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

Somewhere, Patrick Ewing Is Smiling (or maybe just taking a nap, whatever)

suns.jpg

Here’s something I forgot to mention in last Friday’s NBA entry: Players in Saturday’s Suns/Warriors preseason game, which was played outdoors, had official permission to wear long undersleeves — an NBA first. It’s not yet clear if this will lead to sleeves being worn for indoor and/or regular season games, but it’s definitely something that’s being discussed. Personally, I have no problem with it. Hell, put some stripes or patterns on those sleeves and you might even end up with basketball uniforms that aren’t a total joke.

Or, more likely, you might make a bad situation worse. But hey, nothing ventured…

New ESPN column today — look here. Paul

Sponsor Shout-Out: As some of you may already have discovered, the folks at Pennant Race Gear (whose ad appears in the right-hand rail) are running an interesting contest-driven promotion — check it out.

Uni Watch News Ticker: New hoops uniforms for Alabama, UNLV, Miami Ohio, and Grand Canyon, plus Washington appears to have added a seriously ugly black alternate. … New throwback hockey jersey for the University of Denver. … So did Jerry Koosman give tax advice to Ron Darling or what? … According to our “White at Home in the NFL” page, the Raiders had never worn white at home until last week. But now Erin Haight has found a photo of Oakland wearing white at home in a 1967 preseason game. “I was not aware of that,” says jersey scholar Timmy Brulia. “I won’t add this to the white-at-home log, since it was a preseason game, but it’s interesting to note that at least one other AFL team, the Oilers, wore white at home for their preseason games in 1968 and 1969 at the Astrodome. To my knowledge — and I think I can say this with a pretty good degree of certainty — no AFL regular or postseason game ever featured a team wearing white at home.” … Great to see so many old baseball sweaters gathered in one place (thanks Kirsten). … Fun analysis of mascots here (with thanks to Jason Hillyer). … OK, so we all know NFL players now wear tights, and/or leg warmers, and/or socks sewn into the cuffs of their pants, and/or anything other than a standard pair of socks. But Reggie Wayne was really pushing it on Monday night. … Ricko, who knows I’m a Niners fan, sent me a bunch of interesting stuff from his files, including an SI item about the team’s equipment manager and some 1960s shots that show how the team was sometimes wearing silver pants with silver helmets and silver pants with gold helmets before finally settling on gold/gold in 1969. But wait, here’s a 1970s card that appears to show silver pants, although I don’t put much stock in a Topps card photo from that era. … Semi-decent view of the Browns’ 1999 “inaugural” patch here. … Man, the Devils wore some huge-ass helmet numbers in the late ’90s. Those screen shots come from this video clip (good find by Tomas Abrate). … The Canadiens’ centennial throwback schedule is up (with thanks to John Muir). … Ooh, check out Robert Marshall‘s latest bobblehead video. … Fifteen-year timeline of photographic timeline of Presidents Cups here. … Good little article about Brad May getting his preferred uni number here (with thanks to Alyssa Miller). … Another new mask for Carey Price (with thanks to Casey B). … Hey, you know that amazing 1927 Tigers uniform? Here it is being worn in 1928 spring training, except for that one guy in the back row (amazing find by Bruce Menard). … The Blazers wore their Rip City jerseys last night, and Scott Little took a bunch of pics. “The game was at the Memorial Coliseum — a pretty cool old little arena,” he writes. “Steve Blake was wearing some shoes that I didn’t recognize, got a couple pics of those too.” … WVU will reportedly wear gold jerseys and white pants against Marshall this weekend (thanks, Kek). … Bizarre eBay find here. Never seen sleeves like that on a baseball jersey before. Judging by the patch placement and the straight hem, it was meant to be worn untucked, which makes me wonder if it was a women’s softball jersey. But the buttons are on the right, which is the men’s button format. Hmmmm. And man, that “Cadets” sleeve patch is the best! Great, great find (big thanks to Gabe Butler).

 

238 comments to Somewhere, Patrick Ewing Is Smiling (or maybe just taking a nap, whatever)

  • bigo | October 15, 2009 at 8:29 am |

    Paul

    Your lead topic is same in the ticker. (second topic in ticker.

