaphor, because he’s the Vikings’ savior.

    I don’t think it’s a particularly brilliant or funny metaphor, incidentally. But the logic behind it is simple enough. And, again, it’s POSITIVE. Pretending that this is a “double standard” compared to the “VolunQueers” is beyond willful on your part.[/quote]

    No, but once again, you don’t understand why people might be offended by the shirt in the first place. See, for many Christians, comparing a sports figure (no matter how positively) with their God is offensive. Comparing ANY ordinary human being with their God is offensive, especially when done in a irreverent way, comparing Jesus’ salvation with the salvation of a football team.

    I get the shirt. For the millionth time, I’m not offended in the least by the shirt. My only point is that for many people (not me) making a Jesus joke (whether the intent is supposed to be complimentary or not) is just as offensive as a vagina or gay joke. I think it’s an interesting commentary on our culture that people don’t see how that could even be possible.

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”351190″][quote comment=”351186″]apparently no one read post #78[/quote]

    over? did you say “over”? nothing is over until we decide it is! was it over when the jews bombed pearl harbor? hell no![/quote]

    LOL

  • AD | September 30, 2009 at 2:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”351192″][quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

    Why are you putting words in my mouth? “If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem”?

    I never said I wasn’t offended. I even said you did the right thing. I even agreed that the Jesus shirt was intended as a compliment. I never said the shirts were equally offensive. That’s why I didn’t complain about them. So yeah, I dig. Doesn’t mean I think it’s appropriate.

    I have no problem with the “Jesus is my homey” shirts I’ve seen, or other ones like that. I just don’t like it when we start calling people a savior or a messiah. In that particular case I think AP DOES have a point.

    Whatever.[/quote]

    three words: http://www.youtube.c...

  • ry co 40 | September 30, 2009 at 2:46 pm |

    guys… make yourself a sandwich, drink a glass of milk… do some f-in’ thing… but stop with the t-shirt/jesus comments…

  • leon | September 30, 2009 at 2:48 pm |

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    Petitio Principii

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 2:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”351184″]
    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

    Sure he did – it’s about intent. If those shirts were meant to insult, that would be different. “Purple Jesus” was a compliment. “Homo” and the like are clearly intended to be insults. Because being gay or female is somehow shameful in their eyes – they’re making no such claim about being Christian, rendering the comparison meaningless.

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 2:49 pm |
  • Alex | September 30, 2009 at 2:50 pm |

    A new Ocho Cinco!

    http://miamiherald.t...

    -Alexander C.

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 2:51 pm |

    How ’bout we each have two of these…
    http://www.drinksmix...
    …AND lighten up.

    —Ricko

  • rjp | September 30, 2009 at 2:52 pm |

    Question about the new Khabibulin mask in Paul’s ESPN article: Look at the Oilers logo on the forehead. There’s a clock outline superimposed on the logo with hands of a clock. I can’t tell the exact time due to the size of the picture but it looks like it’s either 5:05 or 1:25 depending on which clock hand is which.

    Any idea what this stands for? (and the correct time of course)

  • JohnnyO | September 30, 2009 at 2:53 pm |

    So, I’m going to the Packers/Lions game on Oct. 18th (my birthday), and I was just looking up the game day promotion for fun,and saw it was this:
    Giveaway Item
    Gold Pom-poms with pink strands

    Followed by the Special Game Day Feature:
    Packers Women’s Association Food Drive and NFL Breast Cancer Awareness Month

    And of course, halftime entertainment:
    Oneida Nation Performance -Breast Cancer Awareness theme

    How in the world can you have a halftime show with Breast Cancer Awareness theme? Oh well, let the pink madness begin. Even at Lambeau… *sigh* Not that I don’t like it, or am against it. Just as long as it isn’t overdone.

    And did anyone find that list of players wearing pink this week yet?

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 2:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”351198″][quote comment=”351184″]
    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

    Sure he did – it’s about intent. If those shirts were meant to insult, that would be different. “Purple Jesus” was a compliment. “Homo” and the like are clearly intended to be insults. Because being gay or female is somehow shameful in their eyes – they’re making no such claim about being Christian, rendering the comparison meaningless.[/quote]

    No, as I said to Paul, to Christians, comparing anyone to Jesus is NOT a compliment. Comparing the salvation of a football team to the salvation they believe Jesus won for the world is NOT a compliment. Speaking irreverently about someone’s God, even if you mean it in a complimentary way, is offensive. That’s what people aren’t understanding about this issue.

  • Dane | September 30, 2009 at 2:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”351150″]I’m watching the Red Wings vs. Farjestad BK on NHL.tv… the team is NOB, but the Farjestad goalie is NNOB. Also looks like they got some extra uniform numbers from the Anaheim Ducks.[/quote]

    It’s gotten weird across the pond. The second goalie for Farjestad is in the game for the third period, and he’s got TCNOB: tape covering name on back.

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 2:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”351201″]How ’bout we each have two of these…
    http://www.drinksmix...
    …AND lighten up.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Which one? The Purple Jesus, or the Purple Hooter?

  • mike | September 30, 2009 at 2:56 pm |

    In 2005 when Christmas was on a Sunday the NFL scheduled 13 games for Saturday, played 2 on Sunday and 1 on Monday night.

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 2:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”351204″][quote comment=”351198″][quote comment=”351184″]
    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

    Sure he did – it’s about intent. If those shirts were meant to insult, that would be different. “Purple Jesus” was a compliment. “Homo” and the like are clearly intended to be insults. Because being gay or female is somehow shameful in their eyes – they’re making no such claim about being Christian, rendering the comparison meaningless.[/quote]

    No, as I said to Paul, to Christians, comparing anyone to Jesus is NOT a compliment. Comparing the salvation of a football team to the salvation they believe Jesus won for the world is NOT a compliment. Speaking irreverently about someone’s God, even if you mean it in a complimentary way, is offensive. That’s what people aren’t understanding about this issue.[/quote]
    Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

    Unless they’re saying that being the savior is a bad thing, like being gay or female, then the comparison seems very silly to me.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 2:57 pm |

    A couple of notes on the goalie masks in Paul’s article, and some that were missed:

    – The Corvette imagery on the Craig Anderson’s mask. He’s a huge racing fan, and the image if “Jake”, the ‘Vette mascot, was added to both the Yeti and to his back plate.

    – Chris Mason’s back plate has his daughter’s name, Avery, inside a massive axe. Mason is a huge video game fan, specifically the God of War game. The axe, I assume, has to do with him being a warrior in the nets. I have no explanation of the McArthur portion yet, but it may be his wife’s maiden name.

    – Tampa Bay’s newest goaltender in camp is former Flyers goalie Antero Niittymaki. Niittymaki had a fairly unique design while in Philly with gangster Frank Nitti shown on the side. “Nitty” is, of course, Niittymaki’s nickname. Well, he didn’t stray far in Tampa Bay. He simply changed the colours to reflect Tampa Bay’s colours, and stuck with the Nitti theme on his helmet. Nitty is now Tampa Bay’s gangster.

    – Islanders goaltender Dwayne Roloson is sporting some new paint. Here is the left side, the right side, and the back plate to his mask. I like the buoy on the back plate. Very cool idea. I was hoping for the Fisherman to show up on a mask, but looks like he won’t be making an appearance this season.

    I think that’s all. :o)

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 3:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”351202″]Question about the new Khabibulin mask in Paul’s ESPN article: Look at the Oilers logo on the forehead. There’s a clock outline superimposed on the logo with hands of a clock. I can’t tell the exact time due to the size of the picture but it looks like it’s either 5:05 or 1:25 depending on which clock hand is which.

    Any idea what this stands for? (and the correct time of course)[/quote]
    Not sure about the time, but here’s a legend. It looks like it’s about 5:05 to me.

    His Blackhawks mask was “set” at 5:00.

