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

Monday Morning Uni Watch

Picture 11.png

Okay, let’s get right to it: the Broncos/Pats game. I saw most of the game and have pored over a buttload of photos from various sources. After all of that, my thoughts are as follows:

• First and foremost, whether the Broncos looked “good” or “bad” (I think there was some of both) is not the point. The point is that they were revisiting a chapter from their history — a chapter most of us had never seen, and that almost nobody had seen in color, a chapter that has become semi-legendary and is therefore worthy of further study, even if only as a re-enactment. That’s the value of a project like this, even if the uniforms in question look like shit. And I’m not saying they did look like shit, mind you — I’m just saying that’s not the real issue at hand.

• The vertically striped socks were fun, but where were the whites? The early-’60s Broncos (like every other pro team of that era) wore mid-level whites with their hose, and NFL rules still require mid-level whites today. True, many players nowadays have reduced the white component to just a sliver, but the Broncos didn’t even try yesterday — they just went with full-length stripes, which took things from sublime to ridiculous and, more importantly, was historically inaccurate.

It’s easy to blame the players and the equipment staff for this, but I also say, “J’accuse!” to Reebok, because they could easily have made the socks half-white and half striped (like these, only striped instead of solid). Hell, they gave the socks a white foot –why not bring the white up to the proper level? A major botch by everyone involved.

• The white-free hose led to some tomfoolery on the field, as Jabar Gaffney went candy-striped, plus I noticed a few players wearing two pairs of socks with the stripes misaligned, creating a sort of harlequin effect.

• Also worth noting that the short pants worn by so many of today’s players resulted in the stripes extending above the knee, which is not a good look. Not quite as bad as this, but getting there.

• In the olden days, Denver’s pants stripes were much thinner than the sock stripes, so there was always a clear distinction between sock stripe and pant stripe. But the pants piping on the throwback pants is much heavier, so it sometimes looked like the two sets of stripes were bleeding into each other (that photo doesn’t capture it so well, but I saw it a lot on TV).

• Temperatures in Denver were below freezing but the officials stuck with their throwback attire, including the white knickers, instead of going for the cold-weather slacks. Good for them.

• Y’know, helmets with TV numbers on the side always look so damn cool. I realize teams would rather have a logo on the side, and it’s hard to argue with that, but I wish more teams could find a way to marry the two approaches, like the Chargers used to do.

• Looks like Brandon Marshall used one of the socks as a towel. Here’s another view.

• Okay, so you wouldn’t want to see that Denver uni every week, and probably ditto for the color scheme, but someone on the Chris Creamer board created this — not bad!

• Very cool that they had this flying at the stadium.

• Oh, the Pats. Yeah, they looked swell. And Julian Edelman was doing the double sock stripe thing.

Picture 2.png

Amazing but true: I know this is gonna be hard to believe, but apparently there were also some other games in the NFL yesterday. Here are some of the visual highlights:

• Rare event in KC, as the Chiefs and Cowboys played a throwback game with no white jerseys. And since nobody has a black-and-white TV anymore, I see nothing wrong with it — let’s see more color-on-color matchups. Lots of additional pics here and here. (This game was uni-notable for another reason, as I’ll get to in a minute.)

• Chad Ochocinco finally broke out the pink chinstrap (or was it black strap a pink cup?). Meanwhile, his teammate Dan Skuta, who wears No. 51, had a No. 46 helmet. (Screen shot courtesy of Michael Kinney.)

• Love those Rams throwbacks (additional photos here). Interestingly, they didn’t spring for new helmets — they just swapped out the ram horn decals, as described in the opening graf of this story.

• Joe Skiba had told me that the Giants’ ghosted Reebok logos would no longer be a problem, but apparently he was mistaken. Naturally, I think it’s great. Too bad every team can’t have this “problem.”

• Owen Schmitt of the Seahawks had blood on his uni number yesterday. And how did that happen? He smashed his helmet into his forehead during pregame intros, with predictable results. Bright fella. (Screen shots courtesy of Chad Todd.)

• In that same game, David Garrard’s NOB was stretched into an arc (probably because the jersey had been glued or Velcroed to his pads). Not sure if the last “R” in his name was backwards or just stretched into a new shape, but it looked bad either way. (Thanks to Matt Takimoto for the screen shot.)

• Just what the world’s been waiting for: pink spats.

I hear there were some baseball games yesterday too, but none of those games featured vertically striped socks, so the hell with ’em.

kansas-city-chiefs-authentic-pro-line-full-size-riddell-helmet.jpg

End of an Era: The color-on-color aspect wasn’t the only unusual aspect of that Cowboys/Chiefs game. Reader J.J. Lauderdale explains:

The Chiefs’ wearing of their Dallas Texans throwback helmet snapped a 548-game streak of the Chiefs wearing nothing but their red shell, arrowhead logo, and white facemask — a streak that began on September 15, 1974, against the Jets. The Chiefs had worn gray facemasks in 1973 before changing to white in ’74.

This is the longest streak in NFL history for a team continuously wearing one helmet with no throwback, no change of logo, no change of facemask color, etc. If you ask people who had the longest streak, most people guess the Cowboys, Steelers, or Raiders and never get to the Chiefs. But many of the teams with the more classic helmets had their streaks broken during the 1994 throwback season (the Steelers, Raiders, and Cardinals, for example), when they wore throwbacks or blank shells. The Chiefs, however, wore their regular lids in 1994, keeping their streak intact.

The four next longest streaks in history are:

Cardinals, 1960-1994: They wore that bird head logo on a white helmet for 499 straight games before using the blank shell for a throwback game against the Browns in 1994.

Raiders, 1964-1994: Wore their current helmet for 446 straight games before going retro for the 1994 75th-anniversary season.

Browns, 1975-2005: 434 straight games for the white-facemask version of their helmet. Then they switched to a gray mask.

Cowboys, 1977-2004: 432 straight games between the 1976 bicentennial helmet (the one with the red stripe) and the first time they donned the white throwbacks.

Now that the Chiefs’ streak has been broken, the longest current streak belongs to the Bengals. They’re at about 238 games, dating back to 1994 (not sure exactly which week they last wore the 1994 throwback helmet, so it may be off a week or two).

Stellar research there by J.J. — thanks, buddy.

New Sponsor: As you may have noticed, we have a new advertiser at the top of the page: Homage Clothing, which produces some nifty T-shirts, many of them Ohio-themed. Check out their stuff, and thanks for continuing to support all our advertisers.

Singles Going Steady Fast: Today’s the last day for this batch of indie singles that I’m selling on eBay. I’ll put another batch up for sale later this week.

Uni Watch News Ticker: You know, uniforms are cool and all, but I’ve recently felt like my life was missing something, sort of an undefined emptiness that I didn’t know how to fill. Then Kirsten turned me on to this, and life is much, much better now. … New mask for Jason LaBarbera, continuing his Metallica theme (as spotted by John Muir). … You know what’s great about pink? Everyone loves it (with thanks to Mark Tang). … Also from Mark: Some great old photos from the Northeastern photo archive, including fantastic team portraits of the football and hockey squads, plus a spectacular Bruins photo. … Reprinted from Friday’s comments: Someone has created a very cool New Jersey Devils maize maze. … Yup, no question, Rush Limbaugh is gonna be great for the Rams. … Fascinating chapter in college football history is described in this video clip — highly recommended (big thanks to Brian Willette). … Jim Ransdell, who does the excellent Sports Design Blog, was recently interviewed on NPR’s Studio 360 program on the subject of this year’s NFL throwbacks. … Bears’ dark-blue pants are discussed in the last entry on this Q&A page (with thanks to Chad Todd). … Hmmm, didn’t MLB retire No. 42? (As spotted by Doug Steffenson.) … Jordan Farmar has changed his uni number from 5 to 1, which is the number he wore in college (with thanks to Matthew Wolfram). … “This is the most confusing uniform confrontation ever,” says Bill Blewett. “That’s the Lyman Raiders vs. the Phillip Scotties out here in South Dakota. It was a home game for Lyman (I think).” … Jeremy Brahm reports that the Rakuten Golden Eagles gave their rookie pitcher Hiromichi Fujiwara a necktie for being the “Promising Newcomer (rookie).” … Nice collection of cages from old catchers’ masks (thanks, Kirsten). … The Colorado Eagles of the CHL did the pink thing the other night, but the real news is that the ref got in on the act. “The linesmen were in the normal zebra stripes, though,” says Michael Putlack. … Nothing enhances the view of a football field like a nearby power plant. That’s from a bunch of power/energy-related photos by the great photographer Mitch Epstein. … Reprinted from Saturday’s comments: Big Klu as an Angel. … Some interesting info and photos regarding the Twins’ new ballpark here (with thanks to Brad Lappin). … Harvard goalie Ryan Carroll’s backplate reads “In fide et in bello fortes,” which translates to “Strong in faith and war” (with thanks to Tris Wykes). … Dan Hastings came across a Seahawks logo he’d never seen before, and neither had I. Looks like it was modeled on this old Eagles logo. Anyone ever seen the Seahawks version before? … Not sure I’ve ever seen baseball pants with the team name printed down the side. … Complete President’s Cup apparel wrap-up here. … Happy Thanksgiving to Teebz and all our other Canadian readers.

 

236 comments to Monday Morning Uni Watch

  • Jeremy Brahm | October 12, 2009 at 8:27 am |

    The Seahawks have a version painted in Qwest Field as a huge mural.

  • Maks | October 12, 2009 at 8:31 am |

    good morning everyone… (530am here, PST)

    i noticed something from last night’s game. Dallas Clark has a weird “padding” or some kind of “hat” inside the helmet. Perhaps this already been discussed/noticed but this is new to me.

    http://gazetteonline...

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 8:42 am |

    So, in light of the Chiefs helmet streak being broken… exactly why the heck didn’t they wear a Texans helmet in 1994? I could have sworn they did, but apparently my memory is faulty. That makes them almost as lame as the Jets & Bills of that season.

  • peter | October 12, 2009 at 8:42 am |

    Paul,

    don’t you mean Cheifs & Cowboys played with no white jerseys?

  • Paul Lukas | October 12, 2009 at 8:46 am |

    [quote comment=”353613″]Paul,

    don’t you mean Cheifs & Cowboys played with no white jerseys?[/quote]

    Um, isn’t that what I wrote?

  • ug-lee | October 12, 2009 at 8:46 am |

    Here’s hoping to never see vertically striped socks EVER again in an NFL game. Hideous then, hideous now.

  • Paul Lukas | October 12, 2009 at 8:47 am |

    [quote comment=”353612″]So, in light of the Chiefs helmet streak being broken… exactly why the heck didn’t they wear a Texans helmet in 1994? I could have sworn they did, but apparently my memory is faulty. That makes them almost as lame as the Jets & Bills of that season.[/quote]

    The 1994 throwbacks celebrated the NFL’s 75th anniversary, so it wouldn’t have made sense for a team to have worn an AFL throwback that was never worn in the NFL. I don’t know for a fact that that’s the thinking behind it, but it seems like a logical line of thought.

  • Nickel | October 12, 2009 at 8:47 am |

    More President’s Cup unis and other golf apparel news here.

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 8:49 am |

    [quote comment=”353614″][quote comment=”353613″]Paul,

    don’t you mean Cheifs & Cowboys played with no white jerseys?[/quote]

    Um, isn’t that what I wrote?[/quote]

    Nope.

    [quote]• Rare event in KC, as the Chiefs and Broncos played a throwback game with no white jerseys. And since nobody has a black-and-white TV anymore, I see nothing wrong with it — let’s see more color-on-color matchups. Lots of additional pics here and here. (This game was uni-notable for another reason, as I’ll get to in a minute.)[/quote]

    The striped socks obviously have affected your typing skills.

  • peter | October 12, 2009 at 8:49 am |

    “Rare event in KC, as the Chiefs and Broncos played a throwback game with”…

    (That’s what I was referring too…sorry)

  • Paul Lukas | October 12, 2009 at 8:50 am |

    [quote comment=”353618″][quote comment=”353614″][quote comment=”353613″]Paul,

    don’t you mean Cheifs & Cowboys played with no white jerseys?[/quote]

    Um, isn’t that what I wrote?[/quote]

    Nope.

    [quote]• Rare event in KC, as the Chiefs and Broncos played a throwback game with no white jerseys. And since nobody has a black-and-white TV anymore, I see nothing wrong with it — let’s see more color-on-color matchups. Lots of additional pics here and here. (This game was uni-notable for another reason, as I’ll get to in a minute.)[/quote]

    The striped socks obviously have affected your typing skills.[/quote]

    Ah, I see — thanks. Will fix now!

  • Rich | October 12, 2009 at 8:51 am |

    Speaking of historically inaccurate, I’m pretty sure the Patriots (and other teams for that matter) had stripes going ALL the way around the sleeves/shoulders instead of the half-assery we have today.

  • Kevin | October 12, 2009 at 8:51 am |

    Those Rams throwback helmets from yesterday were slightly inaccurate. During the 99 season, the front of the horns stopped even with the top of the front bumper. You can see it here.

    http://www.dholmes.c...

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 8:53 am |

    [quote comment=”353622″]Those Rams throwback helmets from yesterday were slightly inaccurate. During the 99 season, the front of the horns stopped even with the top of the front bumper. You can see it here.

    http://www.dholmes.c...

    Can we all agree that they look better without the gap at the front? Because they do.

  • Kevin G. | October 12, 2009 at 8:57 am |

    What is with Brett Favre’s jersey? It looks like it is cropped at the waistline and has some kind of band in it to make it snug. It looks hideous. I’ve noticed it earlier this year, but never in the previous years.

  • Charlie | October 12, 2009 at 9:05 am |

    I bought an Archie Griffin t-shirt from Homage a couple of months ago. Great shirt, very comfortable. Great company.

  • Jason Gomez | October 12, 2009 at 9:10 am |

    I LOVED the Black Shoes and Grey facemasks the Chiefs wore, I think those would be great addition to one of the best uniforms in all of sports. WHY? Tradition, all teams wore black shoes and grey masks. Sharp

  • DenverGregg | October 12, 2009 at 9:18 am |

    “• Y’know, helmets with TV numbers on the side always look so damn cool. I realize teams would rather have a logo on the side, and it’s hard to argue with that, but I wish more teams could find a way to marry the two approaches, like the Chargers used to do.”

    Boston used to do that too. Best look they ever had.

  • lemonverbena | October 12, 2009 at 9:25 am |

    [quote comment=”353610″]The Seahawks have a version painted in Qwest Field as a huge mural.[/quote]

    Yep. It’s been an “alternate logo” since the new scheme was introduced in 2002. I haven’t seen it used on any field or sideline apparel.

    http://www.chriscrea...