  • War Damn Eagle | October 15, 2009 at 8:38 am |

    Those Bammer jerseys have a Wal-Mart quality to them. Definitely a step back from the retro look they had last year.

  • Paul Lukas | October 15, 2009 at 8:38 am |

    [quote comment=”354343″]Paul

    Your lead topic is same in the ticker. (second topic in ticker.[/quote]

    Ooops — forgot. Now fixed. Thanks!

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 8:45 am |

    re: frederick cadets baseball uni

    that sure looks like a basketball warmup…not sayin it is, just looks like it

    perhaps the item is mislabled?

  • Steve | October 15, 2009 at 8:45 am |

    The Raiders wore white at home on opening night against the chargers for monday night football.

  • Joe D | October 15, 2009 at 8:49 am |

    I have a hunch USF will wear their white helmets again tonight against Cincinnati.

  • Sport | October 15, 2009 at 8:50 am |

    Another Mountaineer team with gold:

    Appalachian State wore gold jerseys last Saturday.

    http://www2.journaln...

  • ScottyM | October 15, 2009 at 9:08 am |

    You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity!

  • Juke Early | October 15, 2009 at 9:10 am |

    That’s supposed to be a Tiger head on the Detroit 27-28 unis? looks more like a studio still from Lon Chaney’s [Sr.] original Wolfman.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 9:20 am |

    Christ, LI
    I just caught myself about to post a question I can obviously answer by asking our friend. (Should I be salivating-what’s that ringing?)
    :)

  • Roger Faso | October 15, 2009 at 9:20 am |

    [quote comment=”354347″]The Raiders wore white at home on opening night against the chargers for monday night football.[/quote]

    Kiffin also dressed the Raiders in white, at home, shortly before he was fired.

  • MPowers1634 | October 15, 2009 at 9:23 am |

    Scott Little,

    Your pictures are wonderful especially because your seats at that great place were seemingly very good.

    Count me in as LOVING the Rip City alts.

    As for Blake’s shoes, he was sponsored by AND 1 for years:

    http://www3.pictures...

    http://cache1.asset-...

    however, those don”t seem to be similar to any of their designs.

    I’m thinking that perhaps he signed with a foreign company like Anta:

    http://www.antapeak....

  • Paul Lukas | October 15, 2009 at 9:24 am |

    [quote comment=”354346″]re: frederick cadets baseball uni

    that sure looks like a basketball warmup…not sayin it is, just looks like it

    perhaps the item is mislabled?[/quote]

    Good call — hadn’t thought of that.

  • not osama | October 15, 2009 at 9:30 am |

    Ricko,
    Are you sure those 49ers helmets were silver? I know the 49ers wore plain silver with a red stripe(s) but I believe the helmets with the logo were a very light gold but they were definitely gold.
    Paul,
    Same thing as far as the 49ers pants go, you are correct as Topps cards are notorious for wrong colors, muted colors, etc. I think they are a gold shade as well.

  • MPowers1634 | October 15, 2009 at 9:31 am |

    [quote comment=”354354″]Scott Little,

    Your pictures are wonderful especially because your seats at that great place were seemingly very good.

    Count me in as LOVING the Rip City alts.

    As for Blake’s shoes, he was sponsored by AND 1 for years:

    http://www3.pictures...

    http://cache1.asset-...

    however, those don”t seem to be similar to any of their designs.

    I’m thinking that perhaps he signed with a foreign company like Anta:

    http://www.antapeak....

    They also might be made by K1X or better yet, maybe they are the Obama sneakers:

    http://www.nbcnewyor...

  • RS Rogers | October 15, 2009 at 9:31 am |

    Re: Frederick Cadets, the facts that it’s a size 46 shirt (equivalent to men’s XL) and size L pants, and that relatively few high schools had varsity softball in 1974, tend to argue against it being a softball uniform. Basketball warmup is much more plausible. And let’s not forget that there actually was a brief fad for untucked baseball jerseys in the mid 1970s.