  • Trurologist | September 30, 2009 at 3:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”351202″]Question about the new Khabibulin mask in Paul’s ESPN article: Look at the Oilers logo on the forehead. There’s a clock outline superimposed on the logo with hands of a clock. I can’t tell the exact time due to the size of the picture but it looks like it’s either 5:05 or 1:25 depending on which clock hand is which.

    Any idea what this stands for? (and the correct time of course)[/quote]
    1.25 or 5.05 are my best guesses for Khabibulin’s GAA, depending on which incarnation of him shows up in Edmonton…

  • rjp | September 30, 2009 at 3:02 pm |

    Re: Khabibulin mask.

    Did a quick Google search (should have done that first) and apparently he’s had a clock tower on his masks in Chicago and Tampa too and it’s a depiction of the Saviour’s (Spasskaya) Tower at the Moscow Kremlin. As for the time depicted, still no luck as to any specific meaning.

  • Sambojangles | September 30, 2009 at 3:02 pm |

    [quote comment=\”351150\”]I\’m watching the Red Wings vs. Farjestad BK on NHL.tv… the team is NOB, but the Farjestad goalie is NNOB. Also looks like they got some extra uniform numbers from the Anaheim Ducks.[/quote]

    I saw that too. It looks like the took the whole uniform template from the Ducks, and switched green for black. My picture isn\’t good enough to see the details on their uniforms. It\’s weird watching a game without any commentary at all. I\’m so used to play-by-play following the action, I don\’t really know what to do without it.

  • concealed78 | September 30, 2009 at 3:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”351179″]Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

    Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?[/quote]

    Nope. I really like diagonal scripts on hockey jerseys. Other teams should have it too. I once made up a royal & gray Tampa Bay Lightning version with a diagonal script:

    http://img2.imagesha...

    And I just looked at the new Wild alternate… the words out of my mouth: “WOW! That’s the fucking SHIT!”

  • Trurologist | September 30, 2009 at 3:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”351174″]The statue on Chris Masons mask is a statue of Louis XVI (our namesake) that stands outside of the St. Louis Art Museum in Forest Park.

    http://1.bp.blogspot...
    If I recall correctly, St. Louis was named for Louis IX, not Louis-Seize, errr….XVI

  • AP | September 30, 2009 at 3:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”351208″][quote comment=”351204″][quote comment=”351198″][quote comment=”351184″]
    You never answered my question. If the shirt had said “Purple Allah” or “Purple Mohammad” would you still feel the same way? I’d wager that you would have considered that offensive and pulled it right away.[/quote]

    Sure he did – it’s about intent. If those shirts were meant to insult, that would be different. “Purple Jesus” was a compliment. “Homo” and the like are clearly intended to be insults. Because being gay or female is somehow shameful in their eyes – they’re making no such claim about being Christian, rendering the comparison meaningless.[/quote]

    No, as I said to Paul, to Christians, comparing anyone to Jesus is NOT a compliment. Comparing the salvation of a football team to the salvation they believe Jesus won for the world is NOT a compliment. Speaking irreverently about someone’s God, even if you mean it in a complimentary way, is offensive. That’s what people aren’t understanding about this issue.[/quote]
    Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

    Unless they’re saying that being the savior is a bad thing, like being gay or female, then the comparison seems very silly to me.[/quote]

    Think of it this way. Let’s say that when you were a kid, your dad died while saving you from a burning building. Later, you tell someone about it, only to have them say, “Wow, just like how Favre saved the Vikings.” You’re probably going to be offended at how the person has trivialized what your dad did, right?

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 3:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”351210″][quote comment=”351202″]Question about the new Khabibulin mask in Paul’s ESPN article: Look at the Oilers logo on the forehead. There’s a clock outline superimposed on the logo with hands of a clock. I can’t tell the exact time due to the size of the picture but it looks like it’s either 5:05 or 1:25 depending on which clock hand is which.

    Any idea what this stands for? (and the correct time of course)[/quote]
    Not sure about the time, but here’s a legend. It looks like it’s about 5:05 to me.

    His Blackhawks mask was “set” at 5:00.[/quote]
    I’m starting to think there’s no real significance to where the hands are positioned, but that they’re just set so as not to overlap the logo as much as possible. Tampa Bay: looks like it was at about 2:53.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 3:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”351214″][quote comment=”351179″]Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

    Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?[/quote]

    Nope. I really like diagonal scripts on hockey jerseys. Other teams should have it too. I once made up a royal & gray Tampa Bay Lightning version with a diagonal script:

    http://img2.imagesha...

    And I just looked at the new Wild alternate… the words out of my mouth: “WOW! That’s the fucking SHIT!”[/quote]

    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?

  • Hank | September 30, 2009 at 3:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”351212″]Re: Khabibulin mask.

    Did a quick Google search (should have done that first) and apparently he’s had a clock tower on his masks in Chicago and Tampa too and it’s a depiction of the Saviour’s (Spasskaya) Tower at the Moscow Kremlin. As for the time depicted, still no luck as to any specific meaning.[/quote]

    Maybe it’s just an indication that time has passed? As Frued said ‘Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.’

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 3:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”351195″][quote comment=”351192″][quote comment=”351178″][quote comment=”351169″][quote comment=”351162″]Paul was right to do what he did, but AP also has a point.

    This was his original premise:

    It just goes to show you that there’s still one group that’s fair game for ridicule: straight, white, Christian males.

    If you agree with that, then I disagree with you both. On this site everyone and everything has been fair game. And if you aren’t fair or game, I think you’re missing something.
    Now can we talk about tomorrow’s Caps-Bruins game?

    :)[/quote]

    I agree all people are fair game. Where I was saying he had a point was that people’s dieties of choice shouldn’t be considered fair game. That’s all.[/quote]

    He had no point at all! The “Purple Jesus” shirt was intended to be a COMPLIMENT! If any mention of Jesus in contemporary culture offends you, well, good luck with that, but the idea behind the shirt was POSITIVE. Compare that to shirts with slogans like “GAYtors” and “VolunQUEERS” and “Tony Homo” — those are NEGATIVE, dig? They are meant to be nasty — nasty toward a certain fan base, and nasty toward gay people. If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem, but don’t try to conflate those shirts with the Purple Jesus shirt. They have nothing in common.

    Incidentally, I’m the guy who wished everyone a happy Yom Kippur the other day by writing, “Happy High Heeb Holy Days (and only one person got upset about it — guess he doesn’t know about these guys), so let the record show that Jews are persecuted around here too. Equal opportunity![/quote]

    Why are you putting words in my mouth? “If you’re not offended by them, great, no problem”?

    I never said I wasn’t offended. I even said you did the right thing. I even agreed that the Jesus shirt was intended as a compliment. I never said the shirts were equally offensive. That’s why I didn’t complain about them. So yeah, I dig. Doesn’t mean I think it’s appropriate.

    I have no problem with the “Jesus is my homey” shirts I’ve seen, or other ones like that. I just don’t like it when we start calling people a savior or a messiah. In that particular case I think AP DOES have a point.

    Whatever.[/quote]

    three words: http://www.youtube.c...

    Anyone got any idea what those fern green dots are on the back of some of the players helmets?

  • AD | September 30, 2009 at 3:15 pm |

    [quote]Let’s say that when you were a kid, your dad died while saving you from a burning building. Later, you tell someone about it, only to have them say, “Wow, just like how Favre saved the Vikings.” You’re probably going to be offended at how the person has trivialized what your dad did, right?[/quote]

    Especially since what your dad did actually happend.

  • chance michaels | September 30, 2009 at 3:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”351221″][quote]Let’s say that when you were a kid, your dad died while saving you from a burning building. Later, you tell someone about it, only to have them say, “Wow, just like how Favre saved the Vikings.” You’re probably going to be offended at how the person has trivialized what your dad did, right?[/quote]

    Especially since what your dad did actually happend.[/quote]
    Oh, now you started it…

    But back to the question, no. I wouldn’t be offended at all. I wouldn’t consider that “trivializing” what my father did.