  • Joseph Skiba | October 12, 2009 at 9:26 am |

    Dallas Clark is wearing the Xenith helmet…And just to inform Paul and the rest of Uniwatch concerning the vectors: I still didn’t get my replacement home jersey set in…

  • Hank | October 12, 2009 at 9:29 am |

    During the Broncos telecast, there was a quick shot of the jumbotron in one of the endzones during a replay and, it looked like the scoreboard screen was showing the replay in black and white in the stadium. Anyone else notice this?

  • Traxel | October 12, 2009 at 9:29 am |

    If you like the NJ Devils corn maze, here’s one with Tyler Hansbrough (at least it says it’s supposed to be him) and some serious logo creep. Also says part of it is a soybean maze.

    http://www.blufffall...

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 9:29 am |

    [quote comment=”353626″]I LOVED the Black Shoes and Grey facemasks the Chiefs wore, I think those would be great addition to one of the best uniforms in all of sports. WHY? Tradition, all teams wore black shoes and grey masks. Sharp[/quote]

    ….because they had no choice.

    Can something really be called traditional when there weren’t any other options?

    Once colored facemasks became available, it took less than a decade for the entire league to shift away from gray. Only the 49ers and Cardinals continued to use gray without having gray or silver as a part of the rest of their uniform.

  • Oakville Endive | October 12, 2009 at 9:32 am |

    The picture of the Bruins is great. Is it me, or do half the players look like they’re in their 40’s?

    Glad to see the Broncos winning with their retro threads, I had a vision of the uni’s triggering the start of a complete reversal of fortune – but the brown and gold came through

    Not to be a stick in the mud, but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC. Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)

  • Hank | October 12, 2009 at 9:35 am |

    Owen Schmitt, meet Gus Ferotte http://media.photobu...

  • Greenie | October 12, 2009 at 9:42 am |

    [quote comment=”353628″][quote comment=”353610″]The Seahawks have a version painted in Qwest Field as a huge mural.[/quote]

    Yep. It’s been an “alternate logo” since the new scheme was introduced in 2002. I haven’t seen it used on any field or sideline apparel.

    http://www.chriscrea...

    For being so new, I’m surprised they restrained from using their precious snot green.

  • timmy b | October 12, 2009 at 9:45 am |

    Thought I’d get to confirm some historical TV items that were discussed late on yesterday’s thread.

    ABC NEVER televised ANY AFL games in color when they had the AFL rights from 1960-1964. A lot of night games were televised locally to the away team, and I can almost certainly confirm that none of them were televised in color either.

    When NBC first started televising the AFL in 1965, maybe a third of their games were in color, more and more were in color in 1966, possibly 95% in color in 1967 and by 1968, all were in color.

    Over at CBS, their first color telecast was the Turkey Day Colts-Lions game in 1965. Their playoff lineup was in color in 1965. In 1966, most games seen with teams based in their owned and operated markets (NY, Chi, L.A., Phila, StL) were in color, the rest were still in B/W. In 1967, about 75%-80% of the games were in color. And by 1968, the full NFL regualr season schedule was in color.

    When NBC had the NFL Championship game rights from 1955-1963, I think the 1962 and 1963 games were in color, while the previous games were in B/W.

    To sum up, yesterday’s Broncos brown/yellow togs were indeed the first to be televised in color (and in HD for that matter).

  • Hank | October 12, 2009 at 9:48 am |

    [quote comment=”353633″]
    Not to be a stick in the mud,

    but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC.

    Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)[/quote]

    Since the Chiefs’ franchise started life as the Dallas Texans, and the league is commemorating the AFL’s 50th anniversary, what were they supposed to wear?

  • Jason Gomez | October 12, 2009 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”353632″][quote comment=”353626″]I LOVED the Black Shoes and Grey facemasks the Chiefs wore, I think those would be great addition to one of the best uniforms in all of sports. WHY? Tradition, all teams wore black shoes and grey masks. Sharp[/quote]

    ….because they had no choice.

    Can something really be called traditional when there weren’t any other options?

    Once colored facemasks became available, it took less than a decade for the entire league to shift away from gray. Only the 49ers and Cardinals continued to use gray without having gray or silver as a part of the rest of their uniform.[/quote]

    I would call it a tradition, because that was how it used to be….I just loved the look, especially since Lamar Hunt passed they have the AFL/Hunt patch it seems fitting for them to go back to grey masks and black shoes.

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 9:53 am |

    [quote comment=”353637″][quote comment=”353633″]
    Not to be a stick in the mud,

    but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC.

    Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)[/quote]

    Since the Chiefs’ franchise started life as the Dallas Texans, and the league is commemorating the AFL’s 50th anniversary, what were they supposed to wear?[/quote]

    It’s not that they shouldn’t wear a Dallas Texans uniform, it’s a “they shouldn’t wear a Dallas logo while playing against a team from Dallas”. The Cowboys shouldn’t even be involved in the AFL promotion at all, and the Chiefs could have easily worn their Texans helmets against Denver and San Diego instead.

  • interlockingtc | October 12, 2009 at 9:54 am |

    Stapler of the day! Finally!

    Those catcher mask cages look so cool exhibited like that.

  • Randy Rollyson | October 12, 2009 at 9:55 am |

    Paul,

    Interesting tidbit about the first power plant photo. I am originally from West Virginia, really close to the John Amos power plant. The team practicing in that photo, Poca High School, has one of the more interesting and classic nicknames ever. They are called the Poca “Dots.” You will see the name on the goal post padding in the picture.

  • Oakville Endive | October 12, 2009 at 9:59 am |

    [quote comment=”353637″][quote comment=”353633″]
    Not to be a stick in the mud,

    but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC.

    Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)[/quote]

    Since the Chiefs’ franchise started life as the Dallas Texans, and the league is commemorating the AFL’s 50th anniversary, what were they supposed to wear?[/quote]

    Why wear it against Dallas? The retro uni’s are suppose to be against founding AFL teams. The only people who give a flying fadoo that this match up never took place in the 1960’s, are old farts in Dallas. To subject it on Kansas City seems not quite. right. This is a case – where the first few years of franchise history should be forgotten (i.e. like Oakland – where it make less sense to do so)

  • A Tama | October 12, 2009 at 10:00 am |

    I still dislike the all white look – especially on the more modern uniforms like the Colts, but the Patriots (whom I really hate as a team) look so much better in theri throwbacks that in the current crap they wear. If they could put the loops all the way around the shoulders (as Rich mentions above), they would look even better. The home uniform would be a huge improvement.

  • Kurt Allen | October 12, 2009 at 10:01 am |

    Didn’t even notice until now that the Rams went with the dark blue helmets/facemasks – major disappointment. Also looking at the Flickr page page I’m trying to figure out one of the opposing teams, they kind of look like the Lions – my only guess is either Buffalo or Houston. I recognize the Raiders (black helmets/gold trim on numbers) and wish they’d wear that for a ‘legacy’ game. Also the Boston 1960 jerseys (w/hat logo) looked awesome, especially for that time.

    And shame on EA Sports not including the AFL uniforms in Madden this year – unless of course you download something and pay for it, like $60 isn’t enough, but that’s a whole other blog…

  • peter | October 12, 2009 at 10:05 am |

    [quote comment=”353639″][quote comment=”353637″][quote comment=”353633″]
    Not to be a stick in the mud,

    but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC.

    Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)[/quote]

    Since the Chiefs’ franchise started life as the Dallas Texans, and the league is commemorating the AFL’s 50th anniversary, what were they supposed to wear?[/quote]

    It’s not that they shouldn’t wear a Dallas Texans uniform, it’s a “they shouldn’t wear a Dallas logo while playing against a team from Dallas”. The Cowboys shouldn’t even be involved in the AFL promotion at all, and the Chiefs could have easily worn their Texans helmets against Denver and San Diego instead.[/quote]

    So…what’s your take on when the Jets wear their Titans uni’s & the Titan’s don’t wear their Oilers? (it will happen @ some point)

  • Scott Fendley | October 12, 2009 at 10:06 am |

    Where, oh, where, can I get some of those socks? I’ve looked on the Broncos online site, no dice.

  • Kurt Allen | October 12, 2009 at 10:07 am |

    Why the Patriots and Broncos will never go back to their previous schemes, in Denver’s case the ‘Orange Crush/blue D helmet). Both franchises have won multiple titles with the current threads, in Denver’s case the second they went to the rollerball uni’s.

    And besides, the Pats have so much silver that their pants/helmets look like the damn Lombardi Trophy itself…

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 10:11 am |

    [quote comment=”353629″]Dallas Clark is wearing the Xenith helmet…And just to inform Paul and the rest of Uniwatch concerning the vectors: I still didn’t get my replacement home jersey set in…[/quote]

    no worries at all

    no need to rush on that one

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 10:13 am |

    [quote comment=”353645″]

    So…what’s your take on when the Jets wear their Titans uni’s & the Titan’s don’t wear their Oilers? (it will happen @ some point)[/quote]

    If the Jets actually wear the Titans throwback jerseys against the Titans in a non-throwback game, they’re fucking stupid, and they deserve to lose by about 45 points. That’s what I have to say about that.

    I don’t even understand why the Jets brought those things out in the first place. The NY Titans were not a good team. There’s no glory to be throwing back to there. Wearing them for this season with the AFL anniversary is fine… wearing them the other times they’ve done it is a big flashing WTF to me.

    And yes, I never liked the CFL Roughriders vs Rough Riders thing either. That was also stupid.

  • peter | October 12, 2009 at 10:19 am |

    “THE” Jeff:

    I agree with you it would be dumb (but the Jets would / have beaten the Titans quite regularly recently), but it’s all about product in the end…I hate when they wear the throwbacks, but as long as they win, I don’t care…I’m just waiting for the futuristic Jets throwback to come back.

    Say, when are the NY Giants breaking out the 73-74 helmets?

    Are we ever going to get to a point that this Throwback thing is too much? It’s a novelty that almost supercedes the regular uniforms, change happens, and if you only throwbacks once or twice a season, that’s fine, but when it’s almost a 1/4 of your uni rotation, it’s too much.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 10:21 am |

    [quote]Not to be a stick in the mud, but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC. Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)[/quote]

    fair point…about the game and the opponent

    but the titans seem to have no problem wearing their original uni (houston oilers), despite having moved from houston a decade ago, so i don’t have any problems having KC plays as the texans in kansas city

    why they had to play dallas as dallas? what, so the NFL could bill the game as “the game that never was”? that’s bullshit…specially since the cowboys were given that franchise specifically to say “FU” to the afl

    but this is twenty oh-niner, and history, whether it was rivalries, or uniforms and the liberties they now take with the throwbacks…can just be goddamed

    still was a cool looking game, but the circumstances which caused it were bullshit

  • Hank | October 12, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    [quote comment=”353639″][quote comment=”353637″][quote comment=”353633″]
    Not to be a stick in the mud,

    but I didn’t like the idea that KC had to wear a “Dallas” uniform, while playing Dallas, especially considering the game was in KC.

    Strikes me as another indication of the pull Jerry Jones has (could be wrong on this)[/quote]

    Since the Chiefs’ franchise started life as the Dallas Texans, and the league is commemorating the AFL’s 50th anniversary, what were they supposed to wear?[/quote]

    It’s not that they shouldn’t wear a Dallas Texans uniform, it’s a “they shouldn’t wear a Dallas logo while playing against a team from Dallas”. The Cowboys shouldn’t even be involved in the AFL promotion at all, and the Chiefs could have easily worn their Texans helmets against Denver and San Diego instead.[/quote]

    OK, misread your intent. I recall that there was an uproar with Chiefs’ fans on them wearing the Texas state logo under any circumstance.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:29 am |

    [quote comment=”353649″][quote comment=”353645″]

    So…what’s your take on when the Jets wear their Titans uni’s & the Titan’s don’t wear their Oilers? (it will happen @ some point)[/quote]

    If the Jets actually wear the Titans throwback jerseys against the Titans in a non-throwback game, they’re fucking stupid, and they deserve to lose by about 45 points. That’s what I have to say about that.

    I don’t even understand why the Jets brought those things out in the first place. The NY Titans were not a good team. There’s no glory to be throwing back to there. Wearing them for this season with the AFL anniversary is fine… wearing them the other times they’ve done it is a big flashing WTF to me.

    And yes, I never liked the CFL Roughriders vs Rough Riders thing either. That was also stupid.[/quote]

    Couple things, might as well post them after the CFL point…

    The “why” of the Chiefs/Texans vs. Cowboys was discussed yesterday.

    When both teams were in Dallas, Lamar Hunt challenged the Cowboys to play his Texans. Cowboys were an NFL expansion team and still struggling. Texans were one of the better teams in the AFL. Cowboys and NFL declined, thank you very much. As Joe Buck put it yesterday, “They’re billing this as the ‘Game That Never Was’…the Cowboys didn’t want to play the Texans because the Texans were a better team.”

    There’s a story behind the Roughriders and Rough Riders. The CFL is a combination of two older organizations, one in the east, one in the west, that began as rugby leagues, I believe. The teams in Ottawa and Saskatchewan both already had long histories with their nicknames. Media wasn’t like it is today, and I suppose they also figured the difference in spelling (one word and two words) was enough of a distinction back then. Certainly wouldn’t fly today, but it evolved from there. (I may not have all the details right, but pretty sure there’s a history at the CFL website)

    —Ricko

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 10:29 am |

    [quote comment=”353650″]”THE” Jeff:

    I agree with you it would be dumb (but the Jets would / have beaten the Titans quite regularly recently), but it’s all about product in the end…I hate when they wear the throwbacks, but as long as they win, I don’t care…I’m just waiting for the futuristic Jets throwback to come back.

    Say, when are the NY Giants breaking out the 73-74 helmets?

    Are we ever going to get to a point that this Throwback thing is too much? It’s a novelty that almost supercedes the regular uniforms, change happens, and if you only throwbacks once or twice a season, that’s fine, but when it’s almost a 1/4 of your uni rotation, it’s too much.[/quote]

    I think we’re getting really really close to that point, if we’re not there already.

    I can forgive the AFL throwbacks. 50th anniversary is kind of a big deal.

    But look at all the other ones in recent years. It’s definitely getting a bit silly.

  • Kurt Allen | October 12, 2009 at 10:35 am |

    There is actually one case in sports where brown and mustard – I meant, brown and gold, actually works…

  • JRJR | October 12, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    http://www.the700lev...

  • iowacity | October 12, 2009 at 10:39 am |

    The color of those Rams helmets doesn’t seem much different than I remember them using when they wore those great blue/yellow unis. The blue of the helmet always seemed darker than that of the jersey. I hate the Rams, but wish they’d go back to that look.

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 10:40 am |

    [quote comment=”353655″]There is actually one case in sports where brown and mustard – I meant, brown and gold, actually works…[/quote]

    I think brown and yellow (it’s YELLOW dammit, gold is metallic) could work in the NFL, just not the way the Broncos originally looked. Too much yellow, too bright, etc.

