Giving New Meaning to the Term ‘Hat Head’

what uni # will braylon edwards wear for the jets?

I’m not sure a guy who lead the league in drops is a good deal for the Jets…considering what they gave up to get him, it seems like they are handing alot over…is it a step up? Only in time we will see…I truly truly hope so!

Not sure if the logo on Callison’s helmet is a loose applique or a flapping decal. Here’s a pic of Richie Allen taken in ’64 and his helmet logo looks like a decal.

link

Could somebody tell that numbskull ranting about the pink stuff that breast cancer is extremely, EXTREMELY overstated in how fatal and prevalent it is? It’s probably the most “overrated” disease out there.

Paul, after yesterday’s HBP adventures, maybe it’s time for another look at the worst baggy pants/jersey offenders?

As a quick recap, Aubrey Huff’s baggy pants got him first base, but Brandon Inge’s baggy jersey was either not noticed or waived off.

All the police departments in my area, from Washington DC Metro Police to Northern Virginia county cops have made similar switches in the last couple of decades.

A downgrade, since the previous practice was to have big swatches of flat, bold color, often with contrasting panels, whereas now most police cruisers have much narrower, more filigreed decorations that emphasize text like “Police” or “Name of Jurisdiction”. But the point should always be to maximize visibility, particularly at speed. That means you can’t ask the observer to read text to see that it’s a police car; the car needs a distinctive appearance based on color or shape alone.

For example, is it any wonder that people treat DC police like rent-a-cops when they drive around in link? Real cop cars should link. The latter design is instantly recognizable and it commands authority, which is what you want in any tool designed to enforce the law.

Back to the main entry topic, I love the inclusion of the link

Isn’t “Udorse” just the 21st Century equivalent of a farmer have ads painted on the side of his barn? Or the old Coke ads on brick buildings? Those are considered quaint now, nostalgic.

[quote comment=”352543″]what uni # will braylon edwards wear for the jets?[/quote]

dunno, but I heard that when they handed him his jersey so he could get a look, he dropped it.

[quote comment=”352552″]Paul, after yesterday’s HBP adventures, maybe it’s time for another look at the worst baggy pants/jersey offenders?

As a quick recap, Aubrey Huff’s baggy pants got him first base, but Brandon Inge’s baggy jersey was either not noticed or waived off.[/quote]

Huff’s pants didn’t look particularly baggy to me. And neither did Inge’s jersey. The umpire simply blew the call on Inge.

can’t edwards wear #17. i don’t think anyone currently has that number. brad smith is 16.

[quote comment=”352563″]Say what you want about police cars, but nothing will be able to top the ridiculousness of link[/quote]

I beg to differ!
link

east sussex has a fairly cool cruiser

[quote comment=”352547″]Further on the subject of “modernized” squad cars, there’s something that’s been bugging me and I was wondering if this is a nationwide trend as well.

The Chicago police have taken to wearing baseball-style caps with their unis. It really is not a good look. I’m sure they’re more comfortable, but it makes them look like half-assed security guards or armored car drivers.

And the classic checkerboard hatband really doesn’t work with them.

I mean, come ON, what’s better? link or link? No contest.

Well, at least they haven’t tried to go the flashy route on their cars, er, link yet.[/quote]

Cheaper would be the word you’re looking for. Baseball caps are not expensive at all- the real caps usually have leather sweats, are exactly sized, lined and all that jazz.

An adjustable baseball cap is much cheaper. Budget cuts played a role in that decision I’m sure.

But, you look like a rent-a-cop, people will treat you like one.

The Italians win hands down

link

link

The German’s get props as well

link

link

Excuse me, I have to go. somewhere a crime is happening.

link

[quote comment=”352573″]Crabtree’s number with 49ers?

Anyone?

They only have one wideout NOT wearing something in the 80s. Wonder if they’ll stay with trying to keep WRs in the 80s.[/quote]
Well, he ain’t wearing his college number.

And if you ask me, the NFL blew it when they started allowing receivers to wear 10-19. They should have either opened up all the QB/kicker numbers or only allowed single-digit numbers. Single-digit numbers look good on WRs. Numbers 10-19 do not.

[quote comment=”352575″][quote comment=”352574″]Excuse me, I have to go. somewhere a crime is happening.

link

Now THAT’s what a football player should look like!!!

FOX thinks so…
link

—Ricko[/quote]

That made me think of this. HAHAHA!

link

RFL – It is going to be huge! you mark my words!

link

New cruisers for Bedrock, PD. link

[quote comment=”352576″][quote comment=”352573″]Crabtree’s number with 49ers?

Anyone?

They only have one wideout NOT wearing something in the 80s. Wonder if they’ll stay with trying to keep WRs in the 80s.[/quote]
Well, he ain’t wearing his college number.

And if you ask me, the NFL blew it when they started allowing receivers to wear 10-19. They should have either opened up all the QB/kicker numbers or only allowed single-digit numbers. Single-digit numbers look good on WRs. Numbers 10-19 do not.[/quote]

Completely agree. No reason for a WR to wear something not in the 80s if such a number is available. In the past was routine–and expected–that a rookie WR wearing a single digit or teen in preseason would be assigned something in the 80s after final cutdown. And they liked it, was a sign they’d made the club.