  • Namhob | October 15, 2009 at 9:35 am |

    Couldn’t get a screen grab but the ref in last night’s U.S./Costa Rica match was having some major patch issues. The patch looked like it was holding on to the sleeve for dear life; it was probably just ironed on without any stitching.

  • Bryan | October 15, 2009 at 9:37 am |

    [quote comment=”354359″]Couldn’t get a screen grab but the ref in last night’s U.S./Costa Rica match was having some major patch issues. The patch looked like it was holding on to the sleeve for dear life; it was probably just ironed on without any stitching.[/quote]
    Saw that as well…typically the patches are velcroed on, so that is why later in the game, it appeared to be fixed.

  • Mark | October 15, 2009 at 9:38 am |

    From today’s Ticker linked article by Colin Dunlap in the Pittsburgh paper/website on WVU’s yellow jerseys:

    “I have no idea why some people get so worked up, or are so into what uniforms the team is going to wear, but I just wanted to pass that along for all you unirform (sic) gurus.”

    I guess he just doesn’t “get it”.

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 9:40 am |

    [quote]Ooh, check out Robert Marshall’s latest bobblehead video. … [/quote]

    YAY!

    Robert, I can’t wait. Looks outstanding.

  • timmy b | October 15, 2009 at 9:40 am |

    On the Niners (and Ricko, please correct me if I’m wrong):

    The Niners first put the red oval logo on their silver helmets in 1962. Stayed that way in 1963. Normally wore straight silver pants with that look. In 1964 the helmets went to gold. And, I had thought that they also switched to gold pants with the red/white/red side stripes.

    Now, with this pic of Dave Parks (I think) with gold helmet and silver pants and stripes? That I had never seen before. Was this a sort of a leftover from 1964 or did they really wear a gold helmet/silver pants combo from 1964-1968???

    Paul,
    Me, a uni “scholar???” (demure flattered schoolgirl-like blush) Um, historian, if you please…thx

  • Andy11 | October 15, 2009 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”354353″][quote comment=”354347″]The Raiders wore white at home on opening night against the chargers for monday night football.[/quote]

    Kiffin also dressed the Raiders in white, at home, shortly before he was fired.[/quote]
    I think that was a typo. Last week should have been last year.

  • peter | October 15, 2009 at 10:05 am |

    Just read on Teebz site:

    “Bakersfield Condors will be wearing KING OF POP jerseys to honor Michael Jackson”…

    I think this is a tad excessive…and stupid…

  • EddieAtari | October 15, 2009 at 10:06 am |

    It should read “Raiders: 2009 vs. Chargers.”

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 10:07 am |

    on the NINERS…

    Yup, that’s Dave Parks. That photo’s from SI. Parks was a rookie in ’64, perhaps that’s from a preseason game….wearing the new gold lids with the old silver pants?

    I can’t be definitive on the Niners. Black and white TV and publications made it tough to get a handle on what the Niners were wearing, silver or gold, starting in about ’64

    But, I do know the red oval was on silver helmets for couple seasons, yes.

    I actually have that Bruce Taylor card…somewhere. Saved it precisely because the pants are most definitely silver, and it puzzled me at the time (couldn’t find a scan where the colors are true to the card). Perhaps in camp the Niners broke out old gear? But would be really old, because the card has to be a ’72 or so, cuz white adidas didn’t come into the league ’til ’71.

    I thought 49ers only metallic helmets and pants in the 50’s were silver. But there’s a color shot in SI late in ’59 of Raymond Berry catching a TD with Abe Woodson arriving too late. Woodson’s helmet is gold and his pants silver–or the other way around, can’t remember, but should be sort of easy to find in SI Vault.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 10:13 am |

    I can not believe the Niners wore silver pants with gold helmets for 4 years. That’s just insane. Why would an NFL team intentionally look that bad for 4 whole seasons? More importantly, why the heck does no one know about it?

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 10:13 am |

    Guess it’s a San Francisco kinda day.

    I, too, like the Warriors unis, for the same reasons

    “Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old”

    Um, only because San Francisco is absolutely my favorite city, I will go ahead and point out that it’s a Cable Car.

    Did you know those rolling National Monuments?