    Take a Cleveland Browns uniform – swap the orange for yellow, then put the Broncos 1963 dead horse logo on the helmet. It could’ve worked.

  • iowacity | October 12, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    [quote comment=”353624″]What is with Brett Favre’s jersey? It looks like it is cropped at the waistline and has some kind of band in it to make it snug. It looks hideous. I’ve noticed it earlier this year, but never in the previous years.[/quote]

    It does look horrible, but I’d imagine it allows for easier access to his holsters when he’s slinging guns.

  • Kurt Allen | October 12, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    There’s only one reason why NFL teams wear alternate and throwback jerseys seemingly every week now – and it’s cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching. Somebody’s dropping $85 bucks right now on NFLShop.com to get a replica ‘legacy’ jersey. NASCAR did the same thing putting different paint schemes on cars virtually every week – then people then shell out $75 for the die-cast replicas, and in the process blew much of the tradition there to pieces…

  • Kurt Allen | October 12, 2009 at 10:45 am |

    Actually, we refer the Green Bay Packers sometimes as green and ‘school bus yellow’…

  • J Excel | October 12, 2009 at 10:45 am |

    [quote comment=”353630″]During the Broncos telecast, there was a quick shot of the jumbotron in one of the endzones during a replay and, it looked like the scoreboard screen was showing the replay in black and white in the stadium. Anyone else notice this?[/quote]

    Indeed I attended the game and this was the case. Scoreboard in black and white the entire game, but with an “inner tv frame style” sponsored by Samsung. Who I don’t suspect were selling TVs to Americans in the 1960s.

    Also of note:
    – 1960s music blared through much of the game, altho the PA did revert to more modern tunes later in the 4th quarter.
    – three B-52 bombers did a fly over.
    – end zones looked superb, and I vote to remain this way the rest of the season.
    – Cheerleaders also wore 1960 style skirts, larger pom pons, jackets, scarves, etc. Didn’t appear to make much sense since I’d bet my 35years here that the team didn’t have cheerleaders in the 1960s because team owners would have never been able to afford them!

    All hail McHoodie. I now forgive thee for the Cutler fiasco and am drinking the kool aid now.

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 10:48 am |

    [quote comment=”353660″]There’s only one reason why NFL teams wear alternate and throwback jerseys seemingly every week now – and it’s cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching. Somebody’s dropping $85 bucks right now on NFLShop.com to get a replica ‘legacy’ jersey. NASCAR did the same thing putting different paint schemes on cars virtually every week – then people then shell out $75 for the die-cast replicas, and in the process blew much of the tradition there to pieces…[/quote]

    True enough.

    I’d just rather see alternates instead of throwbacks. I’d even be ok with home & away helmets for certain teams, instead of pointless throwbacks to uniforms of bad teams. Going along with my thoughts of phasing out white jerseys and more color vs color games – I’d be perfectly cool with the Steelers wearing black helmet & pants with yellow jersey on the road, and yellow helmet & pants with black jersey at home…instead of randomly pulling out that throwback they have.

  • M.Princip | October 12, 2009 at 10:49 am |

    A few years back, I had some fun with the field and the Seahawks alternate logo. It’s a shame that the team doesn’t do more creative things with this logo.

  • Johnny Bacardi | October 12, 2009 at 10:50 am |

    Even though they looked like giant Butterfinger bars, I still preferred those Broncos throwbacks to what they’ve been wearing for the last decade or so…

  • Johnny Bacardi | October 12, 2009 at 10:55 am |

    Oh, and as far as the Rams go, what I wanna see is a throwback to the classy blue and WHITE of the 60s and early 70s rather than that horrible school bus yellow.

  • Jon | October 12, 2009 at 10:55 am |

    The best aspect of the vertical striped socks was when Jabbar Gaffney twisted the socks to make them look like candy canes.

  • Dank | October 12, 2009 at 10:58 am |

    A bit off topic, but was their ever a summary of all those people keeping track of MLB records ofr teams in each uni? Now that the season is over.

    For the record, the Broncos uniforms while unique were hideous.

  • Bill S | October 12, 2009 at 10:59 am |

    Not sure anyone has asked but…is it just me or did the Giants look like their jerseys were purple vs. the Raiders? I don’t know if it’s a function of the sunlight or what. Their helmets still looked metallic blue and their Under-Armor sleeves were bright blue. But the jersey looked purple all day long – especially on close-ups. Not “Minnesota Viking/Tela-tubby purple” but closer to purple than to blue. Is this a trick of the TV or are their shades of blue really that far off?

  • bill | October 12, 2009 at 11:01 am |

    Recall the catalog picture of a Giants player wearing socks with sewn in pads? I’m not sure if anyone followed up with pics, but I ran across a photo of the ’58 championship game that indicates they were used in that game. Here’s a link to the homepage:

    http://www.geocities...

    and the picture
    http://www.geocities...

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”353658″][quote comment=”353655″]There is actually one case in sports where brown and mustard – I meant, brown and gold, actually works…[/quote]

    I think brown and yellow (it’s YELLOW dammit, gold is metallic) could work in the NFL, just not the way the Broncos originally looked. Too much yellow, too bright, etc.

    Take a Cleveland Browns uniform – swap the orange for yellow, then put the Broncos 1963 dead horse logo on the helmet. It could’ve worked.[/quote]

    In catalogs it’s called “athletic gold” or “light gold”. Michigan wears “yellow” (and Oregon used to). Different colors. Metallic gold is “old gold” or the lighter version is “Vegas gold”.

    I know you already know all this, and being as we’re uniwatchers, kinda have to use catalog descriptions as something of a benchmark.

    It isn’t about who’s right or wrong. It’s about communication, knowing what color someone’s discussing.

    —Ricko

  • Lou | October 12, 2009 at 11:05 am |

    [quote comment=”353669″]Not sure anyone has asked but…is it just me or did the Giants look like their jerseys were purple vs. the Raiders? I don’t know if it’s a function of the sunlight or what. Their helmets still looked metallic blue and their Under-Armor sleeves were bright blue. But the jersey looked purple all day long – especially on close-ups. Not “Minnesota Viking/Tela-tubby purple” but closer to purple than to blue. Is this a trick of the TV or are their shades of blue really that far off?[/quote]

    I think it might be your TV, the jerseys looked blue to me.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 11:05 am |

    Michigan wears “Maize”, don’t they?

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 11:11 am |

    [quote comment=”353671″][quote comment=”353658″][quote comment=”353655″]There is actually one case in sports where brown and mustard – I meant, brown and gold, actually works…[/quote]

    I think brown and yellow (it’s YELLOW dammit, gold is metallic) could work in the NFL, just not the way the Broncos originally looked. Too much yellow, too bright, etc.

    Take a Cleveland Browns uniform – swap the orange for yellow, then put the Broncos 1963 dead horse logo on the helmet. It could’ve worked.[/quote]

    In catalogs it’s called “athletic gold” or “light gold”. Michigan wears “yellow” (and Oregon used to). Different colors. Metallic gold is “old gold” or the lighter version is “Vegas gold”.

    I know you already know all this, and being as we’re uniwatchers, kinda have to use catalog descriptions as something of a benchmark.

    It isn’t about who’s right or wrong. It’s about communication, knowing what color someone’s discussing.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Oh, I know… and it irritates the hell out of me sometimes, especially when it comes down to team color designations. The Rams use “Millenium Blue” and the Patriots use “Nautical Blue” and they’re actually the exact same color.

    So, I’m going to continue being difficult and call it yellow instead of gold. :)

  • J Excel | October 12, 2009 at 11:13 am |

    [quote comment=”353673″]Michigan wears “Maize”, don’t they?[/quote]

    Having graduated from the Univ of Illinois, it’s obvious that michigan wears “urine” yellow.
    I’m sure alumni of other Big10 universities would concur.

  • Thomas Clark | October 12, 2009 at 11:15 am |

    [quote comment=”353673″]Michigan wears “Maize”, don’t they?[/quote]

    If you believe the concession stands they wear “corn.” Because they serve “popped maize” rather than popcorn.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 11:17 am |

    “Made from maize, what you call corn (white man)”.

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 11:18 am |

    [quote comment=”353676″][quote comment=”353673″]Michigan wears “Maize”, don’t they?[/quote]

    If you believe the concession stands they wear “corn.” Because they serve “popped maize” rather than popcorn.[/quote]

    Something about Michigan wearing “blue and corn” is greatly amusing to me. I’m not sure why.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:19 am |

    [quote comment=”353673″]Michigan wears “Maize”, don’t they?[/quote]

    Called that by school. Not the issue at UW.
    Want a uni that color, in the catalogs, pick “Yellow”.

    I mean, we can nitpick the snot out of this because teams may order by PMS number these days, but for the sake of our discussions we need SOME kind of parameters or we’ll get even farther bogged down trying to communicate with each other. An arguing about what’s “mustard”.

    Same PMS spec for light gold for Chiefs, Super Bowl Rams, Vikings, Packers, Steelers, Chargers, Redskins…btw…according to NFL guide.

    Now, what catches us visually is that it will pick up tones from the dark color adjacent to it. Broncos’ gold yesterday looks browner. Packers picks up green, which makes it looks yellower. Chiefs red, which make it look brighter gold.

    “Your eyes can deceive you. Don’t trust them.”

    —Ricko

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 11:19 am |

    So you youngsters out there know where I’m comin’ from:
    http://www.youtube.c...

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:21 am |

    [quote comment=”353680″]So you youngsters out there know where I’m comin’ from:
    http://www.youtube.c...

    So confuse the hell out of your kids. Tell ’em this weekend you’re taking them to the Maize Maze.

  • JL | October 12, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    “Nothing enhances the view of a football field like a nearby power plant.”

    If you follow the link to that photo, you’ll notice that it’s Poca High School from Poca, West Virginia. And if you check the padding on the goalpost, you’ll notice their mascot is Dots…yes, the Poca Dots.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:28 am |

    [quote comment=”353682″]“Nothing enhances the view of a football field like a nearby power plant.”

    If you follow the link to that photo, you’ll notice that it’s Poca High School from Poca, West Virginia. And if you check the padding on the goalpost, you’ll notice their mascot is Dots…yes, the Poca Dots.[/quote]

    Any of the players glow in the dark?
    (Now THERE’s the team to wear neon green).

    —Ricko

  • Hank | October 12, 2009 at 11:28 am |

    [quote comment=”353656″]Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    http://www.the700lev...

    Close but no cigar. The screenshot is from a Phils home game. But the point is well taken. Baseball is not meant to be played in sub-freezing temps (or anything under 55 degrees for that matter.)

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 11:33 am |

    Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    Why:Does Bud possess powers unknown to mere mortals?

  • Chris | October 12, 2009 at 11:34 am |

    [quote comment=”353656″]Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    http://www.the700lev...
    Cold weather baseball = Return of the flap cap

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:34 am |

    [quote comment=”353684″][quote comment=”353656″]Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    http://www.the700lev...

    Close but no cigar. The screenshot is from a Phils home game. But the point is well taken. Baseball is not meant to be played in sub-freezing temps (or anything under 55 degrees for that matter.)[/quote]

    Well then, guess MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?

    Seriously.

    Teams want the division series to go from five games to seven, too. I mean, something’s gotta give somewhere, doesn’t it?

    —Ricko

  • peter | October 12, 2009 at 11:36 am |

    Just heard on WFAN:

    “@ the Giants game, there were 3 # 1 QB Draft Picks that played…has this ever happened before?”

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:36 am |

    The real solution (though it would NEVER fly)?

    Schedule more doubleheaders during the season.
    Even splits. Afternoon and night. Separate admissions, but get more games in.

    (the whining sound you hear is from the Players’ Association)

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    [quote]A bit off topic, but was their ever a summary of all those people keeping track of MLB records ofr teams in each uni? Now that the season is over.[/quote]

    there has not been yet…i will be putting out the call for the end of season tracks soon

    not sure how we’re going to do it — it’s possible (gotta clear it with paul) they may be made into a linkie (sort of an historical record) like timmy b’s uni histories or the “white at home” section in the upper right hand portion of the blog

    regardless, i’ll make sure those who were tracking get them in and get recognized for their efforts…stay tuned

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”353689″]The real solution (though it would NEVER fly)?

    Schedule more doubleheaders during the season.
    Even splits. Afternoon and night. Separate admissions, but get more games in.

    (the whining sound you hear is from the Players’ Association)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Although, come to think of it, that might mean expanding the roster by three to increase the size of pitching staffs, and the Union theoretically could support it on that basis: it would create 90 new jobs in MLB.

    Like I said, though, never gonna happen. They’ll just keep playing in lousy weather as long as the TV revenue is there.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 11:48 am |

    [quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)

  • Paul Lukas | October 12, 2009 at 11:50 am |

    [quote comment=”353646″]Where, oh, where, can I get some of those socks? I’ve looked on the Broncos online site, no dice.[/quote]

    Available from the team shop at Mile High: (720) 258-3300.

    [quote comment=”353683″][quote comment=”353682″]“Nothing enhances the view of a football field like a nearby power plant.”

    If you follow the link to that photo, you’ll notice that it’s Poca High School from Poca, West Virginia. And if you check the padding on the goalpost, you’ll notice their mascot is Dots…yes, the Poca Dots.[/quote]

    Any of the players glow in the dark?
    (Now THERE’s the team to wear neon green).

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Cute, except that’s a coal plant in the photo, not a nuclear plant.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:51 am |

    [quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment=”353693″][quote comment=”353646″]Where, oh, where, can I get some of those socks? I’ve looked on the Broncos online site, no dice.[/quote]

    Available from the team shop at Mile High: (720) 258-3300.

    [quote comment=”353683″][quote comment=”353682″]“Nothing enhances the view of a football field like a nearby power plant.”

    If you follow the link to that photo, you’ll notice that it’s Poca High School from Poca, West Virginia. And if you check the padding on the goalpost, you’ll notice their mascot is Dots…yes, the Poca Dots.[/quote]

    Any of the players glow in the dark?
    (Now THERE’s the team to wear neon green).

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Cute, except that’s a coal plant in the photo, not a nuclear plant.[/quote]

    Sorry. We have one of the early nuclear plants hereabouts and I still free-associate those kind of stacks with nuclear, I guess.

    (Damn, I hate when a joke goes bad. LOL)

    —Ricko

  • timmy b | October 12, 2009 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment=”353677″]”Made from maize, what you call corn (white man)”.[/quote]

    I know where that came from…there was this hot native American gal in a cornfield and it was for Mazola margarine. The commerical closed with a tribal chant as a jingle, “Mazola corn goodness!”

    Loved it!