    One does not negate the other, so the comparison still falls flat.

  • Robin | September 30, 2009 at 3:25 pm |

    I local reporter in New Orleans just \”tweeted\” that Drew Brees would be joining in on the pink cleats game this week for practice and game day.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 3:26 pm |

    Wanna really set the world on fire?

    Jesus was nothing more than a Roman slave. Mel Gibson told me so. LOL

    Seriously, if people want to bitch and quit the site due to Paul’s “politics”, people need to learn to shut up about the religious crap on here too.

    Can’t have it both ways. Let the insanity, and more importantly the pointless debate, end. Arguing about this is like kissing your cousin – nothing good will come of it, and it probably should never have happened in the first place.

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 3:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”351203″]
    And of course, halftime entertainment:
    Oneida Nation Performance -Breast Cancer Awareness theme

    How in the world can you have a halftime show with Breast Cancer Awareness theme? Oh well, let the pink madness begin. Even at Lambeau… *sigh* Not that I don’t like it, or am against it. Just as long as it isn’t overdone.

    [/quote]
    There was some chatter here yesterday about the Pittsburgh “Terrible Towel” going pink for the day, and I guess I’m going to piggyback my thoughts on your “one game per year” idea.

    I get to go to maybe 3 Bears games every four years or so; not a game per year but close. So it’s a lot of fun, and a lot of planning and preparing goes into those trips. Now if I was a Pittsburgh fan, sitting on my couch 15 weekends per year with my Rothlsberger jersey and my towel, and I went to my one game of the year-well, a lot of the fun would be the shared experience of waving that very same Terrible Towel I use every other weekend and seeing that it’s part of the huge crowd at new Three Rivers. If I was one of the 50% who didn’t have a pink towel that day-it just wouldn’t be the same.

    In short: if you’ve created this icon, don’t mess with it for one weekend (or two or three; I’m a firm beliver in slippery slope for this type of thing). Have a ribbon or pin or something that isn’t done every weekend. Come up with something new.

    JohnnyO: hope you’ll let us know what that halftime show looks like.

  • Robin | September 30, 2009 at 3:30 pm |

    Picture of said shoes to be worn by Breesus:

    http://www.zannel.co...

    Courtesy of Jeff Duncan of the Times Picayune

  • Robin | September 30, 2009 at 3:32 pm |

    Or maybe this will work

    http://www.zannel.co...

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 3:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”351171″]
    on a serious note — i agree about moving the jets game…that was bullshit…my PIP sucks and i decided not to DVR the giants game, so i had to flip channels…[/quote]
    Thanks!

    I had completely forgot to ask the NYC crowd Monday about the unusual “same starting time for both Jets and Giants games”; I assumed there would be a lot of ticked off fans.

  • James Craven | September 30, 2009 at 3:33 pm |

    In honor of today’s photo on the front page…

    A little ditty of he shoots into his own team’s net. (Sorry, I don’t have the song, but will you settle for the lyrics?)

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 3:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”351227″]Or maybe this will work

    http://www.zannel.co...

    Apparently Nike is more important that the cause. Because it’s entirely appropriate to leave the white part of the shoe blank while putting your logo OVER THE IMPORTANT PART.

  • concealed78 | September 30, 2009 at 3:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”351218″]

    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

    Sorry, but I like those diagonal road Penguins better than that hummingbird-gradient shit, tho I could do without the blockshadow.

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 3:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”351183″]
    I believe Vikings had a 3 p.m. CT start on Christmas Eve in the past few years. Think was against Packers. That’s about as close as they’ve come.
    [/quote]
    I belive some of the local congregations in GB have “raised the issue” about inconveient starting times in the past; but AFAIK no gametime has ever been moved.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 3:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”351231″][quote comment=”351218″]

    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

    Sorry, but I like those diagonal road Penguins better than that hummingbird-gradient shit, tho I could do without the blockshadow.[/quote]

    Which is why they went back to the skating penguins. Moot point, ’nuff said.

  • Robin | September 30, 2009 at 3:41 pm |

    [quote comment=\”351230\”][quote comment=\”351227\”]Or maybe this will work

    http://www.zannel.co...

    Apparently Nike is more important that the cause. Because it\’s entirely appropriate to leave the white part of the shoe blank while putting your logo OVER THE IMPORTANT PART.[/quote]

    Pink and logo creep – a double whammy.

    At least it isn\’t Under Armor

  • Nick | September 30, 2009 at 3:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”351029″]Would have been fun to see this Raider uni for the 50th celebration.
    http://farm3.static....

    Basically the Bears uni in Steeler colors.

    All the Raiders had FNOB in ’60, which that has to be cuz was only year Parilli was in Oakland. Was raded to Boston in the off season. In ’60 he shared the Raider QB job with an unknown from Pacific, some kid named Tom Flores.

    “Traded”? When was the last NFL trade that involved active players actually switching teams? Moss to Oakland, maybe?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Even better … When was the last time one active player was traded for another? I can’t remember.

    Maybe in 1990 when the Saints traded their first round “bust” DT Shawn Knight for the Broncos similar undersized first round NT Gregory (can’t recall his first name, from Syracuse).

    I’m sure there have been more recent examples, but very rare the player-for-player ytrade these days.

    Speaking of the Old Days, you gotta love the team sportcoats from the 1960s that the owners and coaches wore – Check out Lamar Hunt and Bud Adams on the AFL pictures link above.

  • Stu | September 30, 2009 at 3:56 pm |

    Calvin Johnson’s Pink shoe preview

    http://www.971thetic...

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 3:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”351230″][quote comment=”351227″]Or maybe this will work

    http://www.zannel.co...

    Apparently Nike is more important that the cause. Because it’s entirely appropriate to leave the white part of the shoe blank while putting your logo OVER THE IMPORTANT PART.[/quote]

    would you like this better, teebz?

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 3:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”351237″][quote comment=”351230″][quote comment=”351227″]Or maybe this will work

    http://www.zannel.co...

    Apparently Nike is more important that the cause. Because it’s entirely appropriate to leave the white part of the shoe blank while putting your logo OVER THE IMPORTANT PART.[/quote]

    would you like this better, teebz?[/quote]

    No, it’s still on the pink.

    What I’d really like is for Nike to donate in kind the exact amount of money it cost to produce those shoes PLUS all monies collected for any pink merchandise sold during the month of October.

    Wanna be a leader, Nike? Try leading first.

  • Nick | September 30, 2009 at 4:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”351067″][quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

    Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I got to say, the sghhade of Baby Blue used by the Oilers in the post-Silver Helmet era, when the went back to the Blue Helmet (1971-1974), looked like a bit darker, Ice/Baby Blue to me.

    Maybe the photos or the weather made it look that way, but in N.O. we saw the oilers relatively often, and the Baby Blue of the Bum Phillips era sure looked a bit lighter than the 1971-1974 to me to me.

  • JohnnyO | September 30, 2009 at 4:09 pm |

    Here is a list of what every team is doing for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (The list also includes Target selling “Madden ’10 Pink Version” where proceeds go to the Deanna Favre HOPE Foundation):
    http://www.nfl.com/n...

  • Ricko | September 30, 2009 at 4:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”351239″][quote comment=”351067″][quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

    Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I got to say, the sghhade of Baby Blue used by the Oilers in the post-Silver Helmet era, when the went back to the Blue Helmet (1971-1974), looked like a bit darker, Ice/Baby Blue to me.

    Maybe the photos or the weather made it look that way, but in N.O. we saw the oilers relatively often, and the Baby Blue of the Bum Phillips era sure looked a bit lighter than the 1971-1974 to me to me.[/quote]

    Does look like that, but powder helmet indoors at Astrodome probably would look a bit darker than it would outdoors. Although helmets back then always were a bit darker than the jersey of the same color. Doubt they ever changed their PMS.