Still, though, I’d rather see single digits than teens on WRs. Was one of the little things I liked about USFL. Anthony Carter kept is Michigan 1, Trumaine Johnson his Grambling 2…as well as a few others (USFL allowed one “uni-aberration” like that per team, as I recall).

—Ricko

“32” used to be a great linebacker #

[quote comment=”352587″][quote comment=”352585″]OK, link to my “WRs don’t look good with a number between 10 and 19” statement.[/quote]

Always exceptions, yes. LOL
Lance Alworth (19) and Don Maynard (13) come to mind, too.

—Ricko[/quote]
Natch. And Don Hutson (14), etc.

I guess I was referring to the “modern NFL” not history. Because does anyone want to see a running back wearing link again? Yikes.

[quote comment=”352572″]The German’s get props as well

link

link

Porsche police cars certainly are nice… but did they have to paint them to look like link

[quote comment=”352588″][quote comment=”352587″][quote comment=”352585″]OK, link to my “WRs don’t look good with a number between 10 and 19” statement.[/quote]

Always exceptions, yes. LOL
Lance Alworth (19) and Don Maynard (13) come to mind, too.

—Ricko[/quote]
Natch. And Don Hutson (14), etc.

I guess I was referring to the “modern NFL” not history. Because does anyone want to see a running back wearing link again? Yikes.[/quote]

or a (granted, it’s the CFL) QB like sam etcheverry

[quote comment=”352588″][quote comment=”352587″][quote comment=”352585″]OK, link to my “WRs don’t look good with a number between 10 and 19” statement.[/quote]

Always exceptions, yes. LOL
Lance Alworth (19) and Don Maynard (13) come to mind, too.

—Ricko[/quote]
Natch. And Don Hutson (14), etc.

I guess I was referring to the “modern NFL” not history. Because does anyone want to see a running back wearing link again? Yikes.[/quote]

Alworth and Maynard aren’t “modern NFL” history?
Thought was sorta defined as the TV Era.

I think they need to relax the number rules a bit.

I don’t really have a problem with players wearing whatever number they want. The only real reason for the number rules is to make it easier on the refs to tell if a player is ineligible. So, simple solution – offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it. Everyone else can wear anything they want. It’s not like it really matters if the guy catching the ball is wearing 12, 21, 46 or 81. And while we’re at it, bring back 00.

Really?

link

[quote comment=”352597″]I think they need to relax the number rules a bit.

I don’t really have a problem with players wearing whatever number they want. The only real reason for the number rules is to make it easier on the refs to tell if a player is ineligible. So, simple solution – offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it. Everyone else can wear anything they want. It’s not like it really matters if the guy catching the ball is wearing 12, 21, 46 or 81. And while we’re at it, bring back 00.[/quote]

See, I kinda agree with that, actually.
My point about the current numbering system is that I don’t get relaxing the 80’s rule just because wideouts “like the numbers in the teens”.

That’s just…stupid.

Teams gonna give ’em their own special supply of Sharpies, too?

—Ricko

[quote comment=”352601″][quote comment=”352597″]I think they need to relax the number rules a bit.

I don’t really have a problem with players wearing whatever number they want. The only real reason for the number rules is to make it easier on the refs to tell if a player is ineligible. So, simple solution – offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it. Everyone else can wear anything they want. It’s not like it really matters if the guy catching the ball is wearing 12, 21, 46 or 81. And while we’re at it, bring back 00.[/quote]

See, I kinda agree with that, actually.
My point about the current numbering system is that I don’t get relaxing the 80’s rule just because wideouts “like the numbers in the teens”.

That’s just…stupid.

Teams gonna give ’em their own special supply of Sharpies, too?

—Ricko[/quote]

I don’t think that’s the real reason… I think you can blame retired numbers for that.

Take a pass happy team, 6WRs, 3TEs, a couple HOF players with we’ll say 80 and 84 retired… and there ya go.

[quote comment=”352602″]”…offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it.”

We should assume you meant “50” and 79, right?[/quote]

No I think I meant 60. The 50’s are pretty much dominated by linebackers now and even if they did relax the number rules, that wouldn’t change right away.

[quote comment=”352603″][quote comment=”352601″][quote comment=”352597″]I think they need to relax the number rules a bit.

I don’t really have a problem with players wearing whatever number they want. The only real reason for the number rules is to make it easier on the refs to tell if a player is ineligible. So, simple solution – offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it. Everyone else can wear anything they want. It’s not like it really matters if the guy catching the ball is wearing 12, 21, 46 or 81. And while we’re at it, bring back 00.[/quote]

See, I kinda agree with that, actually.
My point about the current numbering system is that I don’t get relaxing the 80’s rule just because wideouts “like the numbers in the teens”.

That’s just…stupid.

Teams gonna give ’em their own special supply of Sharpies, too?

—Ricko[/quote]

I don’t think that’s the real reason… I think you can blame retired numbers for that.