  • Ryan P. | October 12, 2009 at 11:55 am |

    In the old photo of the Bruins, did anyone else notice the goalie’s chest protector. It extends down past the jersey to the crotch. It looks like an old catcher’s chest protector that would extend down there.

    http://famthings.fil...

    I’ve played hockey, and I can’t recall seeing a chest protector extending down that far. Is he using catcher’s equipment, or is that how goalie chest protectors used to be made?

  • Ben | October 12, 2009 at 11:57 am |

    Seeing that Bruins Team photo reminded me that I saw that sweater at the HHOF two weeks ago. Here’s a link to a pic: http://www.flickr.co...

  • Shaftman | October 12, 2009 at 12:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.

  • JRJR | October 12, 2009 at 12:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”353684″][quote comment=”353656″]Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    http://www.the700lev...

    Close but no cigar. The screenshot is from a Phils home game. But the point is well taken. Baseball is not meant to be played in sub-freezing temps (or anything under 55 degrees for that matter.)[/quote]

    Whoops! My bad–I was falling asleep during the game(2ish EST?!) and must have hallucinated that one–shoulda’ been wearin’ it!

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 12:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Yup, about the only way to accomplish the double-pronged goal of full season AND expanded playoffs in better weather. Otherwise, we just live with lousy post-season weather from time to time.

    Again, I’m not ADVOCATING anything. But either something changes drastically or we just accept the shitty weather as a fact of life.

    —Ricko

  • Smail | October 12, 2009 at 12:07 pm |

    The best part about the Broncos-Pats tilt? I didn’t see any pink.

  • =bg= | October 12, 2009 at 12:18 pm |

    Fines not expected for Broncos sock-twisting
    Posted by Mike Florio on October 12, 2009 8:47 AM ET

    Multiple Broncos players had a new twist for the vertically-striped socks on their throwback uniforms.

    They twisted them.

    The maneuver, performed most noticeably by receiver Jabar Gaffney, might have induced nausea if the color scheme of the uniforms hadn’t already done the trick.

    Many of you have asked whether the players who did it will be fined, so we asked NFL spokesman Greg Aiello whether the barber-pole effect is a violation of league rules.

    “It will be a close shave,” Aiello said. (Well played, Aiello. Well played.)

    Aiello then added, only a bit more seriously, that the players will not be fined unless it can be definitively proven that the Broncos never twisted their socks when wearing the uniforms in question.

    Bottom line? The league probably wasn’t thrilled with the maneuver, but even the Park Avenue fashion police surely realize that there’s a limit to the public’s tolerance of fining players for their efforts to inject a hint of individuality or creativity into the game.

    For more on Sunday’s Patriots-Broncos game — and every other game played on Sunday — check out The Morning Aftermath.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 12:26 pm |

    “Aiello then added, only a bit more seriously, that the players will not be fined unless it can be definitively proven that the Broncos never twisted their socks when wearing the uniforms in question.”

    Not like it matters, but considering that in ’60 and ’61 most players encircled the top of their socks with white training tape to hold them up (often was covered by the longer pants of the day), it’s a pretty good bet nobody twisted their socks.

    Plus, the players’ mindset back then likely was that the socks were ugly enough, no sense making them worse. LOL

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | October 12, 2009 at 12:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”353704″]Not like it matters, but considering that in ’60 and ’61 most players encircled the top of their socks with white training tape to hold them up (often was covered by the longer pants of the day), it’s a pretty good bet nobody twisted their socks.[/quote]

    Actually, I’m curious as to whether tape (or any other mechanism) was used to keep the socks twisted by the player who went candy-striped yeserday. Try twisting a pair of socks and then run around with them — it’s hard to keep them that way!

  • JimV19 | October 12, 2009 at 12:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    We’re only stuck with it if we as fans continue to allow it. You want a shorter season? Do what I do – watch fewer games, especially in the playoffs.

    Mostly in the NBA, but sometimes in MLB, I wait until a team can clinch a series before I’ll watch. If everyone else did this, the leagues might get the hint that the seasons and the playoffs are too long. The owners wouldn’t be laughing at you, because the networks would be laughing at them.

    I don’t want a longer postseason. I’d like to see the wild-card and the worst division winner in a one-game playoff at the division winner’s park. The winner then visits the #2 seed in a one-gamer. That winner plays a best-of-5 with the #1 seed, followed by a best-of-7 (too long for me, but I’ll bow to tradition) World Series.

    For the NBA, I just want a March Madness-type of playoff, except the division winners get a bye.

    And I want shorter seasons as well. I know the one-sport fans would disagree, but I think overall ratings would go up as a result.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”353705″][quote comment=”353704″]Not like it matters, but considering that in ’60 and ’61 most players encircled the top of their socks with white training tape to hold them up (often was covered by the longer pants of the day), it’s a pretty good bet nobody twisted their socks.[/quote]

    Actually, I’m curious as to whether tape (or any other mechanism) was used to keep the socks twisted by the player who went candy-striped yeserday. Try twisting a pair of socks and then run around with them — it’s hard to keep them that way![/quote]

    LOL. Was wondering exactly the same thing during the game.

    Stickum!!! Illegal use of Stickum!!!

    (Hey, Sheffield uses it to keep his PJ’s stuck to his cleats. Read that at UW…yes, I did).

    —Ricko

  • Chris | October 12, 2009 at 12:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”353700″][quote comment=”353684″][quote comment=”353656″]Check out Jimmy Rollins last night–anyone want to bitch about Bud Selig with me??

    http://www.the700lev...

    Close but no cigar. The screenshot is from a Phils home game. But the point is well taken. Baseball is not meant to be played in sub-freezing temps (or anything under 55 degrees for that matter.)[/quote]

    Whoops! My bad–I was falling asleep during the game(2ish EST?!) and must have hallucinated that one–shoulda’ been wearin’ it![/quote]
    Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino were wearing them last night during the game. Todd Helton was wearing one pregame. Video showing glimpses of Rollins but clear images of Victorino wearing it:http://philadelphia.... & Helton in pregame:http://a.espncdn.com...

  • Chris | October 12, 2009 at 12:42 pm |
  • Teebz | October 12, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”353697″]In the old photo of the Bruins, did anyone else notice the goalie’s chest protector. It extends down past the jersey to the crotch. It looks like an old catcher’s chest protector that would extend down there.

    http://famthings.fil...

    I’ve played hockey, and I can’t recall seeing a chest protector extending down that far. Is he using catcher’s equipment, or is that how goalie chest protectors used to be made?[/quote]

    Baseball and hockey have quite an intertwined history when it comes to goaltenders and catchers. Yes, it was probably a catcher’s chest protector. It would have been the only thing designed to provide any sort of protection in the 1920s and 1930s.

  • JimV19 | October 12, 2009 at 12:50 pm |

    Gotta say I liked seeing pics of the Pats/Broncs game. Had it not been a throwback game, I would have listened on the radio and let the family watch something else on the tube (if we were home, that is).

    I think brown and yellow can work, if it’s done simply. I kind of like Wyoming as well, but they have just a few too many things going on with their uniforms.

    I agree there should have been some white on the socks. Otherwise, I’d like to see the Broncos stay with this look.

  • Seth H | October 12, 2009 at 12:55 pm |

    “So confuse the hell out of your kids. Tell ‘em this weekend you’re taking them to the Maize Maze.”

    That’s exactly what we tell our kids every year when we take them to Lancaster, PA: http://www.americanm...

  • Rick | October 12, 2009 at 1:07 pm |

    Did not the Chiefs just wear a throwback helmet, not a tb uni? Kinda half ass. And to play dallas was ok, but if it is the 50th AFL Celebration, it should have been against the Raiders. Still, it is cool that the NFL lets the “other” league show off its history. Would kinda be like the US of A celebrating the Confederacy during the Fourth of July.

  • Jon in SLC | October 12, 2009 at 1:14 pm |

    Paul –

    I know you enjoy Chris Creamers board (as most of us do) and the thought just hit me – Have you ever had a chance to meet Chris or speak with him? It might be a good interview for us.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 1:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”353714″]Did not the Chiefs just wear a throwback helmet, not a tb uni? Kinda half ass. And to play dallas was ok, but if it is the 50th AFL Celebration, it should have been against the Raiders. Still, it is cool that the NFL lets the “other” league show off its history. Would kinda be like the US of A celebrating the Confederacy during the Fourth of July.[/quote]

    [quote comment=”353714″]Did not the Chiefs just wear a throwback helmet, not a tb uni? Kinda half ass. And to play dallas was ok, but if it is the 50th AFL Celebration, it should have been against the Raiders. Still, it is cool that the NFL lets the “other” league show off its history. Would kinda be like the US of A celebrating the Confederacy during the Fourth of July.[/quote]

    Chiefs wore Texans jerseys: gold edge on numbers very, very thin, and no sleeve-end striping. Black cleats yesterday, too.

    For background on Dallas vs. Dallas, see today’s post #44.

    —Ricko

  • Jon in SLC | October 12, 2009 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 1:23 pm |

    The Broncos held their twizzlers in place using one of these:
    http://staplerofthew...

  • Giancarlo | October 12, 2009 at 1:25 pm |

    As many know, the baseball season is only 162 games long because once upon a time the AL had ten teams not divided into divisions and they played each other 18 times a year (9 home/9 away). 18 games x 9 opponents = 162. It made a lot of sense. With today’s unbalanced schedule it no longer makes any sense. I can only imagine MLB remains wedded to the 162 figure out of a desire to keep statistical records comparable between eras (as if!).
    I don’t see why we can’t go back to the old 154-game schedule. It’s an equally arbitrary number & it would save a couple of weeks.

  • Oakville Endive | October 12, 2009 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”353712″]

    I think brown and yellow can work, if it’s done simply. I kind of like Wyoming as well, but they have just a few too many things going on with their uniforms.

    .[/quote]

    I’m not sure brown could work with anything. I’ve thought a subdued brown and green combo, might have some potential – but not likely.

    In one of my favorite books of all time John Irving’s Hotel New Hampshire – the school colors were Brown and Grey – the main character referred to this as the shit and death color scheme. I actually think it would be appropriate colors for the Buffalo Bills – anyone who has seem the Buffalo skyline on a bleak November day – would see the connection. Hey if you have a ugly city – you might as well embrace it.

  • adam | October 12, 2009 at 1:27 pm |

    B. Dawk is the only player in the history of the NFL to wear this…

    http://www.goocd.com...

    and this

    http://www.reebokjer...

    dubious? indeed, but he is 2-0 when wearing yellow…perhaps, the Tour de France could use an aging safety.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 1:29 pm |

    In one of my favorite books of all time John Irving’s Hotel New Hampshire – the school colors were Brown and Grey – the main character referred to this as the shit and death color scheme. I actually think it would be appropriate colors for the Buffalo Bills – anyone who has seem the Buffalo skyline on a bleak November day – would see the connection. Hey if you have a ugly city – you might as well embrace it.

    And they could be called the “ShitStorm”!

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”353717″][quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”353717″][quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.[/quote]

    Works out to almost every Saturday being doubleheaders for everyone…to get 162 games into the same number of weeks/months as 140 games, that is. Everybody’s gotta play 22 doubleheaders. Ouch, 22 a little ambitious. Maybe only 12 or 14, to shorten season by a couple weeks…on the calendar.

    Saturday kinda makes sense. If rains, play twice on Sunday instead, with only one game to make up.

    Anyway, not saying what’s good or bad, just trying to imagine what it would be like. Would be different, that’s for sure.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 1:46 pm |

    speaking of 154 vs. 162

    i remember asking the rickster what the NL did in ’61…because, i bet not a lot of you know this, but in ’61, the AL played a 162 game schedule and the NL played 154 — this is (i am 99.99% sure) the only time in history the two leagues played a different number of games per league

    ricko’s answer: “the AL had a lot of double headers”

    i remember the days when there were actually scheduled DH’s and they weren’t this day-night shit either

    might explain why attendance figures from some clubs are higher these days than at any time in the past (that and a boatload of night games)…but i sure wish MLB would schedule a few sunday DH’s

    and how many of you remember when “monday…no games scheduled” was the norm and not the exception?

  • Tom V | October 12, 2009 at 1:46 pm |

    Not unirelated but weird TV graphic anomaly.

    During yesterdays NASCAR race David Gilliland started off driving the 71 car which parked after 13 laps finishing 42nd. Kyle Busch 18 was sick and got out of his car after 63 laps, then Gilliland took over driving Busches 18. So on the ticker showing driver places Gillilands name appeared twice, first in the 18 car and second in the 71 in the same ticker.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 1:50 pm |

    i remember the days when there were actually scheduled DH’s and they weren’t this day-night shit either

    In the 60’s (going by recollection here) the Senators scheduled a doubleheader every Memorial Day, July 4th, and Labor Day. Lost ’em all, I think :)

  • Jon in SLC | October 12, 2009 at 1:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”353723″][quote comment=”353717″][quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”353717″][quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.[/quote]

    Works out to almost every Saturday being doubleheaders for everyone…to get 162 games into the same number of weeks/months as 140 games, that is. Everybody’s gotta play 22 doubleheaders. Ouch, 22 a little ambitious. Maybe only 12 or 14, to shorten season by a couple weeks…on the calendar.

    Saturday kinda makes sense. If rains, play twice on Sunday instead, with only one game to make up.

    Anyway, not saying what’s good or bad, just trying to imagine what it would be like. Would be different, that’s for sure.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I don’t know that we need to shorten it to that many weeks or DH games – but I would really love to see more scheduled day/night doubleheaders, and day games. To me that is true baseball.

  • joe | October 12, 2009 at 2:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”353719″]As many know, the baseball season is only 162 games long because once upon a time the AL had ten teams not divided into divisions and they played each other 18 times a year (9 home/9 away). 18 games x 9 opponents = 162. It made a lot of sense. With today’s unbalanced schedule it no longer makes any sense. I can only imagine MLB remains wedded to the 162 figure out of a desire to keep statistical records comparable between eras (as if!).
    I don’t see why we can’t go back to the old 154-game schedule. It’s an equally arbitrary number & it would save a couple of weeks.[/quote]
    or 1 week. play 162, with double headers on Sundays like they used to do, do them as split DH and the owners stay happy since there is no gate loss.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 2:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”353726″]i remember the days when there were actually scheduled DH’s and they weren’t this day-night shit either

    In the 60’s (going by recollection here) the Senators scheduled a doubleheader every Memorial Day, July 4th, and Labor Day. Lost ’em all, I think :)[/quote]

    according to baseball almanac, senators played 27 doubleheaders in 1965.

  • concealed78 | October 12, 2009 at 2:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”353610″]The Seahawks have a version painted in Qwest Field as a huge mural.[/quote]

    That’s what I thought. Maybe it was brought up on the site here before? I have a 480×600 gif file of it dated Friday, November 23rd 2007.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 2:13 pm |

    How weird is it that Paul introduces a new “Ohio-themed” advertiser on Columbus Day?