    —Ricko

  • Nick | September 30, 2009 at 4:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”351123″]On two items from the early 60’s:

    Oakland Raiders, 1960 and 1961:
    DURING the 1960 season, the Raiders went from NNOB to FNOB. They also had FNOB for all of 1961.

    Kansas City Athletics 1963:
    This was the first year of the green & gold get-up courtesy fo one Charlie O. Finley. For at least a good portion of the season, he had FiNOB’s on the homes only. Whether he did this to poke fun of the AFL or Bill Veeck or not, I dunno. The A’s wouldn’t have NOB’s again until 1970.

    Meanwhile, while, we’re tripping on the Brown vs Blue bronco on the 1962 Denver helmets, as a uni historian, this little thing means everything to me. If we are to have an accruate visual database for NFL-AFL-AAFC uniforms, then this is vitally important. Like LIPhil, I don’t give a rip if the bronc was brown, blue or pink or purple. I just want some sort of proof as to the EXACT color of the little fella.

    -fin-[/quote]

    Isn’t there someone, anyone still alive that was on that team or involved with the equipment that could tell us what the heck went on at that time. There is a website, Pat Scvoggin, that goes into some detail about Broncos uniform history. It explains a bit about the Orange/Burnt Orange uni manufacterer mistake, but to my knowledge nothing about the alleged Brown Bronco Decal (aka Loch Ness Monster).

    It just seems to me, it was “only” 47 years ago, so there has to be SOMEONE THAT IS NOT YET SENILE AND WHO REMEMBERS ENOUGH ABOUT THE EQUIPMENT USED TO TRULY ANSWER THIS QUESTION ONCE AND FOR ALL !!!

  • JohnnyO | September 30, 2009 at 4:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”351240″]Here is a list of what every team is doing for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (The list also includes Target selling “Madden ’10 Pink Version” where proceeds go to the Deanna Favre HOPE Foundation):
    http://www.nfl.com/n...

    *sigh* That article was from LAST year. My bad

    Here was the cover of Madden ’09 Pink Edition:
    http://www.360sync.c...

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 4:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”351242″][quote comment=”351123″]On two items from the early 60’s:

    Oakland Raiders, 1960 and 1961:
    DURING the 1960 season, the Raiders went from NNOB to FNOB. They also had FNOB for all of 1961.

    Kansas City Athletics 1963:
    This was the first year of the green & gold get-up courtesy fo one Charlie O. Finley. For at least a good portion of the season, he had FiNOB’s on the homes only. Whether he did this to poke fun of the AFL or Bill Veeck or not, I dunno. The A’s wouldn’t have NOB’s again until 1970.

    Meanwhile, while, we’re tripping on the Brown vs Blue bronco on the 1962 Denver helmets, as a uni historian, this little thing means everything to me. If we are to have an accruate visual database for NFL-AFL-AAFC uniforms, then this is vitally important. Like LIPhil, I don’t give a rip if the bronc was brown, blue or pink or purple. I just want some sort of proof as to the EXACT color of the little fella.

    -fin-[/quote]

    Isn’t there someone, anyone still alive that was on that team or involved with the equipment that could tell us what the heck went on at that time. There is a website, Pat Scvoggin, that goes into some detail about Broncos uniform history. It explains a bit about the Orange/Burnt Orange uni manufacterer mistake, but to my knowledge nothing about the alleged Brown Bronco Decal (aka Loch Ness Monster).

    It just seems to me, it was “only” 47 years ago, so there has to be SOMEONE THAT IS NOT YET SENILE AND WHO REMEMBERS ENOUGH ABOUT THE EQUIPMENT USED TO TRULY ANSWER THIS QUESTION ONCE AND FOR ALL !!![/quote]

    The problem is that you wore a helmet for 4 (or 5) games 47 years ago and then for the next 47 years everyone said it was a brown horse.. you would be apt to say it was a brown horse. Your mind lies. Color photos.. not so much.

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 4:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”351243″][quote comment=”351240″]Here is a list of what every team is doing for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (The list also includes Target selling “Madden ’10 Pink Version” where proceeds go to the Deanna Favre HOPE Foundation):
    http://www.nfl.com/n...

    *sigh* That article was from LAST year. My bad

    Here was the cover of Madden ’09 Pink Edition:
    http://www.360sync.c...

    Huh, wierd, cuz I was at the Cardinals October 12 game, and I didn’t get no ribbon. Course I was pretty far gone by the time we went in, but i don’t remember hearing or seeing any pink ribbons. I suppose I could check my pictures.

  • JohnnyO | September 30, 2009 at 4:17 pm |

    Can someone explain this?
    http://www.thewizofo...

    The article is here:
    http://www.thewizofo...

  • Nick | September 30, 2009 at 4:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”351183″][quote comment=”351176″][quote comment=”351161″]This whole offensive t-shirt controversy has basically been settled the same way as how the NFL justifies moving a Jets game earlier in the day to avoid a Jewish holiday while the league will schedule games on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day without a second thought.[/quote]

    Actually, they do have a little consideration. There’s never been a night game on Christmas Eve, as far as I can recall.[/quote]

    I believe Vikings had a 3 p.m. CT start on Christmas Eve in the past few years. Think was against Packers. That’s about as close as they’ve come.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    SAINTS had a similar 2:00pm or 2:30pm start vs the Cowboys on Christmas Eve in I believe 1999.

  • Phil | September 30, 2009 at 4:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”351179″]Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

    Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?[/quote]
    Yes. I’ve always thought that anyone else wearing pinstripes, especially non-navy blue, was just wrong.

  • Stoops | September 30, 2009 at 4:35 pm |

    My girlfriend plays roller derby for the burning river roller girls here in Cleveland. She is a Rolling Pin Up. That GOtham team is really good they are always feature in their publications.
    http://www.burningri...
    http://www.myspace.c...

    check em out
    my girlfriend is punk’d pixie
    enjoy
    -Stoops

  • Stoops | September 30, 2009 at 4:40 pm |

    here is a flicker site too for the Burning River Roller Girls
    http://www.burningri...

    enjoy more!
    -Stoops

  • Thomas Clark | September 30, 2009 at 4:49 pm |

    Two things that really, really, REALLY excited me from the NHL update: The Flames’ sock fiasco is over. I am so thankful for that. Also, it looks like every team is migrating back to the standard “sweater” type uniform rather than those craptastic things that were wannabe body suits. Man I hated that look.

  • Hott Rodd | September 30, 2009 at 5:25 pm |

    So after weeks of wondering whether the judge in the coyotes case will pick A or B, he chose C. Fitting I suppose.

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | September 30, 2009 at 5:52 pm |

    I have always known UTEP’s stripe was the pick-axe thing. Not sure how or where from – but they do have a rather grandiose display as they take the field with the mascot weilding the pick-axe into the grass. I am quite sure the Reliant Stadium grounds crew was rather displeased with the hole in the endzone!

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | September 30, 2009 at 6:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”351179″]Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

    Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?[/quote]

    First question… they shouldn’t. Avs used a similar jersey before – they are just goign back to pick up that cool retro look. Can’t scold anyone for an attempt at retro!

    Second question… yes! Who the hell wants to look like a Yankee??? I still hate the Atros’ pins tripes after that Clemens debacle!

  • LarryB | September 30, 2009 at 6:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”351067″][quote comment=”351057″]Is it just me or do the Oilers original helmets and unis from the ’60s look like they used a much darker blue than what the Oilers are using this season in their AFL throwbacks? The AFL throwbacks look more like the baby blue of the 70s – 90s Oilers, to me.[/quote]

    Oilers used same baby blue entire time they bore that name, from 1960 through the move to Tennessee. In fact, pretty sure it’s still the same blue used after change to Titans. It’s just lighting conditions, different technology, fabrics and materials…an optic thing.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I too have wondered if the colors used were the same shade or tone as the originals. It seems like the Chargers old blue can look totally different than the ones used now. I agree it is most likely the lighting and other factors in old film or pictures.