Take a pass happy team, 6WRs, 3TEs, a couple HOF players with we’ll say 80 and 84 retired… and there ya go.[/quote]

I said, if “no number in 80s in available” is fine. I’m realistic enough to get that. But there are some teams with virtually NO wideouts wearing numbers in 80s. And I guarantee you, those teams don’t have seven or eight retired numbers in the 80s.

It kinda started, for one, when Moss couldn’t get 84 with the Raiders, and didn’t like any of the 80’s that were available. Or was it Plax signing with the Giants? Somewhere around that time was when it all began.

—Ricko

Jacksonville Jaguars, for example, currently have four active players wearing numbers in the 80s (2 WR, 2 TE).

Well, I suppose, the Jaguars having SO many retired numbers in their long rich history and all, they had no choice.

—Ricko

“The”.. what the hell kind of name is that…(sarcasm)

Actually, I think Plaxico was named after his uncle or some other family member

[quote comment=”352605″][quote comment=”352602″]”…offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it.”

We should assume you meant “50” and 79, right?[/quote]

No I think I meant 60. The 50’s are pretty much dominated by linebackers now and even if they did relax the number rules, that wouldn’t change right away.[/quote]
There are still quite a few OLs wearing numbers in the 50s.

But, because the majority of players wearing numbers in the 50s are linebackers, then 50-59 should no longer be valid for offensive linemen?

Not sure if I missed a difinitive answerr in the comments but 17:

link

[quote comment=”352607″]I said, if “no number in 80s in available” is fine. I’m realistic enough to get that. But there are some teams with virtually NO wideouts wearing numbers in 80s. And I guarantee you, those teams don’t have seven or eight retired numbers in the 80s.[/quote]
The Bears have six wide receivers on their active roster, only two of them have numbers in the 80s.

Quick, name a Bears WR whose number is retired.

[quote comment=”352613″][quote comment=”352605″][quote comment=”352602″]”…offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it.”

We should assume you meant “50” and 79, right?[/quote]

No I think I meant 60. The 50’s are pretty much dominated by linebackers now and even if they did relax the number rules, that wouldn’t change right away.[/quote]
There are still quite a few OLs wearing numbers in the 50s.

But, because the majority of players wearing numbers in the 50s are linebackers, then 50-59 should no longer be valid for offensive linemen?[/quote]

In his scenario, it should be (because we’re accustomed to it) approached from the offensive point of view…ineligible ballcarrier positions wear 50-79.

In the kind of free-wheeling number system he’s talking about, such a concern on defense would essentially be irrelevant. That’s why I thought he meant “50” through 79…cuz otherwise a RB could wear 50. And you can’t just ignore the 50s and say, “Well, those are all linebackers, anyway.” A, that’s not true. B, if you’re gonna set parameters can’t leave out 10 numbers.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”352616″][quote comment=”352613″][quote comment=”352605″][quote comment=”352602″]”…offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it.”

We should assume you meant “50” and 79, right?[/quote]

No I think I meant 60. The 50’s are pretty much dominated by linebackers now and even if they did relax the number rules, that wouldn’t change right away.[/quote]
There are still quite a few OLs wearing numbers in the 50s.

But, because the majority of players wearing numbers in the 50s are linebackers, then 50-59 should no longer be valid for offensive linemen?[/quote]

Fine, 50-79. Whatever. Arbitrary number rule is arbitrary. Sounds just as silly to complain about that as it does to complain about WRs getting to use QB/K numbers, doesn’t it?[/quote]
OK, but the 50-79 rule isn’t arbitrary. That actually serves a purpose. Players wearing those numbers are ineligible. It helps the officials do their job.

And I’m not really complaining about receivers wearing QB numbers, I’m just saying that numbers in the teens don’t look as good on the WRs as they do on QBs. Basically, SINCE the NFL is insisting on slotting the positions numerically, AND they relaxed the rules, they opened up the wrong digits — should’ve gone with 1-9 instead.

The NFL actually should just restrict WRs from wearing 7 through 12 since they are the traditional QB numbers.

[quote comment=”352623″]The NFL actually should just restrict WRs from wearing 7 through 12 since they are the traditional QB numbers.[/quote]

Even though two of the best QBs in modern history wore 13 and 16?

What numbers you call traditional really depends on when you started watching the league. The Bears lack of retired WR numbers was mentioned earlier – but they have 42 retired for a QB.

WRs have worn numbers in the teens and twenties before. Linebackers used to wear numbers in the 80’s, so did defensive linemen. The number rules may be to help the refs know who is ineligible, but they’re still completely arbitrary. Pick a range of numbers and call them ineligible. It doesn’t actually matter if it’s 50-79 or or 40-69 or whatever. We’re just used to seeing a certain set of numbers used so it looks weird to see something else.

I’m a Raiders fan – just a few years ago #12 led us to a Superbowl (then played the worst game ever). Now #12 is a WR who can’t catch. It’s a little odd to look at, but it doesn’t really bother me, aside from the can’t catch part.

[quote comment=”352584″][quote comment=”352576″][quote comment=”352573″]Still, though, I’d rather see single digits than teens on WRs. Was one of the little things I liked about USFL. Anthony Carter kept is Michigan 1, Trumaine Johnson his Grambling 2…as well as a few others (USFL allowed one “uni-aberration” like that per team, as I recall).