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 2:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”353727″][quote comment=”353723″][quote comment=”353717″][quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”353717″][quote comment=”353699″][quote comment=”353694″][quote comment=”353692″][quote] MLB needs to cut the regular season to, what, 140 games or so?[/quote]

    you think MLBPA would bitch about DH’s? try telling the owners they’ll lose 22 more (really 11, cuz half would be home dates) gates

    that sound you just heard was the owners laughing you out of the room ;)[/quote]

    That was my point. Only way to both expand the playoffs AND play them in better weather would be to shorten the season. And that ain’t gonna happen, so not much sense bitchin’ ’bout the weather. They (and we) are stuck with it.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    But if you shedule 11 Day/Night double headers there are no gates lost. Then expand the roster by 3 and the playoffs can start earlier in the calendar year. Everyone (union, owners, fans) win.[/quote]

    Thank you. I agree 100%. The MLB needs more doubleheaders and also 1 game during the day everyday. Do it on a rotation.[/quote]

    Works out to almost every Saturday being doubleheaders for everyone…to get 162 games into the same number of weeks/months as 140 games, that is. Everybody’s gotta play 22 doubleheaders. Ouch, 22 a little ambitious. Maybe only 12 or 14, to shorten season by a couple weeks…on the calendar.

    Saturday kinda makes sense. If rains, play twice on Sunday instead, with only one game to make up.

    Anyway, not saying what’s good or bad, just trying to imagine what it would be like. Would be different, that’s for sure.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I don’t know that we need to shorten it to that many weeks or DH games – but I would really love to see more scheduled day/night doubleheaders, and day games. To me that is true baseball.[/quote]

    This discussion springs from the notion of ending the season earlier to improve playoff weather, and allow LDS to be seven games instead of five. So 10 to 14 days would be a good target number of days to cut.

    But, as we all know, ain’t gonna happen. So get your Elmer Fudd hats ready, men, and keep ’em handy.

    —Ricko

  • Bernard | October 12, 2009 at 2:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”353720″][quote comment=”353712″]

    I think brown and yellow can work, if it’s done simply. I kind of like Wyoming as well, but they have just a few too many things going on with their uniforms.

    .[/quote]

    I’m not sure brown could work with anything.

    I’ve thought a subdued brown and green combo, might have some potential – but not likely.

    In one of my favorite books of all time John Irving’s Hotel New Hampshire – the school colors were Brown and Grey – the main character referred to this as the shit and death color scheme. I actually think it would be appropriate colors for the Buffalo Bills – anyone who has seem the Buffalo skyline on a bleak November day – would see the connection. Hey if you have a ugly city – you might as well embrace it.[/quote]

    Keep passing the open windows, Oakland… ;)

  • Tom V | October 12, 2009 at 2:20 pm |

    But if you do split double headers, do you think you’re going to actually get double the amount of fans (or ticket sales) for the day? Sure, they’ll be maybe 1/3 that might buy both games, but are you really going to be able to get the other 2/3rd’s of both games filled? You’re talking about getting your stadium 5/3rd’s of capacity in one day with that scenario.

    I get a kick out of most of the folks that complain about October baseball in the snow, they say its wrong but when pressed for an option they offer none, as we can see there is very little room for improvement without big concessions from the owners.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 2:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”353734″]But if you do split double headers, do you think you’re going to actually get double the amount of fans (or ticket sales) for the day? Sure, they’ll be maybe 1/3 that might buy both games, but are you really going to be able to get the other 2/3rd’s of both games filled?

    You’re talking about getting your stadium 5/3rd’s of capacity in one day with that scenario.

    I get a kick out of most of the folks that complain about October baseball in the snow, they say its wrong but when pressed for an option they offer none, as we can see there is very little room for improvement without big concessions from the owners.[/quote]

    Zactly. Fudd hats for everyone! It’ll be FUN.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 2:39 pm |

    How fervently do we think the TV execs right now are praying…

    “Please not Angels-Dodgers, please not Angels-Dodgers” ?

    West Coast series tend to mean something of a ratings dip, don’t they? Especially a one-market one like the Earthquake series in ’89.

    —Ricko

  • Oakville Endive | October 12, 2009 at 2:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”353733″][quote comment=”353720″][quote comment=”353712″]

    I think brown and yellow can work, if it’s done simply. I kind of like Wyoming as well, but they have just a few too many things going on with their uniforms.

    .[/quote]

    I’m not sure brown could work with anything.

    I’ve thought a subdued brown and green combo, might have some potential – but not likely.

    In one of my favorite books of all time John Irving’s Hotel New Hampshire – the school colors were Brown and Grey – the main character referred to this as the shit and death color scheme. I actually think it would be appropriate colors for the Buffalo Bills – anyone who has seem the Buffalo skyline on a bleak November day – would see the connection. Hey if you have a ugly city – you might as well embrace it.[/quote]

    Keep passing the open windows, Oakland… ;)[/quote]

    Wow……….very good

  • concealed78 | October 12, 2009 at 3:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”353643″]I still dislike the all white look [/quote]

    I’m the polar opposite. I hate colored pants, especially dark ones. And dark pants lead to possible monochrome combination. Yellow, gray & gold pants is fine, tho. Nobody has jerseys in those colors.

  • Christopher | October 12, 2009 at 3:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”353725″]Not unirelated but weird TV graphic anomaly.

    During yesterdays NASCAR race David Gilliland started off driving the 71 car which parked after 13 laps finishing 42nd. Kyle Busch 18 was sick and got out of his car after 63 laps, then Gilliland took over driving Busches 18. So on the ticker showing driver places Gillilands name appeared twice, first in the 18 car and second in the 71 in the same ticker.[/quote]

    Yes! I saw that. Now, technically Kyle gets the points, so it would have been more accurate to say “Ky. Busch”.

    A few years back Tony Stewart had to get out of the 20 car because of an injury. Ricky Rudd filled in, and on the ticker it said Stewart/Rudd.

    Another funny thing is they made Gilliand change hats to Kyle’s sponsor as he walked all of 3 minutes (5 seconds air time) to the other pit stall.

  • Christopher | October 12, 2009 at 3:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”353734″]But if you do split double headers, do you think you’re going to actually get double the amount of fans (or ticket sales) for the day? Sure, they’ll be maybe 1/3 that might buy both games, but are you really going to be able to get the other 2/3rd’s of both games filled?

    You’re talking about getting your stadium 5/3rd’s of capacity in one day with that scenario.

    I get a kick out of most of the folks that complain about October baseball in the snow, they say its wrong but when pressed for an option they offer none, as we can see there is very little room for improvement without big concessions from the owners.[/quote]

    Exactly. Everyone complains about this in April and then again in October because 1-2 games are affected. Please, its not that big of a deal.

  • Tom V | October 12, 2009 at 3:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”353734″]Exactly. Everyone complains about this in April and then again in October because 1-2 games are affected. Please, its not that big of a deal.[/quote]

    I live in Florida, so going to an outdoor sporting event when its below 70 degrees outside is simply unheard of.

  • Josh | October 12, 2009 at 3:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”353693″]
    Cute, except that’s a coal plant in the photo, not a nuclear plant.[/quote]
    John E. Amos Electric Power Plant to be precise.

  • =bg= | October 12, 2009 at 3:29 pm |

    More pink..@ the HS level
    http://arizonavarsit...

  • rhdii | October 12, 2009 at 3:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”353671″][quote comment=”353658″][quote comment=”353655″]There is actually one case in sports where brown and mustard – I meant, brown and gold, actually works…[/quote]

    I think brown and yellow (it’s YELLOW dammit, gold is metallic) could work in the NFL, just not the way the Broncos originally looked. Too much yellow, too bright, etc.

    Take a Cleveland Browns uniform – swap the orange for yellow, then put the Broncos 1963 dead horse logo on the helmet. It could’ve worked.[/quote]

    In catalogs it’s called “athletic gold” or “light gold”. Michigan wears “yellow” (and Oregon used to). Different colors. Metallic gold is “old gold” or the lighter version is “Vegas gold”.

    I know you already know all this, and being as we’re uniwatchers, kinda have to use catalog descriptions as something of a benchmark.

    It isn’t about who’s right or wrong. It’s about communication, knowing what color someone’s discussing.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Does anybody actually wear Old Gold any longer? Maybe UCLA? This is a pet peeve of mine–Georgia Tech wore Old Gold last year then goes back to Vegas Gold this year. Vegas Gold is too light and washes out, especially when paired with white jerseys. The worst thing is Notre Dame wears Old Gold helmets and Vegas Gold pants. Imagine how great they’d look if their pants were darker.

  • =bg= | October 12, 2009 at 3:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”353736″]How fervently do we think the TV execs right now are praying…

    “Please not Angels-Dodgers, please not Angels-Dodgers” ?

    West Coast series tend to mean something of a ratings dip, don’t they? Especially a one-market one like the Earthquake series in ’89.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well, they need not worry. I think you’re gonna see Yanks-Dodgers.

  • James | October 12, 2009 at 3:42 pm |

    Hey Paul with your profound love of all things meat, you should check out this “bakery”!!

    http://www.themeatlo...

  • KT | October 12, 2009 at 3:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”353639″]It’s not that they shouldn’t wear a Dallas Texans uniform, it’s a “they shouldn’t wear a Dallas logo while playing against a team from Dallas”. The Cowboys shouldn’t even be involved in the AFL promotion at all, and the Chiefs could have easily worn their Texans helmets against Denver and San Diego instead.[/quote]

    So….the fact that the Cowboys and Texans/Chiefs have an intertwined history, and that the very existence of the Cowboys is likely the reason there have even BEEN Kansas City Chiefs since 1963, which is one of the obvious reasons for the success of the very AFL that these things celebrate, is completely lost on you, then?

  • Frank | October 12, 2009 at 3:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”353736″]
    West Coast series tend to mean something of a ratings dip, don’t they? Especially a one-market one like the Earthquake series in ’89.[/quote]

    Greater LA is somewhere between 2-3 times bigger than the SF Bay Area market. I’m sure they’d love the Yankees in there, but LA vs. LA is probably the next best matchup (ratings-wise) out of the remaining possibles (ones that don’t include NYC).

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 3:46 pm |

    Had the chance to catch the Tennessee Titans postgame press conference, and noticed a logo they should be using on their uniforms. I’m sure it’s not new, but the logo is a big “T” dagger with a circle of stars at the handle. The interesting thing is that there are no silly flames coming out of the dagger, this logo would look better then that flaming thumbtacks currently on the helmet. Put that big “T” dagger sideways on the helmet, and lose the flames, and that would be an improvement. The Titans should also incorporate the dagger onto the rest of the uniform, which needs upgrading anyway. It’s disappointing Tennessee blew this opportunity after they renamed the team.

  • Fight | October 12, 2009 at 3:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”353625″]I bought an Archie Griffin t-shirt from Homage a couple of months ago. Great shirt, very comfortable. Great company.[/quote]
    Bought a script Ohio for the wife, I highly recommend the company – great product.

  • mike 2 | October 12, 2009 at 4:06 pm |

    Also remember that the LCS used to be 5 games and not 7 (prior to 1985). It all adds up.

    But on another related topic, I’d be happy if they brought back day playoff games, or at least night games that started at a reasonable hour.

    I didn’t mind last nights game too much because I live in Mountain time, but it seems like every single LCS and WS game ends WAY past midnight, eastern time. I don’t know how MLB expects to keep its youthful audience when they don’t get to see the biggest games end.

    Plus if they played day games, playing later in the year wouldn’t seem like such a big deal. Playing in the middle of the day in late October, not terrible – playing in the middle of the night, ridiculous.

  • JohnnyO | October 12, 2009 at 4:10 pm |

    Paul, and many others, would really like the shirt of “Woot Shirt” today:

    http://shirt.woot.co...

  • Jim Bullard | October 12, 2009 at 4:19 pm |

    Ok, got a question that can only be answered by fellow Uni-Watchers.

    I’m a big OKC Thunder fan, but I’m not a big fan of either their uniforms or the prices charged for their uniforms. I bought a 10 game ticket package this year, so I’ll be live rooting the Thunder on a lot this season.

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    Thanks everybody, can’t wait for what everyone thinks.

  • Christopher | October 12, 2009 at 4:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”353753″]Ok, got a question that can only be answered by fellow Uni-Watchers.

    I’m a big OKC Thunder fan, but I’m not a big fan of either their uniforms or the prices charged for their uniforms. I bought a 10 game ticket package this year, so I’ll be live rooting the Thunder on a lot this season.

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    Thanks everybody, can’t wait for what everyone thinks.[/quote]

    I would tend to think its a little creepy. There is a lot of exploitation of high schoolers (and younger) by the basketball system.

    Its like playing the Little League World Series on ESPN. I think its inappropriate.

  • Christopher | October 12, 2009 at 4:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”353753″]Ok, got a question that can only be answered by fellow Uni-Watchers.

    I’m a big OKC Thunder fan, but I’m not a big fan of either their uniforms or the prices charged for their uniforms. I bought a 10 game ticket package this year, so I’ll be live rooting the Thunder on a lot this season.

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    Thanks everybody, can’t wait for what everyone thinks.[/quote]

  • mmwatkin | October 12, 2009 at 4:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”353753″]Ok, got a question that can only be answered by fellow Uni-Watchers.

    I’m a big OKC Thunder fan, but I’m not a big fan of either their uniforms or the prices charged for their uniforms. I bought a 10 game ticket package this year, so I’ll be live rooting the Thunder on a lot this season.

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    Thanks everybody, can’t wait for what everyone thinks.[/quote]

    College jersey = Okay

    High School jersey = Lame-O

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 4:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”353748″][quote comment=”353736″]
    West Coast series tend to mean something of a ratings dip, don’t they? Especially a one-market one like the Earthquake series in ’89.[/quote]

    Greater LA is somewhere between 2-3 times bigger than the SF Bay Area market. I’m sure they’d love the Yankees in there, but LA vs. LA is probably the next best matchup (ratings-wise) out of the remaining possibles (ones that don’t include NYC).[/quote]

    I imagine their thinking is—and rightly so—that they’ll do fine the LA market if either Angels or Dodgers get in. That is to say their numbers won’t double in LA if it’s Angels-Dodgers. And whatever increase they would get would be offset by overall losses in the east. So, other than NY, they’d probably prefer Phillies-Angels. Advertisers like to keep at least SOME hold on one market in the east.

    No matter what, they’ll do okay, though.

    Colorwise, of course, Phillies-Angels and Dodgers-Yankees would be the most monchromatic. And Reggie ain’t around to jerk three in one game, either. Although A-Rod or Manny might.