    I had been working on more screen grabs and sometimes I edit the grabs with more lighting if the film seems too dark.

    Here is the Oilers bench shot with more lighting.

    http://img.photobuck...

  • LarryB | September 30, 2009 at 6:21 pm |

    About using pink in any uniforms. I would like ti see it used. I know several colleges had pink as part of the uniforms at first. Well at least a couple. I know Penn State was pink and black. Syracuse I think had pink.

    Now I think black and dark pink would look sharp. I am not a fan of Penn States uniforms. Imagine the Lions in black jerseys with pink numbers and pink pants. Pink helmet with single black stripe.

    Uh maybe the away would not look as good. Pink pants pink jersey with black numbers

  • Ryan | September 30, 2009 at 6:26 pm |

    Not sure if anyone has caught this yet, but the Seahawks had different pants then there normal blues matched up with the lime green jersey, the pants matched the sleeves and the stripe down the side was different also.

  • Thomps | September 30, 2009 at 6:35 pm |

    The UTEP helmet stripe ticker item made me think about the recent NFL uniform updates by Phil. He strongly dislikes the truncated pointy pant stripes, but I think they could be a signature look for the Panthers. I love his idea of making full sleeve stripes and tapering them to a point under the arm (this is already present on some Panther jerseys) You combine tapered shoulder stripes and tapered pant stripes, and all you need is a good helemt stripe to tie it all together.

    Tapered pant stripe – http://farm4.static....

    Tapered shoulder stripe (already on some Panthers) – http://beat.bodoglif...

    This brings me to the helmet stripe. I really dislike how the two black stripes outlined in blue flail away from one another – http://www.blogcdn.c...
    Why not straighten them out straight back, or replace them with a single tapered stripe that mimics the current pant stripe-
    http://www.flickr.co...
    http://www.flickr.co...

    While I love the classic striping used by the Packers, I don’t think every team has to use them. Why not a modern striping pattern that still provides continuity between the helmet, jersey, and pant?

  • LI Phil | September 30, 2009 at 7:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”351257″]About using pink in any uniforms. I would like ti see it used. I know several colleges had pink as part of the uniforms at first. Well at least a couple. I know Penn State was pink and black. Syracuse I think had pink.

    Now I think black and dark pink would look sharp. I am not a fan of Penn States uniforms. Imagine the Lions in black jerseys with pink numbers and pink pants. Pink helmet with single black stripe.

    Uh maybe the away would not look as good. Pink pants pink jersey with black numbers[/quote]

    i donno

    think papa joe would go for it?

  • =bg= | September 30, 2009 at 7:42 pm |

    Vick back with Beaverton
    http://www.sfgate.co...

  • Gusto44 | September 30, 2009 at 7:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”351255″][quote comment=”351179″]Why should the Rangers should have an exclusive on the diagonal insignia?

    Should the Yankees have an exclusive on pinstripes?[/quote]

    First question… they shouldn’t. Avs used a similar jersey before – they are just goign back to pick up that cool retro look. Can’t scold anyone for an attempt at retro!

    Second question… yes! Who the hell wants to look like a Yankee??? I still hate the Atros’ pins tripes after that Clemens debacle![/quote]

    Regarding Yankee pinstripes, I don’t think other teams should be copying the same Yankee color style of pinstripes. However, I would strongly disagree with the idea all other MLB clubs be somehow disallowed from using pinstripes of their respective team colors. I liked the Phillies in red pinstripes and Pirates in gold pinstripes, and the Cubs look good currently, in their blue pinstripes.
    In some respects , this argument reminds me of the Boston Bruins ill-advised decision to file a protest to the NHL in 1980 when the Pens decided to switch to black and yellow uniforms. It just doesn’t make any sense.

  • LarryB | September 30, 2009 at 8:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”351260″][quote comment=”351257″]About using pink in any uniforms. I would like ti see it used. I know several colleges had pink as part of the uniforms at first. Well at least a couple. I know Penn State was pink and black. Syracuse I think had pink.

    Now I think black and dark pink would look sharp. I am not a fan of Penn States uniforms. Imagine the Lions in black jerseys with pink numbers and pink pants. Pink helmet with single black stripe.

    Uh maybe the away would not look as good. Pink pants pink jersey with black numbers[/quote]

    i donno

    think papa joe would go for it?[/quote]

    Yikes, Ya sure JoePa would love it

  • Rob Ullman | September 30, 2009 at 8:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”351218″]
    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

    I just couldn’t disagree more with this.

  • Gusto44 | September 30, 2009 at 9:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”351264″][quote comment=”351218″]
    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

    I just couldn’t disagree more with this.[/quote]

    Absolutely, what is iconic about the New York Rangers diagonal name on their uniforms? We’re talking about a franchise which has won only four Stanley Cups in their history. That’s a remarkably low total, considering the Rangers had the huge advantage of entering the NHL an Original Six club. In that era, teams with losing records actually won Cups, something which would never happen today. By comparison, the Penguins entered the NHL several decades later, and have already won three Cups.

  • =bg= | September 30, 2009 at 9:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    repeat after me.
    THIS:
    http://nfl.imageg.ne...
    is THE BEST NFL UNI EVER. Nothing else comes close. IMO.

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 9:46 pm |

    Sure, I knew it already; but it was nice to see this week’s SI Hockey Preview edition acknowledge that the O-6 jerseys are the best in hockey. :-)

    (But I have to wonder how Stan Mikita feels to find out that there were no Europeans in the NHL in 1964.)

  • Patrick in MI | September 30, 2009 at 10:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”351250″]My girlfriend plays roller derby for the burning river roller girls here in Cleveland. She is a Rolling Pin Up. That GOtham team is really good they are always feature in their publications.
    http://www.burningri...
    http://www.myspace.c...

    check em out
    my girlfriend is punk’d pixie
    enjoy
    -Stoops[/quote]

    One of the teams is the Cleveland Steamers? Priceless!

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:07 pm |

    RE: Yankees having exclusive rights to pinstripes

    I’ve got to disagree with this.

    I would agree with this sentiment if the Yankees were the first team to wear pins. Granted, they’ve stuck with them for a hell of a long time, and there were many years where the Yankees were the only team wearing pinstripes. But the fact of the matter is that several teams wore pinstripes before the Yankees ever did.

    That being said, I think there are some teams that definitely should not be wearing pins, but that’s based purely on their aesthetic qualities.

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 10:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”351268″]One of the teams is the Cleveland Steamers? Priceless![/quote]

    I’m not sure which team “Gonnolea” plays for, but I wouldn’t want to catch her.

  • B. Cole | September 30, 2009 at 10:17 pm |

    Adam Richman, host of Man Vs. Food, was on Page 2 today promoting his baseball stadium episode.

    In the episode, he sported a No Mas shirt. No, not the “I’m Calling It Shea” one, this one: http://bit.ly/3txiIv

    Just thought you’d like to know. Not sure why.

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”351265″][quote comment=”351264″][quote comment=”351218″]
    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

    I just couldn’t disagree more with this.[/quote]

    Absolutely, what is iconic about the New York Rangers diagonal name on their uniforms? We’re talking about a franchise which has won only four Stanley Cups in their history. That’s a remarkably low total, considering the Rangers had the huge advantage of entering the NHL an Original Six club. In that era, teams with losing records actually won Cups, something which would never happen today. By comparison, the Penguins entered the NHL several decades later, and have already won three Cups.[/quote]
    You have to win a heap of championships for your look to be considered “iconic?” That’s asinine.

    How many Lombardi trophies have the Chargers hoisted? I’d say the lightning bolts are a signature look. Conversely, when the Broncos did their most recent makeover, should the Bears have said to them, “Uh, we wear navy and orange and we’ve got 9 championships. Come up with another color scheme.”

  • JTH | September 30, 2009 at 10:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”351266″][quote comment=”351007″]Any of you geeks see this?

    http://sports.yahoo....