—Ricko[/quote]

And Doug Flutie wearing #22 was just as awesome!

[quote comment=”352597″]I think they need to relax the number rules a bit.

I don’t really have a problem with players wearing whatever number they want. The only real reason for the number rules is to make it easier on the refs to tell if a player is ineligible. So, simple solution – offensive lineman must wear a number between 60 and 79. That’s it. Everyone else can wear anything they want. It’s not like it really matters if the guy catching the ball is wearing 12, 21, 46 or 81. And while we’re at it, bring back 00.[/quote]

YES!

[quote comment=”352577″][quote comment=”352573″]Crabtree’s number with 49ers?

Anyone?

They only have one wideout NOT wearing something in the 80s. Wonder if they’ll stay with trying to keep WRs in the 80s.[/quote]

For what it’s worth, the 49ers team shop is selling crabtree apparel with 15 on it.

And the jets are selling 17-Edwards jerseys.[/quote]

The store I work at at the mall has been selling Crabtree-15 jerseys since April.

[quote comment=”352627″]This whole uni-numbering thing is interesting. Personally, I’m actually in favor of less restrictive rules. Basically, I think any eligible receiver should be allowed to wear any eligible number. I love it when a tight end has a number in the 40s, I loved growing up watching Gene Washington wear 18, I think Reggie Bush should’ve been allowed to wear 5, etc. And as the wildcat offense becomes more popular, many of these position designations become more flexible, so why note make the numbers flexible too?[/quote]

Exactly. Plus, that way the game would look more like my electric football set. Eleven guys, no subs and numbering systems out the window!

[quote comment=”352630″][quote comment=”352588″][quote comment=”352587″][quote comment=”352585″]OK, link to my “WRs don’t look good with a number between 10 and 19” statement.[/quote]

Always exceptions, yes. LOL
Lance Alworth (19) and Don Maynard (13) come to mind, too.

—Ricko[/quote]
Natch. And Don Hutson (14), etc.

I guess I was referring to the “modern NFL” not history. Because does anyone want to see a running back wearing link again? Yikes.[/quote]

I’d love it – same as I loved seeing the Fridge’s #72.[/quote]
OK, I’ll admit link was pretty cool.

Yes. It was truly a shame the NFL didn’t let Bush wear number 5, so he wasn’t able to donate 5% of his jersey sales to the victims of Katrina.

Shame on you, Roger Goodell.

[quote comment=”352634″][quote comment=”352633″][quote comment=”352577″][quote comment=”352573″]Crabtree’s number with 49ers?

Anyone?

They only have one wideout NOT wearing something in the 80s. Wonder if they’ll stay with trying to keep WRs in the 80s.[/quote]

For what it’s worth, the 49ers team shop is selling crabtree apparel with 15 on it.

And the jets are selling 17-Edwards jerseys.[/quote]

The store I work at at the mall has been selling Crabtree-15 jerseys since April.[/quote][/quote]

Now, see, if I were Crabtree I’d want…
#6 (“Touchdown”) or…
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko

[quote comment=”352641″]
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko[/quote]

Either a sign of my age or yours, but i have no idea what that means.. I dial 1 for long distance, is it similar?

[quote comment=”352623″]The NFL actually should just restrict WRs from wearing 7 through 12 since they are the traditional QB numbers.[/quote]
Please don’t tell me that the NFL is doing to 4 what the NHL did to 99. Also 14 used to be very common for QBs and I have a hunch 18 is going to grow in popularity before long.

[quote comment=”352644″][quote comment=”352643″][quote comment=”352641″]
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko[/quote]

Either a sign of my age or yours, but i have no idea what that means.. I dial 1 for long distance, is it similar?[/quote]

maybe it’s ricko’s phone system…”8″ + “1” plus area code plus number?

my office requires you to dial a “9” for any outside number, but i believe some systems require an 8 + 1 (etc.)

i don’t think it’s “old school”[/quote]

Ok. I thought he was busting out rotary terms, and I’m 27 wondering why he would expect a 22yr old to know such ancient stuff.

our office has an outgoing button on the phone.

[quote comment=”352643″][quote comment=”352641″]
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko[/quote]

Either a sign of my age or yours, but i have no idea what that means.. I dial 1 for long distance, is it similar?[/quote]

Neither, regarding the age thing.

Hotel telephones—with which pro athletes are all too familiar because of their travel—are where is says, “Dial 8 for Long Distance”. Not used as much now cuz of cell phones, of course, but still there.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”352649″][quote comment=”352643″][quote comment=”352641″]
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko[/quote]

Either a sign of my age or yours, but i have no idea what that means.. I dial 1 for long distance, is it similar?[/quote]

Neither, regarding the age thing.

Hotel telephones—with which pro athletes are all too familiar because of their travel—are where is says, “Dial 8 for Long Distance”. Not used as much now cuz of cell phones, of course, but still there.

—Ricko[/quote]
And with most cell phone services, you don’t even need to dial 1.