    Sounds like I’m counting Colorado out, doesn’t it. Not so, Rockies fans, was considering only the East Coast element in the equation.

    Although I’d guess Rockies-Angels is likely the least attractive to the network. Based on numbers, geography and weather.

    —Ricko

  • Nick | October 12, 2009 at 4:38 pm |

    Jerseys for the Dayton Gems an expansion franshise in the International Hockey League have surfaced.

    Black

    Gold with two Gems along the hem – Yikes

    Blue third jersey that looks like the Reebok Edge design

    Retro – This is the second incarnation of the Gems. They played in the original IHL from 1964 to 1977, and 1979–1980.

  • JimV19 | October 12, 2009 at 4:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”353753″]Ok, got a question that can only be answered by fellow Uni-Watchers.

    I’m a big OKC Thunder fan, but I’m not a big fan of either their uniforms or the prices charged for their uniforms. I bought a 10 game ticket package this year, so I’ll be live rooting the Thunder on a lot this season.

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    Thanks everybody, can’t wait for what everyone thinks.[/quote]

    Personally, I’d DIY a better-looking Thunder jersey. That may not be your bag, but I don’t see what’s wrong with wearing the Oak Hill jersey. LeBron’s HS jerseys were on sale in stores quite a bit. I haven’t been to a Cavs game in years, but I’m sure a few people wear his St. V jersey there. Now if you wore a shirt from Durant’s grade school or daycare, that might be another story….

  • mmwatkin | October 12, 2009 at 4:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”353752″]Paul, and many others, would really like the shirt of “Woot Shirt” today:

    http://shirt.woot.co...

    Not sure what they mean by “Michigan” dog. it looks like it is just mustard. You would think they would label it “Detroit” and have a coney dog as an illustration.

    mmm…Detroit coney dog…

  • Jim Bullard | October 12, 2009 at 4:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”353756″][quote comment=”353753″]Ok, got a question that can only be answered by fellow Uni-Watchers.

    I’m a big OKC Thunder fan, but I’m not a big fan of either their uniforms or the prices charged for their uniforms. I bought a 10 game ticket package this year, so I’ll be live rooting the Thunder on a lot this season.

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    Thanks everybody, can’t wait for what everyone thinks.[/quote]

    College jersey = Okay

    High School jersey = Lame-O[/quote]

    College Jersey isn’t an option. Can’t wear a Longhorns jersey in Sooner Country.

  • rhdii | October 12, 2009 at 4:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”353747″][quote comment=”353639″]It’s not that they shouldn’t wear a Dallas Texans uniform, it’s a “they shouldn’t wear a Dallas logo while playing against a team from Dallas”. The Cowboys shouldn’t even be involved in the AFL promotion at all, and the Chiefs could have easily worn their Texans helmets against Denver and San Diego instead.[/quote]

    So….the fact that the Cowboys and Texans/Chiefs have an intertwined history, and that the very existence of the Cowboys is likely the reason there have even BEEN Kansas City Chiefs since 1963, which is one of the obvious reasons for the success of the very AFL that these things celebrate, is completely lost on you, then?[/quote]

    Yeah, I’m not sure I understand the controversy. I’m a Texas Rangers fan (which is punishment enough) and it wouldn’t bother me for them to wear Senators’ gear in a game with the Nationals. That’s part of the history of the franchise.

    Likewise I would LOVE to see the Dallas Stars playing the Wild wearing old North Stars uniforms.

  • Oakville Endive | October 12, 2009 at 4:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”353747″][quote comment=”353639″]It’s not that they shouldn’t wear a Dallas Texans uniform, it’s a “they shouldn’t wear a Dallas logo while playing against a team from Dallas”. The Cowboys shouldn’t even be involved in the AFL promotion at all, and the Chiefs could have easily worn their Texans helmets against Denver and San Diego instead.[/quote]

    So….the fact that the Cowboys and Texans/Chiefs have an intertwined history, and that the very existence of the Cowboys is likely the reason there have even BEEN Kansas City Chiefs since 1963, which is one of the obvious reasons for the success of the very AFL that these things celebrate, is completely lost on you, then?[/quote]

    If you’re going to do it, do it in Dallas, do not have Kansas City fans watching Dallas vs. Dallas.

  • JimV19 | October 12, 2009 at 5:24 pm |

    So, do you eat turkey on Canadian Thanksgiving, or something else?

    And would you have been more grateful if the Stamps and Als went throwback today? http://images.tsn.ca...
    Too bad the band and the official are the best looking people in this picture. The thing is, with some minor tweaks (red pants with Calgary, white numbers with Montreal), you’d have something there.

    Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving!

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 5:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”353757″][quote comment=”353748″][quote comment=”353736″]
    West Coast series tend to mean something of a ratings dip, don’t they? Especially a one-market one like the Earthquake series in ’89.[/quote]

    Greater LA is somewhere between 2-3 times bigger than the SF Bay Area market. I’m sure they’d love the Yankees in there, but LA vs. LA is probably the next best matchup (ratings-wise) out of the remaining possibles (ones that don’t include NYC).[/quote]

    I imagine their thinking is—and rightly so—that they’ll do fine the LA market if either Angels or Dodgers get in. That is to say their numbers won’t double in LA if it’s Angels-Dodgers. And whatever increase they would get would be offset by overall losses in the east. So, other than NY, they’d probably prefer Phillies-Angels. Advertisers like to keep at least SOME hold on one market in the east.

    No matter what, they’ll do okay, though.

    Colorwise, of course, Phillies-Angels and Dodgers-Yankees would be the most monchromatic. And Reggie ain’t around to jerk three in one game, either. Although A-Rod or Manny might.

    Sounds like I’m counting Colorado out, doesn’t it. Not so, Rockies fans, was considering only the East Coast element in the equation.

    Although I’d guess Rockies-Angels is likely the least attractive to the network. Based on numbers, geography and weather.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Agreed, the networks would prefer big market versus big market team in the Series, the ratings would be more than a smaller market team involved.
    Problem is, even with an all big market Series, baseball is still getting hammered by football, I found something interesting, which speaks volumes about baseball’s current situation. The 2000 World Series, featuring the Yanks and Mets, was totally destroyed in the TV ratings by the 1991 Minnesota-Atlanta Series. The reality of the situation is that outside of the teams playing in the Series,(and we know the short list), few people are actually watching anymore. Even the most ardent Twins fans knew it would take a miracle to beat the Yanks and then win the pennant. I’d be willing to bet the TV ratings in Minnesota will be low for the Series, and that also speaks volumes about the situation.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 5:42 pm |

    back from a long drive…hasn’t been the best of days, not by a long shot, but i had talk radio (sports) to help me forget about life for a white…

    of course, the host was already assuming the phillies have the fourth playoff spot locked up (i don’t think it’s a given, but that’s another story)…and they were discussing possible WS matchups

    (even uni wise, discounting the rox and assuming the anhels don’t wear the softball tops)…phillies/yanks, phillies/halos; dodgers/yanks and hollywood/bro. love…all uni gold

    as far as the matchups, the host was saying “gee, no one would be upset with anyone of those”

    yeah…i’m real pumped for phillies/yanks…please make that one happen

    gotta think, uni & tradition wise, dodgers-yanks would be the most kick-ass of the four scenarios

  • Christopher | October 12, 2009 at 5:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”353767″]back from a long drive…hasn’t been the best of days, not by a long shot, but i had talk radio (sports) to help me forget about life for a white…

    of course, the host was already assuming the phillies have the fourth playoff spot locked up (i don’t think it’s a given, but that’s another story)…and they were discussing possible WS matchups

    (even uni wise, discounting the rox and assuming the anhels don’t wear the softball tops)…phillies/yanks, phillies/halos; dodgers/yanks and hollywood/bro. love…all uni gold

    as far as the matchups, the host was saying “gee, no one would be upset with anyone of those”

    yeah…i’m real pumped for phillies/yanks…please make that one happen

    gotta think, uni & tradition wise, dodgers-yanks would be the most kick-ass of the four scenarios[/quote]

    I want the Phils to win, they’re my second team. But honestly I really don’t like their unis. Too cartoonish of a font.

    Yanks/Dodgers is obviously the best uni matchup.

  • Jeff P(udlo) | October 12, 2009 at 5:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”353767″]back from a long drive…hasn’t been the best of days, not by a long shot, but i had talk radio (sports) to help me forget about life for a white…

    of course, the host was already assuming the phillies have the fourth playoff spot locked up (i don’t think it’s a given, but that’s another story)…and they were discussing possible WS matchups

    (even uni wise, discounting the rox and assuming the anhels don’t wear the softball tops)…phillies/yanks, phillies/halos; dodgers/yanks and hollywood/bro. love…all uni gold

    as far as the matchups, the host was saying “gee, no one would be upset with anyone of those”

    yeah…i’m real pumped for phillies/yanks…please make that one happen

    gotta think, uni & tradition wise, dodgers-yanks would be the most kick-ass of the four scenarios[/quote]
    I think yanks dodgers has been done a few times though.

    And I’m not sure I really want to hear about Torre versus Giradi every waking hour.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 5:57 pm |

    [quote]I think yanks dodgers has been done a few times though.[/quote]

    and that’s a problem because?

    …seriously, i can think of a billion reasons for that to suck, including having yankee fans in my face for the next six months, and the joes will be beat to death in two seconds…

    but uni wise? it really doesn’t get much better than that

  • JimV19 | October 12, 2009 at 6:03 pm |

    One, because the networks wouldn’t want it, two, becasue it’d be a cool red, white and blue matchup and three, because it’s as close as you’re going to get this year to daytime playoff baseball…go Angels and Dodgers!

  • Dave Zalatoris | October 12, 2009 at 6:13 pm |

    When did Pete Rose become an NFL referee?

    http://cache.boston....

  • Jeff P(udlo) | October 12, 2009 at 6:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”353770″][quote]I think yanks dodgers has been done a few times though.[/quote]

    and that’s a problem because?

    …seriously, i can think of a billion reasons for that to suck, including having yankee fans in my face for the next six months, and the joes will be beat to death in two seconds…

    but uni wise? it really doesn’t get much better than that[/quote]

    Not really a problem per say, but it wouldn’t be as interesting a matchup Uni wise.

    But yeah, the biggest problem would be the Joes and the constant yapping about that. As a yankees fan, I’m fine with that part.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 6:38 pm |

    On ebay, I found several auctions for Kevin Durant’s Oak Hill Academy jersey. The jerseys themselves are way cooler (in my opinion) and much cheaper than if I bought a Thunder swingman jersey.

    Question: Is wearing the high school jersey of your favorite NBA player to games cool or lame?

    If you’re referring to the Oak Hill Academy in Mouth of Wilson, VA then you’d be wearing the jersey of what is basically a professional team anyway.

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 6:41 pm |

    I recall someone on this board saying the Dodgers wore a blue alternate jersey once, is that true? It reminds me of the time Detroit wore a dark alternate jersey in the 1990s.

  • BurghFan | October 12, 2009 at 6:51 pm |

    Dallas Clark is wearing the Xenith helmet…And just to inform Paul and the rest of Uniwatch concerning the vectors: I still didn’t get my replacement home jersey set in…

    Joe,

    I just want to thank you for keeping us informed.

  • BurghFan | October 12, 2009 at 6:56 pm |

    I recall someone on this board saying the Dodgers wore a blue alternate jersey once, is that true?

    They did alts during a “Think Blue” promotion at Dodger Stadium (date unknown), and they wore their BP jerseys at Three Rivers July 20, 1999.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 7:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”353775″]I recall someone on this board saying the Dodgers wore a blue alternate jersey once, is that true? It reminds me of the time Detroit wore a dark alternate jersey in the 1990s.[/quote]

    both the dodgers “think blue” as well as a whole shitload of other “one and dones” were detailed thoroughly by some guy named lukas over on espn

  • jack | October 12, 2009 at 7:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”353657″]The color of those Rams helmets doesn’t seem much different than I remember them using when they wore those great blue/yellow unis. The blue of the helmet always seemed darker than that of the jersey. I hate the Rams, but wish they’d go back to that look.[/quote]

    The Rams’ helmet was darker than the jersey, something that always kind of frustrated me about that uniform. I wish they’d use the current design but jettison the gold in favor of yellow-gold. Or even better, bring back the blue and white scheme of the Fearsome Foursome era.

  • LarryB | October 12, 2009 at 7:16 pm |

    Lot of good tidbits today and lot of good comments. I will now work my way through the column.

    Like it was discussed late yesterday about the Broncos, for me it was not so much if they looked good or bad. The historical part of seeing them in color and HD was nice. There is something about those helmets with just a number on them. Of course in the mid to late 1950’s all the teams had just plain helmets and a single stripe and numbers on the side. So now it is refreshing to see. But if all teams had the helmets like that it would be boring.

    Having not read all the comments yet, Is it possible Denver can wear those again? Or are they going to wear the whites. I had that legacy games schedule someplace.

    Bad thing is I am using an older computer of mine. My newer one might have a power supply problem. The power button is not working.

    And I know many of us save tons of old sports pictures. I hope to get that one fixed. I have so many scanned pics and saved ones.

  • jack | October 12, 2009 at 7:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”353749″]Had the chance to catch the Tennessee Titans postgame press conference, and noticed a logo they should be using on their uniforms. I’m sure it’s not new, but the logo is a big “T” dagger with a circle of stars at the handle. The interesting thing is that there are no silly flames coming out of the dagger, this logo would look better then that flaming thumbtacks currently on the helmet. Put that big “T” dagger sideways on the helmet, and lose the flames, and that would be an improvement. The Titans should also incorporate the dagger onto the rest of the uniform, which needs upgrading anyway. It’s disappointing Tennessee blew this opportunity after they renamed the team.[/quote]

    Tennessee has also, in past several seasons, taken what was a pretty good uniform (dark blue jersey/white pants and vice-versa) and totally butchered that look by wearing all-powder (like they did last night), powder jersey/dark blue pants, and all-dark.

  • mtjaws | October 12, 2009 at 7:34 pm |

    *That Oklahoma guy could wear a Sonics jersey, and be thankful he’s got a team now.

    *The Marlins have had a few doubleheaders due to rainouts, but we never have to bother with day/night! 2 games for the price of 1 here. Otherwise there’d be 4 people at the day game.

    *I could see MLB forcing 2-4 doubleheaders per year, but then the union would want more days off, so you’re back to the same timeframe again.