    He makes a REAL good point![/quote]

    repeat after me.
    THIS:
    http://nfl.imageg.ne...
    is THE BEST NFL UNI EVER. Nothing else comes close. IMO.[/quote]
    Yeah, it’s nice. But it isn’t even the best uniform ever worn by that team.

    This one is.

  • Josh Williams | September 30, 2009 at 10:25 pm |

    What’s happening in this picture?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

  • Rob Ullman | September 30, 2009 at 10:32 pm |

    The Penguins wore the arched “PITTSBURGH” lettering their first year in the NHL (though they ditched it the next). I know I’ve seen replicas at Mitchell & Ness and Ebbets Field of other minor and semi-pro teams who’ve sported the diagonal name. True, some a’ those looks might be made up to look old-timey and not historically accurate, but I still think of it more as a hockey thing than a Rangers thing.

  • Gusto44 | September 30, 2009 at 10:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”351272″][quote comment=”351265″][quote comment=”351264″][quote comment=”351218″]
    The Rangers should be the only NHL team to have it because the other teams that wore their name diagonally looked stupid. Copycats need not apply in the NHL. Wasn’t that the complaint about the EDGE design: everyone looks the same?[/quote]

    I just couldn’t disagree more with this.[/quote]

    Absolutely, what is iconic about the New York Rangers diagonal name on their uniforms? We’re talking about a franchise which has won only four Stanley Cups in their history. That’s a remarkably low total, considering the Rangers had the huge advantage of entering the NHL an Original Six club. In that era, teams with losing records actually won Cups, something which would never happen today. By comparison, the Penguins entered the NHL several decades later, and have already won three Cups.[/quote]
    You have to win a heap of championships for your look to be considered “iconic?” That’s asinine.

    How many Lombardi trophies have the Chargers hoisted? I’d say the lightning bolts are a signature look. Conversely, when the Broncos did their most recent makeover, should the Bears have said to them, “Uh, we wear navy and orange and we’ve got 9 championships. Come up with another color scheme.”[/quote]

    It’s not just championships, it’s also great players who have spent the vast majority with a franchise. On both counts, the Rangers fall short, especially when you consider how long they’ve been in existence. You mentioned the Chargers, and they’ve had many more great players who spent most of their career wearing that iconic jersey. That’s the important difference.

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 10:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”351274″]What’s happening in this picture?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    Well, the guy on the right is giving the welcoming signal for the Royal Order of Raccoons…except he’s got the wrong hat.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 10:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”351275″]The Penguins wore the arched “PITTSBURGH” lettering their first year in the NHL (though they ditched it the next). I know I’ve seen replicas at Mitchell & Ness and Ebbets Field of other minor and semi-pro teams who’ve sported the diagonal name. True, some a’ those looks might be made up to look old-timey and not historically accurate, but I still think of it more as a hockey thing than a Rangers thing.[/quote]

    Here’s the thing.

    The Penguins wore a diagonal “Pittsburgh” for a total of four seasons out of 42 possible seasons they have been in the NHL.

    The Avalanche wore a diagonal “Colorado” for a total of six seasons out of 14 possible seasons they have been in the NHL.

    The Brooklyn Americans wore a diagonal “Brooklyn” for a total of one season out of 17 season that they were in the NHL.

    The Rangers have worn a diagonal “Rangers” or “New York” for 80 of the 83 seasons they have been a part of the NHL.

    The diagonal name is clearly a New York Rangers design element. The red-white-and-blue has been copied by a number of teams, but the diagonal name has been associated with the Rangers as long as Native American head has been associated with the Blackhawks.

    Other teams need to be original, not copycats. Otherwise, the NHL is the new NCAA.

  • Gusto44 | September 30, 2009 at 10:48 pm |

    I should also add that while the Chicago Black Hawks have had less success than the Rangers, at least their uniform design is unique. The Rangers have not always had that diagonal lettering anyway, so I don’t understand what is so iconic about their uniform.

  • anotherguy | September 30, 2009 at 10:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”351278″]
    Other teams need to be original, not copycats. Otherwise, the NHL is the new NCAA.[/quote]
    Isn’t the object to sell jerseys?

    Somewhere, “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” has to come into the equation. If the jersey sells, great. But if the reaction from fans is “what? why would we want to look like the Rangers?” then they’ll try another look.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 10:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”351276″]
    It’s not just championships, it’s also great players who have spent the vast majority with a franchise. On both counts, the Rangers fall short, especially when you consider how long they’ve been in existence. You mentioned the Chargers, and they’ve had many more great players who spent most of their career wearing that iconic jersey. That’s the important difference.[/quote]

    You want great players? Let’s run down the list.

    Brian Leetch, Mike Richter, Mark Messier, Eddie Giacomin, Jean Ratelle, Brad Park, Vic Hadfield, Rod Gilbert, Andy Bathgate, Walt Tkaczuk, Bill Cook, Bun Cook, Harry Howell, and Lynn Patrick are all iconic Rangers. Maybe I just know these names because hockey is my religion, but it’s not like the Rangers haven’t had talent.

    I also want to point out that the Rangers have more Stanley Cups that the Blackhawks who joined the NHL in 1926.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 10:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”351280″][quote comment=”351278″]
    Other teams need to be original, not copycats. Otherwise, the NHL is the new NCAA.[/quote]
    Isn’t the object to sell jerseys?

    Somewhere, “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” has to come into the equation. If the jersey sells, great. But if the reaction from fans is “what? why would we want to look like the Rangers?” then they’ll try another look.[/quote]

    And as you can plainly see, neither Colorado nor Pittsburgh are wearing the diagonal names any longer. Need that be proof that the Rangers’ look only works for the Rangers?

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 11:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”351279″]I should also add that while the Chicago Black Hawks have had less success than the Rangers, at least their uniform design is unique. The Rangers have not always had that diagonal lettering anyway, so I don’t understand what is so iconic about their uniform.[/quote]

    Unlike the Rangers, the Blackhawks logo has gone through a number of changes. Because of this, the current logo is significantly different than what they wore when they first entered the league.

    The Rangers only wore the diagonal name for 80 season out of the 83 they have played with only slight changes to the lettering.

    The Blackhawks, meanwhile, have changed jersey design, logos, and looks more often than the Rangers, and are doing so again this season. Therefore, the Rangers’ jersey would be far more recognizable through the passage of time, and more iconic throughout the history of the NHL.

  • KeeNly | September 30, 2009 at 11:03 pm |

    Speaking of offensive shirts, what’s the deal with the Jewboys shirt on No Mas? I can’t believe you would approve that one and get mad at a shirt that calls the Giants Ginas! Oh wait, you are a NY fan, makes sense. Got to love your loyalty Paul.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 11:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”351284″]Speaking of offensive shirts, what’s the deal with the Jewboys shirt on No Mas?

    I can’t believe you would approve that one and get mad at a shirt that calls the Giants Ginas!

    Oh wait, you are a NY fan, makes sense. Got to love your loyalty Paul.[/quote]

    Are you for real?

    It wasn’t one t-shirt that he had an issue with. It was a number of them, and the message that they presented. He’s not here to promote shirts that encourage demeaning messages. But you would have seen that had you actually read through all the comments.

    Pull your head out of your lower orifice.

  • BuckeyeMark | September 30, 2009 at 11:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”351259″]The UTEP helmet stripe ticker item made me think about the recent NFL uniform updates by Phil. He strongly dislikes the truncated pointy pant stripes, but I think they could be a signature look for the Panthers. I love his idea of making full sleeve stripes and tapering them to a point under the arm (this is already present on some Panther jerseys) You combine tapered shoulder stripes and tapered pant stripes, and all you need is a good helemt stripe to tie it all together.

    Tapered pant stripe – http://farm4.static....

    Tapered shoulder stripe (already on some Panthers) – http://beat.bodoglif...