I could see the NFL permanently retiring the number 4. They already have kind of retired number 1 for Warren Moon, and they will probably retire number 18 for Manning. It will be hard to retire number 12 for Brady since a lot of QBs wear that number though.

[quote comment=”352651″][quote comment=”352649″][quote comment=”352643″][quote comment=”352641″]
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko[/quote]

Either a sign of my age or yours, but i have no idea what that means.. I dial 1 for long distance, is it similar?[/quote]

Neither, regarding the age thing.

Hotel telephones—with which pro athletes are all too familiar because of their travel—are where is says, “Dial 8 for Long Distance”. Not used as much now cuz of cell phones, of course, but still there.

—Ricko[/quote]
And with most cell phone services, you don’t even need to dial 1.[/quote]

I never said it wasn’t an inside bit. Pro athletes know the phrase from all that time in all those hotel rooms, and they’d get it.

Doesn’t mean it’s ancient. Means you don’t have the life experience to get the reference.

I learn something here every day myself. Nothing wrong with that.

—Ricko

[quote comment=”352575″][quote comment=”352574″]Excuse me, I have to go. somewhere a crime is happening.

link

Now THAT’s what a football player should look like!!!

FOX thinks so…
link

—Ricko[/quote]

When I see the Fox idea it reminds me of this powerful machine.

One of the coolest toys I ever had

link

[quote comment=”352558″]Isn’t “Udorse” just the 21st Century equivalent of a farmer have ads painted on the side of his barn? Or the old Coke ads on brick buildings? Those are considered quaint now, nostalgic.[/quote]

But a barn is, for all intents and purposes, a place of business.

[quote comment=”352658″]Besides, Brett’s never going to retire, so it’s a moot point…[/quote]That’s what I was thinking! :-)

Four teams down, only 28 more to go before he can get his number retired by each team. He’ll be a young 68.

[quote comment=”352653″]I could see the NFL permanently retiring the number 4. They already have kind of retired number 1 for Warren Moon, and they will probably retire number 18 for Manning. It will be hard to retire number 12 for Brady since a lot of QBs wear that number though.[/quote]

so you can see the nfl retiring the number of favre, moon, and manning… interesting… what about aikman, montana, and bradshaw then??? how about dilfer? lol

i will be at the ceremony when the nfl retires the #7 for “ROETHLISELWAY”

Shifting Gears,

I’m going to a Jim Craig signing and, given his place in sports history, I am shocked by what other athletes are charging for signatures, pictures, etc.

Now, I don’t go to these often, so that may be why I am shocked, but to see someone like Joba Chamberlain bilking $90…(where as Craig is $30…I’m just more interested in meeting him as a hockey fan)…just doesn’t register w/me about the difference of the 2 people, and one of them played a huge role in perhaps one of the most politically charged/greatest hockey games ever…

Just dumbfounded…

Hey Paul, could you get $90 for your signature?

Phil, I think you could wrangle $75

[quote comment=”352663″]so you can see the nfl retiring the number of favre, moon, and manning… interesting… what about … bradshaw then???[/quote]

don’t a lot of guys wear 44?

[quote comment=”352628″][quote comment=”352618″]Packers used to have a fashion show for charity, back when it was easier to get players to do things in the community. Players still do things in community but now it’s mostly orchestrated by the Packers, in connection with sponsors, marketing partners and approved charities.[/quote]

I think the Charlestown Chiefs did something like that.[/quote]

Sorta:

Johnny Upton: I’m gonna walk down that stinkin’ runway, open up this faggot robe and wiggle my dick at ’em! And do you know why? Because I want you to have a heart-attack and die so we don’t have to do this shit again! You and your fucking fashion shows!

[quote comment=”352652″][quote comment=”352641″][quote comment=”352634″][quote comment=”352633″][quote comment=”352577″][quote comment=”352573″]Crabtree’s number with 49ers?

Anyone?

They only have one wideout NOT wearing something in the 80s. Wonder if they’ll stay with trying to keep WRs in the 80s.[/quote]

For what it’s worth, the 49ers team shop is selling crabtree apparel with 15 on it.

And the jets are selling 17-Edwards jerseys.[/quote]

The store I work at at the mall has been selling Crabtree-15 jerseys since April.[/quote][/quote]

Now, see, if I were Crabtree I’d want…
#6 (“Touchdown”) or…
#8 (“Dial 8 for Long Distance”).

I mean, gotta get with the NFL WR mindset, right?

—Ricko[/quote]

Anthony Carter had the WR mindset with his #1.

While it was cool on him, and on Warrren Moon, if I were an owner I’d “retire” the #1. Being the so-called ultimate team sport, I’d reserve it for the fans the way Seattle retired #12. Either that, or you would have to earn the #1. If the players, coaches and fans overwhelmingly agree a certain player deserves #1, then he could wear it.[/quote]
Believe it or not, the Cincinnati Bengals have never issued #1. Don’t think it’s retired though.

Totally off the subject, but since my wife brought it up, I’ll turn it into a UW-related question:
Mrs. V just sent me this little bit of trivia – “The Ohio buckeye was named for its nut, which resembles the eye of a male white-tailed deer, or buck.”