    *I’m excited to see the Dolphins in orange tonight. Way better than white at home, but not as good as aqua.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 7:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”353779″][quote comment=”353657″]The color of those Rams helmets doesn’t seem much different than I remember them using when they wore those great blue/yellow unis. The blue of the helmet always seemed darker than that of the jersey. I hate the Rams, but wish they’d go back to that look.[/quote]

    The Rams’ helmet was darker than the jersey, something that always kind of frustrated me about that uniform. I wish they’d use the current design but jettison the gold in favor of yellow-gold. Or even better, bring back the blue and white scheme of the Fearsome Foursome era.[/quote]

    Virtually always the case back then when it came to teams that wore royal blue. Rams (in the blue & white years, too), Giants, Chargers, even the Montreal Alouettes (with their Pepsi unis). I posted some photos over the weekend (Sat. night, maybe?). In the Al’s photo, their helmets are the same color as their opponent, Toronto, who wears navy.

    In fact, if you compare photos from those years, all those teams’ blue helmets are the same color as the Bears’.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 7:48 pm |

    Oh, and the original “Fearsome Foursome” was the SD Chargers’ defensive line of Ernie Ladd, Earl Faison, Bill Hudson and Ron Nery.

    You can look it up.
    http://www.conigliof...
    http://en.wikipedia....(football)
    http://www.economice...

    I remember it being applied to them first, and later when it was attached to the Rams’ group, thinking, “Hey, that’s the Charger guys’ nickname.”

    —Ricko

  • Teebz | October 12, 2009 at 7:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”353719″]As many know, the baseball season is only 162 games long because once upon a time the AL had ten teams not divided into divisions and they played each other 18 times a year (9 home/9 away). 18 games x 9 opponents = 162. It made a lot of sense. With today’s unbalanced schedule it no longer makes any sense. I can only imagine MLB remains wedded to the 162 figure out of a desire to keep statistical records comparable between eras (as if!).
    I don’t see why we can’t go back to the old 154-game schedule. It’s an equally arbitrary number & it would save a couple of weeks.[/quote]

    Or roll it forward a few weeks. Snow in Cleveland says so. And the Toronto Blue Jays opened their inaugural season in 1977 against the White Sox in the snow.

  • leon | October 12, 2009 at 7:52 pm |

    I’m sure it’s not new, but the logo is a big “T” dagger with a circle of stars at the handle.

    As any student of mythology will recognize, that dagger was the weapon of choice of the Titans; and since Nashville has a copy of the Parthenon, it makes perfect sense that this icon would become part of their uniform. (Luckily they didn’t relo to Memphis, which has a pyramid).

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 8:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”353786″]I’m sure it’s not new, but the logo is a big “T” dagger with a circle of stars at the handle.

    As any student of mythology will recognize, that dagger was the weapon of choice of the Titans; and since Nashville has a copy of the Parthenon, it makes perfect sense that this icon would become part of their uniform. (Luckily they didn’t relo to Memphis, which has a pyramid).[/quote]

    Thanks for the background info, what’s confusing is why Tennessee did not take advantage of this version of their logo. The existing thumbtack with flames does not look like a dagger at all, and many people still wonder what the hell Titans has to do with Tennessee. By using the dagger version of the logo, and by placing it on the helmet sideways and the jersey or pants, it would improve everything. The uniform, and people would be able to identify what the logo actually is.

  • Giancarlo | October 12, 2009 at 8:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”353783″]

    Virtually always the case back then when it came to teams that wore royal blue. Rams (in the blue & white years, too), Giants, Chargers, even the Montreal Alouettes (with their Pepsi unis). I posted some photos over the weekend (Sat. night, maybe?). In the Al’s photo, their helmets are the same color as their opponent, Toronto, who wears navy.

    In fact, if you compare photos from those years, all those teams’ blue helmets are the same color as the Bears’.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    That’s amazing if true. But, as you alluded to on Saturday, the Broncos of the Orange Crush era were able to come up with a royal blue helmet, so I wonder why those other teams could not do so. Is it that the royal was a slightly different royal than the color of royal jerseys & they clashed in a weird way?

  • scott | October 12, 2009 at 8:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”353766″]
    Agreed, the networks would prefer big market versus big market team in the Series, the ratings would be more than a smaller market team involved.
    Problem is, even with an all big market Series, baseball is still getting hammered by football, I found something interesting, which speaks volumes about baseball’s current situation. The 2000 World Series, featuring the Yanks and Mets, was totally destroyed in the TV ratings by the 1991 Minnesota-Atlanta Series. [/quote]

    That’s comparing apples and oranges. TV’s biggest shows of today also fare poorly in ratings when compared to TV shows of 30 or 40 years ago. What’s more important to the powers that be is revenue, and baseball more than holds its own against football, and against its own past.

  • Giancarlo | October 12, 2009 at 8:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”353785″]
    Or roll it forward a few weeks. Snow in Cleveland says so. And the Toronto Blue Jays opened their inaugural season in 1977 against the White Sox in the snow.[/quote]
    Yeah, that’s a good reminder that there can be a weather problem at the beginning of the season, too. And that’s why I’d prefer to have the season shorter on both ends, even if means fewer games. Without having a financial stake in the matter, I’m forced to resort to the overly sensible solution.

  • Big Tring | October 12, 2009 at 8:32 pm |

    Don’t know if anyone already mentioned this, but Tully Banta-Cain of the Patriots wore the Pats Throwback socks on his arms as half sleeves. I thought it looked pretty good. Just more sock news out of Denver…

    http://www.apimages....

  • Dave | October 12, 2009 at 8:40 pm |

    Boy, do the Dolphins look sharp. I gotta admit, I’m a huge fan of the orange tops. They’ve always been one of my biggest uniform guilty pleasures.

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 8:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”353789″][quote comment=”353766″]
    Agreed, the networks would prefer big market versus big market team in the Series, the ratings would be more than a smaller market team involved.
    Problem is, even with an all big market Series, baseball is still getting hammered by football, I found something interesting, which speaks volumes about baseball’s current situation. The 2000 World Series, featuring the Yanks and Mets, was totally destroyed in the TV ratings by the 1991 Minnesota-Atlanta Series. [/quote]

    That’s comparing apples and oranges. TV’s biggest shows of today also fare poorly in ratings when compared to TV shows of 30 or 40 years ago. What’s more important to the powers that be is revenue, and baseball more than holds its own against football, and against its own past.[/quote]

    Remember, I was only talking about a difference of nine years, not 30-40 years. Even factoring in more cable channels and the increased popularity of the internet can’t explain away the gigantic advantage in viewers of the 1991 Series with one small market team.
    Another sign of the bad situation facing baseball is the fact a third rate network like TBS with the horrible Chip Carey doing playoff baseball. You’ll never see NFL playoff games on TBS, because football is now the national pastime, not baseball.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 8:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”353788″][quote comment=”353783″]

    Virtually always the case back then when it came to teams that wore royal blue. Rams (in the blue & white years, too), Giants, Chargers, even the Montreal Alouettes (with their Pepsi unis). I posted some photos over the weekend (Sat. night, maybe?). In the Al’s photo, their helmets are the same color as their opponent, Toronto, who wears navy.

    In fact, if you compare photos from those years, all those teams’ blue helmets are the same color as the Bears’.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    That’s amazing if true. But, as you alluded to on Saturday, the Broncos of the Orange Crush era were able to come up with a royal blue helmet, so I wonder why those other teams could not do so. Is it that the royal was a slightly different royal than the color of royal jerseys & they clashed in a weird way?[/quote]

    Oh, it’s true. I noticed as a kid, and I remember seeing that Bronco helmet and wondering if royal was actually possible, why those other teams couldn’t do it.

    This photo shows an obvious difference, as late as the early 1980’s…
    http://www.ibnsports...
    Here’s what it would look like if helmet WERE (the artist didn’t notice the difference in the reality of things)…
    http://www.sportspos...
    and the real thing…
    http://www.nfljersey...
    See, helmet is same color here…
    http://assets.sbnati...
    Another shot of Fouts in royal jersey and navy helmet.
    http://www.gasolinea...

    See…navy…
    http://www.instantre...
    Royal jersey, navy helmet…
    http://a.espncdn.com...
    Ditto…
    http://www.tropiccom...
    again…
    http://assets.espn.g...

    Rams…
    http://www.ramsusa.c...
    Dickerson again…
    http://i.cdn.turner....

    Bears vs. Giants. Not much difference…
    http://imagecache5.a...

    Anyway, helmets certainly were darker than the royal jerseys they were supposed to match.

    —Ricko

  • Rick | October 12, 2009 at 8:50 pm |

    Best ratings for tv this year will be Yankees v any NL team. Without them, it’s like watching the Masters without Tiger.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 9:08 pm |

    We also talked about Kansas’ helmets over the weekend, and about use of the Jayhawk logo.
    Here’s Gayle Sayers in’62, first year at Kansas, still in hightops and powder blue pants and helmets. Note the Jayhawk logo on the helmet.
    http://farm3.static....
    Here’s 1963 (junior year) after they went to darker blue and white pants…still with the Jayhawk (scroll down a bit and click on photo)…
    http://www.nytstore....
    But, by his senior season in ’64 was “KU”…
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 9:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”353792″]Boy, do the Dolphins look sharp. I gotta admit, I’m a huge fan of the orange tops. They’ve always been one of my biggest uniform guilty pleasures.[/quote]
    Not a guilty pleasure for me. I will scream it from the rooftops. I love orange jerseys on the Dolphins. I love them on the Browns. I love them on the Bears. Hell, I even love to see the Giants in red.

    Do I want to see them worn every week? Hell, no. I like to see them ONCE A YEAR.

    Orange on the Broncos should be a weekly occurrence. They need to lose the navy jerseys. Bengals? I’d like to see them go with orange as their primary and the black as their alt.

  • Dave | October 12, 2009 at 9:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”353797″][quote comment=”353792″]Boy, do the Dolphins look sharp. I gotta admit, I’m a huge fan of the orange tops. They’ve always been one of my biggest uniform guilty pleasures.[/quote]
    Not a guilty pleasure for me. I will scream it from the rooftops. I love orange jerseys on the Dolphins. I love them on the Browns. I love them on the Bears. Hell, I even love to see the Giants in red.

    Do I want to see them worn every week? Hell, no. I like to see them ONCE A YEAR.

    Orange on the Broncos should be a weekly occurrence. They need to lose the navy jerseys. Bengals? I’d like to see them go with orange as their primary and the black as their alt.[/quote]

    Thats the other uni I was looking for, Broncos in orange, I love those too.

    However, I gotta disagree with you about orange on the Bears and red on the Giants. I think orange on the Bears would look ok maybe once a year, but the Giants should never wear solid red.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 9:24 pm |

    im one who loves the color orange, and is not a fan of teal…that being said, i just don’t like this look for the fish…oh, once a season is kinda cool, but there’s something not quite right about it…maybe the teal dropshadow?

    also NOT a fan of the jets in green pants, but thankfully, they wear white socks so it’s not a terrible look…unfortunately, too many players are wearing bicycle shorts, and white socks coming up over the knee is just not a good look

    im with james on the broncos…they should wear orange as their primary and relegate the blue to alt status…

    and man…if they would just ditch the nike swoosh panels and get semi-normal stripage…that becomes a damn-near top 5 uni in the NFL

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 9:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”353796″]We also talked about Kansas’ helmets over the weekend, and about use of the Jayhawk logo.
    Here’s Gayle Sayers in’62, first year at Kansas, still in hightops and powder blue pants and helmets. Note the Jayhawk logo on the helmet.
    http://farm3.static....
    Here’s 1963 (junior year) after they went to darker blue and white pants…still with the Jayhawk (scroll down a bit and click on photo)…
    http://www.nytstore....
    But, by his senior season in ’64 was “KU”…
    http://farm3.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I just noticed something else. If you enlarge that first photo, you can see that they used the same decal on both sides of the helmet. The Jayhawk is walking toward the back of the helmet, not the way you’d prefer it.

    In the second photo (showing other side of helmet) it’s walking toward the front.

    —Ricko

  • JohnnyO | October 12, 2009 at 9:24 pm |

    I was going through some old photos on photo bucket, and I came across this great pic. of Wisconsin in their “one and done” uniforms. They wore these for one game in the early 90’s against Colorado, got spanked, and never wore them again. If you want to see a jersey up close, you can go to Wando’s downtown Madison, and head to the 2nd floor in the bar, and see a framed one. Be sure to have a fishbowl while you are there.

    http://s147.photobuc...

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 9:27 pm |
  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 9:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”353799″]im one who loves the color orange, and is not a fan of teal…that being said, i just don’t like this look for the fish…oh, once a season is kinda cool, but there’s something not quite right about it…maybe the teal dropshadow?

    also NOT a fan of the jets in green pants, but thankfully, they wear white socks so it’s not a terrible look…unfortunately, too many players are wearing bicycle shorts, and white socks coming up over the knee is just not a good look

    im with james on the broncos…they should wear orange as their primary and relegate the blue to alt status…

    and man…if they would just ditch the nike swoosh panels and get semi-normal stripage…that becomes a damn-near top 5 uni in the NFL[/quote]

    Still need white numbers, though. They just plain show up better (see the photos you mocked up, the Dolphins on TV right now…or Texas or Oklahoma State…or…just about anyone who’s ever worn orange jerseys….for football, that is, Orioles or SF Giants don’t count, not as difficult to ID players in baseball, very few big piles of people crashing into each other and falling down, for example)

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 9:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”353801″]I was going through some old photos on photo bucket, and I came across this great pic. of Wisconsin in their “one and done” uniforms. They wore these for one game in the early 90’s against Colorado, got spanked, and never wore them again. If you want to see a jersey up close, you can go to Wando’s downtown Madison, and head to the 2nd floor in the bar, and see a framed one. Be sure to have a fishbowl while you are there.

    http://s147.photobuc...

    Same era as Iowa’s yellow feathers, yes?

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 9:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”353799″]im one who loves the color orange, and is not a fan of teal…that being said, i just don’t like this look for the fish…oh, once a season is kinda cool, but there’s something not quite right about it…maybe the teal dropshadow?[/quote]
    Dropshadow definitely detracts.
    [quote]also NOT a fan of the jets in green pants, but thankfully, they wear white socks so it’s not a terrible look…unfortunately, too many players are wearing bicycle shorts, and white socks coming up over the knee is just not a good look
    [/quote]
    Normally I’m not a fan of white-helmeted teams wearing dark pants, but I can kinda dig it on the Jets because they match the sleeves. The stripéd socks help, too. But they really should stick with the white pants.
    [quote]
    im with james on the broncos…they should wear orange as their primary and relegate the blue to alt status…

    and man…if they would just ditch the nike swoosh panels and get semi-normal stripage…that becomes a damn-near top 5 uni in the NFL[/quote]
    No navy alt. Go throwback for the permanent alt. (Either Orange Crush era or early AFL.)

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 9:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”353801″]I was going through some old photos on photo bucket, and I came across this great pic. of Wisconsin in their “one and done” uniforms. They wore these for one game in the early 90’s against Colorado, got spanked, and never wore them again. If you want to see a jersey up close, you can go to Wando’s downtown Madison, and head to the 2nd floor in the bar, and see a framed one. Be sure to have a fishbowl while you are there.

    http://s147.photobuc...