    This brings me to the helmet stripe. I really dislike how the two black stripes outlined in blue flail away from one another – http://www.blogcdn.c...
    Why not straighten them out straight back, or replace them with a single tapered stripe that mimics the current pant stripe-
    http://www.flickr.co...
    http://www.flickr.co...

    While I love the classic striping used by the Packers, I don’t think every team has to use them. Why not a modern striping pattern that still provides continuity between the helmet, jersey, and pant?[/quote]

    watching the Cowboys – Carolina game Monday night I noticed some players on the Carolina D have a slightly different look with the stripes. some seem to be closer together than “regular.”

  • Gusto44 | September 30, 2009 at 11:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”351281″][quote comment=”351276″]
    It’s not just championships, it’s also great players who have spent the vast majority with a franchise. On both counts, the Rangers fall short, especially when you consider how long they’ve been in existence. You mentioned the Chargers, and they’ve had many more great players who spent most of their career wearing that iconic jersey. That’s the important difference.[/quote]

    You want great players? Let’s run down the list.

    Brian Leetch, Mike Richter, Mark Messier, Eddie Giacomin, Jean Ratelle, Brad Park, Vic Hadfield, Rod Gilbert, Andy Bathgate, Walt Tkaczuk, Bill Cook, Bun Cook, Harry Howell, and Lynn Patrick are all iconic Rangers. Maybe I just know these names because hockey is my religion, but it’s not like the Rangers haven’t had talent.

    I also want to point out that the Rangers have more Stanley Cups that the Blackhawks who joined the NHL in 1926.[/quote]

    Mark Messier is one of many Rangers who didn’t spend the majority of his career as a Ranger. I agree, the Rangers have had some talented players, but the fact remains they rank 4th among the Original Six teams in success. Only winning four Cups since 1926 is not something to brag about. The tradition just is disappointing, especially when you consider that franchise had a 35 year head start before the first wave of NHL expansion. I follow hockey too, and I’ve never, ever, heard anyone say the Rangers look is iconic at all. The lack of success is most definitely a factor. Still can’t see anything wrong with other teams using diagonal lettering, I can’t recall any media person outside New York complaining.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”351287″]
    Mark Messier is one of many Rangers who didn’t spend the majority of his career as a Ranger. I agree, the Rangers have had some talented players, but the fact remains they rank 4th among the Original Six teams in success. Only winning four Cups since 1926 is not something to brag about. The tradition just is disappointing, especially when you consider that franchise had a 35 year head start before the first wave of NHL expansion. I follow hockey too, and I’ve never, ever, heard anyone say the Rangers look is iconic at all. The lack of success is most definitely a factor. Still can’t see anything wrong with other teams using diagonal lettering, I can’t recall any media person outside New York complaining.[/quote]

    Mark Messier’s legend was made in New York City. He was a winner with Edmonton, but he became “Mess” with the Rangers.

    It’s the Rangers’ look. They have worn it for so long that it’s impossible not to associate any other team with diagonal lettering with it.

    It’s the same as the Fisherman jersey that the Islanders wore. Anyone else who were to use that would automatically be associated to the Fisherman. Why? Because it’s their look.

    That’s what makes it iconic.

  • JohnnyO | September 30, 2009 at 11:28 pm |

    Randy Moss in pink gloves…(and a Gillete ad patch)

    http://www.huffingto...

  • Gusto44 | September 30, 2009 at 11:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”351288″][quote comment=”351287″]
    Mark Messier is one of many Rangers who didn’t spend the majority of his career as a Ranger. I agree, the Rangers have had some talented players, but the fact remains they rank 4th among the Original Six teams in success. Only winning four Cups since 1926 is not something to brag about. The tradition just is disappointing, especially when you consider that franchise had a 35 year head start before the first wave of NHL expansion. I follow hockey too, and I’ve never, ever, heard anyone say the Rangers look is iconic at all. The lack of success is most definitely a factor. Still can’t see anything wrong with other teams using diagonal lettering, I can’t recall any media person outside New York complaining.[/quote]

    Mark Messier’s legend was made in New York City. He was a winner with Edmonton, but he became “Mess” with the Rangers.

    It’s the Rangers’ look. They have worn it for so long that it’s impossible not to associate any other team with diagonal lettering with it.

    It’s the same as the Fisherman jersey that the Islanders wore. Anyone else who were to use that would automatically be associated to the Fisherman. Why? Because it’s their look.

    That’s what makes it iconic.[/quote]

    It’s a good uniform, but answer me this: Why did the Rangers abandon their regular uniform for two years in the 1970s for the Winnipeg Jets look if their look was iconic? They discarded the diagonal lettering for the shield logo instead. Can’t imagine the Wings, Habs, or Leafs doing the same. Heck, even the Florida Panthers have stuck with their logo.
    You mentioned the Islanders, I think it’s revealing they have won just as many Cups as the Rangers, despite entering the NHL nearly five decades later.

  • Teebz | September 30, 2009 at 11:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”351290″]
    It’s a good uniform, but answer me this: Why did the Rangers abandon their regular uniform for two years in the 1970s for the Winnipeg Jets look if their look was iconic? They discarded the diagonal lettering for the shield logo instead. Can’t imagine the Wings, Habs, or Leafs doing the same. Heck, even the Florida Panthers have stuck with their logo.
    You mentioned the Islanders, I think it’s revealing they have won just as many Cups as the Rangers, despite entering the NHL nearly five decades later.[/quote]

    The Panthers haven’t been around for 83 years yet so let’s give them some time. The Leafs, Habs, and Red Wings have all tinkered and changed their logos. I believe you may have seen the sweaters of the Detroit Falcons, the Toronto St. Pats, and the various Montreal jerseys worn in several games in the past decade.

    The reason the Rangers changed their jerseys for two seasons was due to the WHA and John Ferguson. As NHLuniforms.com writes, “General Manager John Ferguson makes what many Rangers fans consider a fatal mistake – he changed the uniforms from their traditional design to a more modern one. After Rangers fans gave it a thumbs-down, Ferguson took the design to the Winnipeg Jets when he became their GM”.

    In 1976, they changed. In 1978, they changed back. Ironically, they made the change after they dealt for one of the biggest superstars in the NHL at that time: Phil Esposito.

    Strangely enough, they did it again in 1996 when they started wearing the Liberty head jersey. The superstar they signed? Wayne Gretzky.

    Diagonal lettering in the NHL will always be associated with the NY Rangers due to them wearing it since they joined the NHL.

  • LarryB | September 30, 2009 at 11:55 pm |

    Letterman has the NY Rangers doing the top 10 list.
    Dave said how great the classic Rangers uni is.

  • LarryB | September 30, 2009 at 11:58 pm |

    The Rangers did have the blue Ranger sweaters on.

    So did Hawaii change their uniforms and helmets with the old Rainbow because of the association the gays now use a rainbow for?

    I read that tonight from a guy from Hawaii.

    I liked the old rainbow helmet and bright uniforms better than the current ones

  • mmwatkin | October 1, 2009 at 12:08 am |

    [quote comment=”351274″]What’s happening in this picture?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    Tigers clinching the division over the Twins, natch

  • Gusto44 | October 1, 2009 at 12:10 am |

    [quote comment=”351291″][quote comment=”351290″]
    It’s a good uniform, but answer me this: Why did the Rangers abandon their regular uniform for two years in the 1970s for the Winnipeg Jets look if their look was iconic? They discarded the diagonal lettering for the shield logo instead. Can’t imagine the Wings, Habs, or Leafs doing the same. Heck, even the Florida Panthers have stuck with their logo.
    You mentioned the Islanders, I think it’s revealing they have won just as many Cups as the Rangers, despite entering the NHL nearly five decades later.[/quote]

    The Panthers haven’t been around for 83 years yet so let’s give them some time. The Leafs, Habs, and Red Wings have all tinkered and changed their logos. I believe you may have seen the sweaters of the Detroit Falcons, the Toronto St. Pats, and the various Montreal jerseys worn in several games in the past decade.