That got me thinking…what if Ohio State replaced the goofy Brutus mascot with a buck? Then at midfield they could do an “eye of the buck” design the way LSU does with the “eye of the tiger.” Whaddaya think?

[quote comment=”352675″]Totally off the subject, but since my wife brought it up, I’ll turn it into a UW-related question:
Mrs. V just sent me this little bit of trivia – “The Ohio buckeye was named for its nut, which resembles the eye of a male white-tailed deer, or buck.”

That got me thinking…what if Ohio State replaced the goofy Brutus mascot with a buck? Then at midfield they could do an “eye of the buck” design the way LSU does with the “eye of the tiger.” Whaddaya think?[/quote]
What’s the difference between deer nuts and Beer Nuts?

Hi. Long-time Uni Watch reader here, first-time commentor. (commenter? sp?) … anyway.

I was reading an article about Joe Johnson, and it mentioned that the Hawks have both Josh Smith (longtime Hawk) and Joe Smith (new) on this year’s roster. Immediately I wondered, will they go FNOB or will they just both wear “Smith”, as we’ve seen so many same-surnamed players link?

THEN, I got to thinking… what would you call it if the latter case was true? I’m an intermittent reader at best, so I don’t know if this has been discussed on the site previously or not, but how about “Same Name on Back”, or SNOB?

If that term, or something similar, has already been christened, then I apologize. –CG

Deer nuts are just under a buck.

sheer poetry!

[quote comment=”352677″][quote comment=”352675″]Totally off the subject, but since my wife brought it up, I’ll turn it into a UW-related question:
Mrs. V just sent me this little bit of trivia – “The Ohio buckeye was named for its nut, which resembles the eye of a male white-tailed deer, or buck.”

That got me thinking…what if Ohio State replaced the goofy Brutus mascot with a buck? Then at midfield they could do an “eye of the buck” design the way LSU does with the “eye of the tiger.” Whaddaya think?[/quote]
What’s the difference between deer nuts and Beer Nuts?[/quote]

There’s more Beer Nuts in a handful.

New Twins logo leaked on TBS last night: Look at the difference in the letters and the ball.

New:
link

Old:
link

retire[quote comment=”352674″]For what it’s worth:
link

Retired numbers can be unretired with a simple wink to the right PR person. Just ask link

[quote comment=”352686″]There’s more Beer Nuts in a handful.

Sure about that?

link

possible NSFW

This is a pretty slick cruiser, link Particularly fond of the cursive script, the old school black and white, and the #33 here.

[quote comment=”352692″]The Rockies-Phillies game looks ridiculous.

MLB really needs to ban alternates in postseason play.

If I were commish for a day…[/quote]
Could be worse. At least…
A) Jiminez is pitching
B) The Phillies’ alts look like actual baseball uniforms.

But my favorite lineman was #52 for the Pack. Good ole Frankie Bag-O-Donuts! Gotta keep the 50’s for the linemen.

link

-Greenie

link have a very unique cruiser. Love the (Lions-Hawaiian) blue and orange, and the hood stop sign is crazy.

…and speaking of competitive eating, did anyone catch Monday night’s link?

What?

Twins division champs hat last night had that idiotic plastic thingy on top. Stupid.

[quote comment=”352700″]Page 2 updates NFL team logos
link

These are pretty good. I love the new ram logo.

[quote comment=”352702″]C-I-L-L …
[/quote]
It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood…

[quote comment=”352691″]This is a pretty slick cruiser, link Particularly fond of the cursive script, the old school black and white, and the #33 here.[/quote]
Shocking to see that particular suburb using all FoMoCo products. Shocking, I tell ya.

[quote comment=”352668″][quote comment=”352654″]after a month of no connection, i welcome myself back to the land of neterwebs by agreeing with jeff 100%. who the hell cares what numbers people wear? and if it hurts your eyes, good. it is one of the things i love about the college game, DT’s that wear #9, QB’s that wear #22, it is beautiful. sure, we won’t see a red grange in #77 anymore, but good golly, open it up. i was a wishbone option QB that toted the number 54 back in the glory days, and wasn’t rico a #73 flanker?[/quote]

Welcome back, Robert!

You ran the wishbone? Indeed, you ARE a true artist.[/quote]

thanks jim mothervilker! i preferred the belly play, because i didn’t have to get smacked by the end if i decided to pitch it or not. i think i threw the ball 6 times in 4 years. then again, most ends are pretty flippin stupid and easy to fool. any ends out there? yeah, you heard me right, you’re dumb:)

rico~ i use “dial 8 for long distance” as my back-up dinger call. “open the window wilma this baby is coming home.” the later is in reference to fred jumping through the window to get safely home in the flintstone’s end credits.

revolutionary stirrup party info~ the cubs and white sox came in today. and may i say they turned out absolutely fanfuckingtastic!!! they will be in the mail tomorrow.

New Hampshire has some cool-looking state police cruisers. link

Bloomfield Hills, MI sure has a lot of money for cop cars…

link

link

[quote comment=”352714″]Anyone see the ALDS at Yankee stadium? The Ump is wearing and old school sport coat and chest protector instead of the polo shirt or wind breaker![/quote]
Nice idea, but the chest protector looks a little clunky. I guess I’ve gotten used to it being hidden.