    Darrell Bevell? What’s he up to these days? ;)

  • Giancarlo | October 12, 2009 at 9:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”353794″]
    Anyway, helmets certainly were darker than the royal jerseys they were supposed to match.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Oh, no doubt about that – I always noticed it too. The amazing part to me is that those helmets were as dark as the Bears’ lids, which have always appeared nearly black. Maybe it’s a psychological effect of the eye seeing those navy helmets as more royal than they really are when paired with royal jerseys.

  • JohnnyO | October 12, 2009 at 9:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”353806″][quote comment=”353801″]I was going through some old photos on photo bucket, and I came across this great pic. of Wisconsin in their “one and done” uniforms. They wore these for one game in the early 90’s against Colorado, got spanked, and never wore them again. If you want to see a jersey up close, you can go to Wando’s downtown Madison, and head to the 2nd floor in the bar, and see a framed one. Be sure to have a fishbowl while you are there.

    http://s147.photobuc...

    Darrell Bevell? What’s he up to these days? ;)[/quote]

    The game was September 2nd 1995. Sorry for not getting the exact date in the original post.

    Ricko… I still can’t believe Darrell Bevell is the Offensive Coordinator for the Minnesota Vikings. I keep forgetting he was with the Packers from 2000-2005 as offensive assistant and QB’s coach.

  • Casey (Davis, CA) | October 12, 2009 at 9:58 pm |

    Hmmm…the Reebok logos on Miami’s orange unis are ghosted, much like the NY Giants’ logos…

    http://www.gettyimag...

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:03 pm |

    “Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:10 pm |

    Ah-ha, thought so. Just checked. Colts’ Austin Collie is the son of Scott Collie, a wide receiver at BYU during their pass-happy years and then with the Hamilton Tiger-Cats.

    Per our discussions of WR numbers, remember Scott was #3 at BYU and #25 with Hamilton.

    —Ricko

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 10:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”353810″]”Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants? I think it would look better than what we see tonight.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:17 pm |

    One more navy helmet with royal.
    Quite a difference between the helmet and the shoulder panel…
    http://farm4.static....

    —Ricko

  • =bg= | October 12, 2009 at 10:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”353797″][quote comment=”353792″]Boy, do the Dolphins look sharp. I gotta admit, I’m a huge fan of the orange tops. They’ve always been one of my biggest uniform guilty pleasures.[/quote]
    Not a guilty pleasure for me. I will scream it from the rooftops. I love orange jerseys on the Dolphins. I love them on the Browns. I love them on the Bears. Hell, I even love to see the Giants in red.

    Do I want to see them worn every week? Hell, no. I like to see them ONCE A YEAR.

    Orange on the Broncos should be a weekly occurrence. They need to lose the navy jerseys. Bengals? I’d like to see them go with orange as their primary and the black as their alt.[/quote]

    Like those oranges on the Dolphs, no doubt.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”353798″][quote comment=”353797″][quote comment=”353792″]Boy, do the Dolphins look sharp. I gotta admit, I’m a huge fan of the orange tops. They’ve always been one of my biggest uniform guilty pleasures.[/quote]
    Not a guilty pleasure for me. I will scream it from the rooftops. I love orange jerseys on the Dolphins. I love them on the Browns. I love them on the Bears. Hell, I even love to see the Giants in red.

    Do I want to see them worn every week? Hell, no. I like to see them ONCE A YEAR.

    Orange on the Broncos should be a weekly occurrence. They need to lose the navy jerseys. Bengals? I’d like to see them go with orange as their primary and the black as their alt.[/quote]

    Thats the other uni I was looking for, Broncos in orange, I love those too.

    However, I gotta disagree with you about orange on the Bears and red on the Giants. I think orange on the Bears would look ok maybe once a year, but the Giants should never wear solid red.[/quote]

    Giants wore red at home in early 50’s, so is kinda part of the throwback platform of their current set. So is the logical alt…if they simply MUST have an alt.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:27 pm |

    “What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants?”

    Sounds like something Florida A&M would do.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 10:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”353812″][quote comment=”353810″]”Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants? I think it would look better than what we see tonight.[/quote]

    really?

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:33 pm |

    Mostly, Dolphins should go back to white shoes.
    Just suits the look, and the city they play in.

    (Neither black nor white shoes are inherently good or evil…depends on the uni and city/school)

  • Graf Zeppelin | October 12, 2009 at 10:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”353616″][quote comment=”353612″]So, in light of the Chiefs helmet streak being broken… exactly why the heck didn’t they wear a Texans helmet in 1994? I could have sworn they did, but apparently my memory is faulty. That makes them almost as lame as the Jets & Bills of that season.[/quote]

    The 1994 throwbacks celebrated the NFL’s 75th anniversary, so it wouldn’t have made sense for a team to have worn an AFL throwback that was never worn in the NFL. I don’t know for a fact that that’s the thinking behind it, but it seems like a logical line of thought.[/quote]

    The Broncos did. So did the Oilers. The Raiders’ white-shield helmet decal was also worn only in the AFL.

    What no team did in ’94 was throw back to a different nickname, and only the Cardinals, Raiders and Colts threw back to a different city. (You could argue that the Patriots did so as well, “Boston” as opposed to “New England”.) As of 1994, these were the only teams to have relocated since the AFL-NFL merger, and no franchise other than the Chiefs and Jets had used a different nickname in the modern era.

    Of course, since 1994, we’ve had both L.A. teams move, the Browns became the Ravens (but left the name & history behind), the Oilers became the Titans and were replaced by the Texans, thus resurrecting both of the abandoned original AFL nicknames, plus we’ve had the rebirth of the Browns and the Seahawks changing conferences.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”353818″][quote comment=”353812″][quote comment=”353810″]”Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants? I think it would look better than what we see tonight.[/quote]

    really?[/quote]

    Kinda same general look as Orlando Rage in XFL. White helmet, red jersey, royal pants. That sucked, too.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 10:37 pm |

    oops…fucked up the fish

    need orange socks

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”353823″]oops…fucked up the fish

    need orange socks[/quote]

    Good. Even more like Orlando Rage. They wore red-topped socks. LOL

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:40 pm |

    Always though Rage should have worn brown helmets. Woulda looked like the frickin’ Mounties.

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 10:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”353822″][quote comment=”353818″][quote comment=”353812″][quote comment=”353810″]”Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants? I think it would look better than what we see tonight.[/quote]

    really?[/quote]

    Kinda same general look as Orlando Rage in XFL. White helmet, red jersey, royal pants. That sucked, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I think it looks pretty good, with the traditional striping, that’s the difference between that look and Florida A&M. Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 10:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”353826″][quote comment=”353822″][quote comment=”353818″][quote comment=”353812″][quote comment=”353810″]”Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants? I think it would look better than what we see tonight.[/quote]

    really?[/quote]

    Kinda same general look as Orlando Rage in XFL. White helmet, red jersey, royal pants. That sucked, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I think it looks pretty good, with the traditional striping, that’s the difference between that look and Florida A&M. Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    Yeah, if we think the XFL really knew how football teams should dress.

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 10:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”353825″]Always though Rage should have worn brown helmets. Woulda looked like the frickin’ Mounties.[/quote]
    Jacques Rougeau’s greatest gimmick.

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 11:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”353827″][quote comment=”353826″][quote comment=”353822″][quote comment=”353818″][quote comment=”353812″][quote comment=”353810″]”Dropshadow definitely detracts.”

    It’s there on the aquas, though (not teal, teal is, technically, darker). So, they just did some color rearranging. In that respect, points for being a buy-the-book “alt”, I suppose.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    What about if Miami wore the orange jerseys with the aqua pants? I think it would look better than what we see tonight.[/quote]

    really?[/quote]

    Kinda same general look as Orlando Rage in XFL. White helmet, red jersey, royal pants. That sucked, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I think it looks pretty good, with the traditional striping, that’s the difference between that look and Florida A&M. Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    Yeah, if we think the XFL really knew how football teams should dress.[/quote]

    I was inspired by the old WFL, especially liked the Florida Blazers red/blue uniform. As you know, several WFL teams had the multi color look.

    Would also like to see New Orleans bring back the gold jersey, and use gold numbers on their white jerseys.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 11:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 11:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”353830″][quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no[/quote]
    Oh, the Giants totally would have finished higher than #7 in the survey if they would just wear red pants.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 11:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”353831″][quote comment=”353830″][quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no[/quote]
    Oh, the Giants totally would have finished higher than #7 in the survey if they would just wear red pants.[/quote]

    i got your #7 right here

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 11:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”353831″][quote comment=”353830″][quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no[/quote]
    Oh, the Giants totally would have finished higher than #7 in the survey if they would just wear red pants.[/quote]

    Eh, take the swoosh off the jersey and change the pants to a regular wide stripe, and it’s not that bad. I mean really – navy helmet, navy jersey, orange pants – not that different from a certain black helmet, black jersey, yellow/gold pants team.

    The Giants don’t need red pants though, fool. The Giants need blue pants, with their red jersey.

    Something like this: http://www.wfl1974.c...

  • Gusto44 | October 12, 2009 at 11:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”353832″][quote comment=”353831″][quote comment=”353830″][quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no[/quote]
    Oh, the Giants totally would have finished higher than #7 in the survey if they would just wear red pants.[/quote]

    i got your #7 right here[/quote]

    Yes, Yes, Yes!

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 11:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”353832″][quote comment=”353831″][quote comment=”353830″][quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no[/quote]
    Oh, the Giants totally would have finished higher than #7 in the survey if they would just wear red pants.[/quote]

    i got your #7 right here[/quote]
    That is fucking horrifying.

  • Ricko | October 12, 2009 at 11:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”353834″][quote comment=”353832″][quote comment=”353831″][quote comment=”353830″][quote comment=”353827″]Always have liked the multi color look in uniform styles, I’d like to see Denver try a blue jersey with orange pants as well.[/quote]

    um…no[/quote]
    Oh, the Giants totally would have finished higher than #7 in the survey if they would just wear red pants.[/quote]

    i got your #7 right here[/quote]

    Yes, Yes, Yes![/quote]

    What’s scary is that the Texans actually could do that (well, jersey would be navy, of course).

    Better yet, wear the red jersey with those pants and change the name to the New York Cannonballs.
    http://farm4.static....

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 11:21 pm |
  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 11:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”353837″]wanna puke?[/quote]

    Funny, the orange jersey/navy pants is the combination I usually use for them in Madden. No puking here.

  • LI Phil | October 12, 2009 at 11:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”353836″]What’s scary is that the Texans actually could do that (well, jersey would be navy, of course).

    Better yet, wear the red jersey with those pants and change the name to the New York Cannonballs.
    http://farm4.static....

    —Ricko[/quote]

    let the texans, with no history, do it…

    in fact, i could dress them in 12 different outfits, none of which would be monocchrome or leotard

    1-6

    7-12

    give them white striped socks to throw into the mix…let them have fun

  • JTH | October 12, 2009 at 11:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”353838″][quote comment=”353837″]wanna puke?[/quote]

    Funny, the orange jersey/navy pants is the combination I usually use for them in Madden. No puking here.[/quote]
    I just hope this didn’t give them any ideas for when they trot out their alts the day after Halloween.

  • john sullivan | October 12, 2009 at 11:43 pm |

    Is it my imagination (or color blindness), but didn’t the Broncos throwbacks (which I kind of dug, vertical-striped socks and all) sport black-and-white helmets, as opposed to the brown-and-mustard yellow scheme? If so, I suspect only black or white helmets were available (or affordable) to the AFL 50 years ago. At any rate, this mismatching of color just makes the Broncos throwbacks even more kick-ass! (At least my Pates looked swell in the Steve Grogan-era all-whites w/Pat Patriot logo, albeit in defeat.)

  • mtjaws | October 12, 2009 at 11:49 pm |

    yay, Dolphins win. Still undefeated in their orange jerseys.

  • The Jeff | October 12, 2009 at 11:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”353841″]Is it my imagination (or color blindness), but didn’t the Broncos throwbacks (which I kind of dug, vertical-striped socks and all) sport black-and-white helmets, as opposed to the brown-and-mustard yellow scheme? If so, I suspect only black or white helmets were available (or affordable) to the AFL 50 years ago. At any rate, this mismatching of color just makes the Broncos throwbacks even more kick-ass! (At least my Pates looked swell in the Steve Grogan-era all-whites w/Pat Patriot logo, albeit in defeat.)[/quote]

    ….no

    The helmets were brown & white. Why white stripe instead of yellow, who knows.

    I’m not even sure what heck you’re talking about with that black or white thing. The AFL of 1960 had 2 white helmets and 1 black, as well as navy, powder blue, silver, red and brown. No shortage of colors available.

  • Kurt Allen | October 13, 2009 at 12:08 am |

    I tried the orange tops/aqua pants w/the Dolphins in Madden, I didn’t mind it. Also put the Raiders in alternate silver tops (never worn for real) – also played the Packers in 2K5 in alternate gold, which isn’t even sold on a retail basis anymore…

  • Chuck | October 13, 2009 at 12:18 am |

    [quote comment=”353746″]Hey Paul with your profound love of all things meat, you should check out this “bakery”!!

    http://www.themeatlo...

    I saw this place mentioned on the Travel Channel and I thought of you Paul, the owner said: “most places have salad bars, we have french fry bars.” LOL! http://www.heartatta...

  • iLO | October 13, 2009 at 9:58 am |

    Seems like football pants are creeping up higher on players. They’re abandoning their knee and thigh pads for less compression i guess. Sooner or later they’re gonna wear boyshorts along with their tank top jerseys (Amani Toomer style). I always see it with Ronnie Brown too. I’ve taken a helmet shot to the knee, or acutally my knee impacted a player while he was on the ground and I always wondered how bad that would have stung if i didn’t have my knee pads in place.

    By the Way…Does anyone think the 80s were significant enough to have a year dedicated to them?

  • JimV19 | October 13, 2009 at 11:33 am |

    [quote comment=”353878″]By the Way…Does anyone think the 80s were significant enough to have a year dedicated to them?[/quote]

    YES!

  • Mark W | October 13, 2009 at 2:12 pm |

    As a full season ticket holder, a day/night double header is a hassle. What can I do for the few hours in between? Go home. Change my shirt and head back out for game 2. Ugh.

    MLB should fund – out of their central resources – a retractable dome for every stadium where whether in April and October is a factor.

    And regarding the Flap Caps – why don’t they sell them for every team in the north? I’d buy a Nats Flap Cap.

  • gak | October 13, 2009 at 2:34 pm |

    Finally got my Bronco vertical socks in the mail (redirected via New York to Vancouver since the Broncos store can’t ship to Canada). Man, they are thick…