    The reason the Rangers changed their jerseys for two seasons was due to the WHA and John Ferguson. As NHLuniforms.com writes, “General Manager John Ferguson makes what many Rangers fans consider a fatal mistake – he changed the uniforms from their traditional design to a more modern one. After Rangers fans gave it a thumbs-down, Ferguson took the design to the Winnipeg Jets when he became their GM”.

    In 1976, they changed. In 1978, they changed back. Ironically, they made the change after they dealt for one of the biggest superstars in the NHL at that time: Phil Esposito.

    Strangely enough, they did it again in 1996 when they started wearing the Liberty head jersey. The superstar they signed? Wayne Gretzky.

    Diagonal lettering in the NHL will always be associated with the NY Rangers due to them wearing it since they joined the NHL.[/quote]

    Yes, the Wings, Habs, and Leafs did some tinkering with their unis, but never abandoned their look for two entire seasons. If the Rangers had such an iconic look, the ownership during the John Ferguson era would have certainly stepped in and prevented the change. Of course they did not, but as too often in Rangers history, a GM was looking for a winning formula. In this case, ownership thought so little of the regular uniform they let the change stand for not one, but two seasons.
    I will agree with your statement about diagonal lettering being associated with the New York Rangers. But it’s not iconic like the Wings or Habs logo, because of the lack of overall success. There’s no excuse for only two Cups since 1950, anyway you slice it. And I don’t know of any homegrown Rangers on the short list of greatest players of all time. That’s significant. If the Rangers were anywhere near the franchise of the Wings, I think you’d see fewer teams sporting the diagonal look.
    I’m signing off, and won’t be checking today’s posts anymore. Good night, all.

  • Paul Lukas | October 1, 2009 at 12:31 am |

    [quote comment=”351284″]Speaking of offensive shirts, what’s the deal with the Jewboys shirt on No Mas?

    I can’t believe you would approve that one and get mad at a shirt that calls the Giants Ginas!

    Oh wait, you are a NY fan, makes sense. Got to love your loyalty Paul.[/quote]

    I tried to explain to this guy, privately, that the Jewboys shirt is a PRO-Jewish statement. But, of course, he’s hiding behind a phony email address.
    Someone please explain to him that No Mas is run by a guy named Isenberg…. I swear, some people are so fucking clueless….

  • Teebz | October 1, 2009 at 12:36 am |

    [quote comment=”351295″]
    Yes, the Wings, Habs, and Leafs did some tinkering with their unis, but never abandoned their look for two entire seasons. If the Rangers had such an iconic look, the ownership during the John Ferguson era would have certainly stepped in and prevented the change. Of course they did not, but as too often in Rangers history, a GM was looking for a winning formula. In this case, ownership thought so little of the regular uniform they let the change stand for not one, but two seasons.
    I will agree with your statement about diagonal lettering being associated with the New York Rangers. But it’s not iconic like the Wings or Habs logo, because of the lack of overall success. There’s no excuse for only two Cups since 1950, anyway you slice it. And I don’t know of any homegrown Rangers on the short list of greatest players of all time. That’s significant. If the Rangers were anywhere near the franchise of the Wings, I think you’d see fewer teams sporting the diagonal look.
    I’m signing off, and won’t be checking today’s posts anymore. Good night, all.[/quote]

    The Habs wore four different uniforms last season, and will wear two more this season. And their logo has changed significantly since they started. But they didn’t tinker.

    The Leafs were green until they changed to the traditional blue-and-white. Oh yeah, they were also called the St. Pats while wearing green from 1919 until 1927. They also changed from the traditional logo in 1967 to the current 16-point Maple Leaf. But that wasn’t a major change whatsoever.

    The Blackhawks have one Stanley Cup since 1950, yet they have an iconic look. The Bruins have two since 1950, yet they have an iconic look. But the Rangers don’t? Would the Rangers not be close to or equal in their success as those other two Original Six teams?

    As for homegrown players, I suppose that Mike Richter and Brian Leetch – two American-born players none-the-less – had no success. They were both fairly essential in winning that 1994 Stanley Cup, Leetch was the Conn Smythe Trophy winner,the first American-born player to capture the honour, that year, yet the Rangers haven’t produced any homegrown talent. Strange.

  • JTH | October 1, 2009 at 12:51 am |

    Gusto,

    I know you already took your ball and went home, but aren’t you the same guy who was calling the Pirates a “storied franchise” and citing their 5 World Series championships as evidence?

    5 championships in the World Series era is an average of once every 21 years or so. 4 Stanley Cups in the Rangers’ 83 seasons is…?

  • EddieAtari | October 1, 2009 at 1:19 am |

    Hey Paul, sorry you caught flack for being a socially responsible capitalist… These things happen… we need more good ironic sports T-shirts so smug and offensive… My $0.02…

  • super390 | October 1, 2009 at 1:26 am |

    The Houston Aeros wore diagonal lettering for their entire existence, and won two WHA championships.

    And how do we even know the Rangers were the first team to wear diagonal lettering? Maybe they ripped it off of some Canadian or college team. If they weren’t the first, then they no more have an exclusive on it than the Detroit Tigers do on Old English monograms. Nor do the NFL Rams have a monopoly on curving rams’ horns (copied by a couple of college teams).

  • EddieAtari | October 1, 2009 at 1:36 am |

    Hey Paul, sorry you caught flack for being a socially responsible capitalist… These things happen… We need more good ironic sports T-shirts that aren’t so smug or offensive anyway…

  • Teebz | October 1, 2009 at 9:52 am |

    [quote comment=”351300″]The Houston Aeros wore diagonal lettering for their entire existence, and won two WHA championships.

    And how do we even know the Rangers were the first team to wear diagonal lettering? Maybe they ripped it off of some Canadian or college team. If they weren’t the first, then they no more have an exclusive on it than the Detroit Tigers do on Old English monograms. Nor do the NFL Rams have a monopoly on curving rams’ horns (copied by a couple of college teams).[/quote]

    Find me a team that has (a) worn it for more than 83 years, and (b) worn it before 1926, and you got yourself a deal.

  • Sportscrack | October 1, 2009 at 12:56 pm |

    Dear Uniwatch Nation:

    As owner of Sportscrack.com I would like to stand up for myself on these shirts we are talking about. The shirts are meant to be funny. Yes, they can be seen offensive to some people and for this I apologize. We went out of our way to accommodate to Paul’s wishes to make a separate store page without some of the shirts on there he found offensive. Unfortunately that didn’t work out either. In no way do any of our shirts say “Kill The Homos” like Paul was referring to. They are meant to be a play of words that fans use on their arch rival. For instance our Ann Arbor is a Whore shirt and FUSC shirt. Those should be considered offensive by some people but I guess that is the point: we aren’t targeting gay people specifically. Trust me there are a lot more offensive t shirts out there then Gaytors or Oklahomo.

    In 4 years of business we had one complaint and that was from a Uniwatch reader. He went to Paul and complained and said we were being homophobic and hateful. I told him the shirts are meant to be in good humor. We do not condone violence against anybody. But in the end the PC police won out.

    I thank Paul for letting us advertise on this wonderful blog and wish him the best of luck. Hopefully sometime in the future we can work together.

    Sincerely,

    Matt Fairchild
    Sportscrack.com
    Drinklikeachampiontoday.com

  • Gusto44 | October 2, 2009 at 9:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”351298″]Gusto,

    I know you already took your ball and went home, but aren’t you the same guy who was calling the Pirates a “storied franchise” and citing their 5 World Series championships as evidence?

    5 championships in the World Series era is an average of once every 21 years or so. 4 Stanley Cups in the Rangers’ 83 seasons is…?[/quote]

    Well, for starters, it’s much more impressive since only three other franchises in baseball history have won more titles. I already made that point before…….