What’s really bugging me, though, is that every time the camera sweeps past the link, it looks like they’re trying to build awareness for link. The bottom of that L just disappears into the 2009 banner, especially from a low camera angle (like the dugout camera panning up to batter in the box).

[quote comment=”352574″]Excuse me, I have to go. somewhere a crime is happening.

link

Thanks for crashing my browser (FF 3.5) with that link. Don’t click on it if you don’t want a bunch of windows to pop up and the Uniwatch site to disappear.

The other Also a WR and had a nice 17.6 yd avg catch over 5 years w/ the Falcons. Career overlapped with “00” Ken Burrough.

[quote comment=”352719″][quote comment=”352716″][quote comment=”352713″]Bloomfield Hills, MI sure has a lot of money for cop cars…

link

link
Those are often confiscated from drug dealers. Usually they paint the DARE logo on them in that case[/quote]
I’m sure there’s some competition as to who gets to drive those on any given day.[/quote]

In Detroit, there is a new tourist attraction opening up soon, called the Museum of CarJacking.

[quote comment=”352583″]Crabtree’s number with 49ers?

7, I mean 10[/quote]

it’s absolutely 15.

link
if you look at that video and go to 0:30, you will see that evan longoria doesn’t have a devil ray patch
this is so my comment will get noticed

[quote comment=”352714″]Anyone see the ALDS at Yankee stadium? The Ump is wearing and old school sport coat and chest protector instead of the polo shirt or wind breaker![/quote]

That is an awesome look. Any sport that has room for men wearing suit jackets is okay with me.

Am I right in remembering that back in the day the AL umps wore blue and the NL wore maroon?

[quote comment=”352728″]Somebody get a screen grab of C.C. from the back, just standing, and drop it into the Worldwide Pants logo.[/quote]
On the road, he’s the Man in Two Grey Flannel Suits.

That has always made me wonder, how many NFL players go from their senior year in college, to the NFL, and play on the same field.

Cook played @ UC’s Nippert Field, and so did the Bengals til fall of 70.

[quote comment=”352733″]Cook played @ UC’s Nippert Field, and so did the Bengals til fall of 70.[/quote]LA Rams teams would be a good candidate here with both UCLA and USC sharing the Coliseum for quite a while.

Dolphins too. Possibly the Saints during their Sugar Bowl years?

[quote comment=”352736″][quote comment=”352726″][quote comment=”352610″][quote comment=”352607″]

I said, if “no number in 80s in available” is fine. I’m realistic enough to get that. But there are some teams with virtually NO wideouts wearing numbers in 80s. And I guarantee you, those teams don’t have seven or eight retired numbers in the 80s.

It kinda started, for one, when Moss couldn’t get 84 with the Raiders, and didn’t like any of the 80’s that were available. Or was it Plax signing with the Giants? Somewhere around that time was when it all began.

—Ricko[/quote]

Moss and Plaxico (what the hell kind of name is that anyway) might have started the latest trend, but Keyshawn Johnson was wearing 19 a decade ago. I think his first season might have been a legitimate no number available thing, but after that he was given an exception.[/quote]

I’ve posted this before (I think); I loved the 72 Bengals roster:

10 Eric Crabtree

WR
11 Virgil Carter

QB
12 Greg Cook

QB
13 Ken Riley

CB
14 Ken Anderson

QB
15 Dave Lewis

P
16 Horst Muhlmann

K
17 Speedy Thomas

WK
18 Paul Robinson

RB
19 Essex Johnson

RB
20 Lemar Parrish

CB

And I did that from memory….amazing, I know.[/quote]
Might wanna check on that. According to Crabtree’s Wikipedia page, he didn’t play after 1971. Looks like that might be 1971 to me.
link

My recollection is that Cook was rehabbing his shoulder injury during the early 1970s, but saw only limited action before calling it quits around 1975.

[quote comment=”352718″][quote comment=”352574″]Excuse me, I have to go. somewhere a crime is happening.

link

Thanks for crashing my browser (FF 3.5) with that link. Don’t click on it if you don’t want a bunch of windows to pop up and the Uniwatch site to disappear.[/quote]

Might want to check your own equipment there, cowboy.

I know what I want for Christmas:

link

[quote comment=”352741″]I know what I want for Christmas:

link

I like this part of the description: “go inside the Packers’ victory in Super Bowl XXXI led by the heroics of Reggie White and Desmond Howard…”

Notice that they left off a certain QB’s name??

[quote comment=”352742″]Who wants to see all the 2nd Season NFL hats?

link

nice how they decide that even if black is not part of your color palatte, they’re going to assign it to you anyway…WTF?

can’t use yellow or white guys?

[quote comment=”352744″][quote comment=”352740″][quote comment=”352734″][quote comment=”352723″]On the topic of endzone art, can anyone tell me why at Hienz Field one endzone features “PITTSBURGH” and the other one has the 30 degree lines? Seems like it’s been this way for a while.[/quote]
Possibly to make sure that it’s applicable for both the Steelers and the Panthers??[/quote]

Yes. They used to paint Steelers or Panthers in that endzone all year, depending on the game, but then they made it easier and went with the slashes. Once Pitt’s season is over, they resume with painting Steelers at that end.

Personally, I’d like to see one endzone with Steelers and one with Panthers, with either slashes or a diamond pattern as well. It would make the endzones look snazzy without doing a full paint job.[/quote]

Then again, wouldn’t it be oh so “Steeler-ish”, to just mark one end zone, and leave the other blank?[/quote]

I’m probably one of the few Steeler fans who would be in favor of placing the logo decal on both sides of the helmet. That’s always bothered me, wish Art Rooney would have corrected this back in the 1960s after the logo was well received. It’s such a universally recognizable logo, I don’t think it would detract from the uniform.

Oh, sweet Jeebus. What the hell is wrong with me? I actually kinda-sorta like link of link atrocious link. Yes, even link.

[quote comment=”352740″]Yes. They used to paint Steelers or Panthers in that endzone all year, depending on the game, but then they made it easier and went with the slashes. Once Pitt’s season is over, they resume with painting Steelers at that end.[/quote]”Pittsburgh” on both sides until Thanksgiving would be okay too-then after November they can put Steelers on one of them.

I’m sure they’ve thought of that though…

[quote comment=”352750″][quote comment=”352747″][quote comment=”352744″][quote comment=”352740″][quote comment=”352734″][quote comment=”352723″]On the topic of endzone art, can anyone tell me why at Hienz Field one endzone features “PITTSBURGH” and the other one has the 30 degree lines? Seems like it’s been this way for a while.[/quote]
Possibly to make sure that it’s applicable for both the Steelers and the Panthers??[/quote]

Yes. They used to paint Steelers or Panthers in that endzone all year, depending on the game, but then they made it easier and went with the slashes. Once Pitt’s season is over, they resume with painting Steelers at that end.

Personally, I’d like to see one endzone with Steelers and one with Panthers, with either slashes or a diamond pattern as well. It would make the endzones look snazzy without doing a full paint job.[/quote]

Then again, wouldn’t it be oh so “Steeler-ish”, to just mark one end zone, and leave the other blank?[/quote]

I’m probably one of the few Steeler fans who would be in favor of placing the logo decal on both sides of the helmet. That’s always bothered me, wish Art Rooney would have corrected this back in the 1960s after the logo was well received. It’s such a universally recognizable logo, I don’t think it would detract from the uniform.[/quote]

I’ve mentioned liking the throwback logo better link but I think they should just leave the helmet blank, or move the TV numbers to the sides. Combine that with Ricko’s jersey and you’ve got something there![/quote]

I like the throwback logo, too, but would place it on the pants, on the hip area. I’ve always disliked the Titans yoke look on jerseys, would prefer the TV numbers stay there, along with the decal on both sides of the helmet. I would also remove the modern logo from the jersey, and return to grey face masks.
In somewhat related news, if and when arena football returns to the Steel City, they should be called the Ironmen. I believe Lynn Swann was going to be one of the owners when the AFL bought the farm. Some of the stronger AFL teams may return in another league at some point.

[quote comment=”352752″][quote comment=”352743″]I like this part of the description: “go inside the Packers’ victory in Super Bowl XXXI led by the heroics of Reggie White and Desmond Howard…”

Notice that they left off a certain QB’s name??[/quote]I wonder if they wrote the copy on Tuesday morning?? :-)

How do they feel about the former coach up there?[/quote]

Holmgren and Favre are on the cover though. They aren’t completely ignoring them.

I drove on Holmgren way almost every day while in college. When it first was named in the mid 90’s the street sign looked like this:
link

But after Coach Mike went to Seattle, the sign looked (and still looks) like this:
link

One gripe I do have, is that Favre should have been MVP. Look at the stats:
Green Bay Att. Comp. Yds. TD Int
Favre 27 14 246 2 0

Plus one rushing TD.

I still love the guy.. I just can’t stand him in purple.

P.S. I think I may end up getting a Packer 2nd season hat. It’s kind of like how I feel about Oregon’s unis. They are so radical, I kind of like ’em.

Note to LI Phil.. I just sent you a few e-mails on something that is really interesting… If you are awake, please take a look.

Paul would really like it too I think.

Anyone else notice that if we go by the Chamberlain Pronounciation Guide, Dorothy should be calling her little dog “Tot-oh”?

And it would be “Bah-oh the Clown”.

Shouldn’t he spell his name “Jobba”? Or pronounce it “Joe-ba”?

I know, I know…it’s his name and he can spell it and say it however he chooes. Former Patriot/Jets QB Mike Taliaferro pronounces his name “Tolliver”, for instance. That’s still the most extreme example I recall in sports.

—Ricko

Yesterday you made note that Canucks goalie Roberto Luongo should go back to the Vintage white mask at home like he did during the pre-season where he went 3-0…last night when the Canucks were playing at home agaist the Montreal Canadiens Bobby Lou wore the white mask and the canucks won 7-1