    —Ricko

  • MPowers1634 | October 15, 2009 at 10:18 am |

    [quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.

  • MPowers1634 | October 15, 2009 at 10:21 am |

    BTW…while I’m complaining about NBA unis…look at the Suns player pictured with the opening entry.

    He must be the Miguel cabrera of the NBA…what is all the junk he’s wearing?

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 10:21 am |

    [quote comment=”354369″]I can not believe the Niners wore silver pants with gold helmets for 4 years. That’s just insane. Why would an NFL team intentionally look that bad for 4 whole seasons? More importantly, why the heck does no one know about it?[/quote]

    I didn’t say that did. Just found an oddball photo and sent it to Paul, cuz it kinda illustrates why was so befuddling sometimes to figure if Niner were wearing silver or gold….once they did go to the gold helmets in ’64.

    Every once in a while you see something (like that Taylor) and think, “What the hell, did they go back to silver?”

    Likewise in the late 50s. I though I had it figured out and then I saw that Abe Woodson photo.

    Maybe they had moments of discoloration similar to the Lions? (at least with the helmets in the late 50’s).

    Want proof of the confusion? Check out this cover…from ’65.
    http://sportsillustr...

    Go figure. TimmyB just sat up in his chair. Silver? in ’65???

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    [quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?

  • Rob | October 15, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    [quote comment=”354355″][quote comment=”354346″]re: frederick cadets baseball uni

    that sure looks like a basketball warmup…not sayin it is, just looks like it

    perhaps the item is mislabled?[/quote]

    Good call — hadn’t thought of that.[/quote]

    Per the Maryland Public Secondary Schools Athletic Association (MPSSAA)website – the Frederick Cadets won the Class B 1974 State Basketball Championship (led by coach Bill Brooks) – so that could very well be their basketball warmup. Unfortunately, their state championship database for baseball only goes back to 1975!

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 10:26 am |

    [quote comment=”354368″]on the NINERS…

    Yup, that’s Dave Parks. That photo’s from SI. Parks was a rookie in ’64, perhaps that’s from a preseason game….wearing the new gold lids with the old silver pants?

    I can’t be definitive on the Niners. Black and white TV and publications made it tough to get a handle on what the Niners were wearing, silver or gold, starting in about ’64

    But, I do know the red oval was on silver helmets for couple seasons, yes.

    I actually have that Bruce Taylor card…somewhere. Saved it precisely because the pants are most definitely silver, and it puzzled me at the time (couldn’t find a scan where the colors are true to the card). Perhaps in camp the Niners broke out old gear? But would be really old, because the card has to be a ’72 or so, cuz white adidas didn’t come into the league ’til ’71.

    I thought 49ers only metallic helmets and pants in the 50’s were silver. But there’s a color shot in SI late in ’59 of Raymond Berry catching a TD with Abe Woodson arriving too late. Woodson’s helmet is gold and his pants silver–or the other way around, can’t remember, but should be sort of easy to find in SI Vault.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Forget the Woodson photo. Found it. Helmet and pants silver. Guess I’m thinking of another photo. Hmmm…time to start digging.

    —Ricko

  • Teebz | October 15, 2009 at 10:29 am |

    [quote comment=”354366″]Just read on Teebz site:

    “Bakersfield Condors will be wearing KING OF POP jerseys to honor Michael Jackson”…

    I think this is a tad excessive…and stupid…[/quote]

    Tasteful? Um… the jury is out. Personally, they have done promo nights before on sensitive subject – the Rod Blago night, for example – but this is the first that might actually draw fire from some people. Michael Jackson was loved by millions… according to the funeral procession into the Staples Center.

    I have no doubt that they will honour the man, but it might be too soon still for some people.

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 10:37 am |

    [quote comment=”354377″][quote comment=”354366″]Just read on Teebz site:

    “Bakersfield Condors will be wearing KING OF POP jerseys to honor Michael Jackson”…

    I think this is a tad excessive…and stupid…[/quote]

    Tasteful? Um… the jury is out. Personally, they have done promo nights before on sensitive subject – the Rod Blago night, for example – but this is the first that might actually draw fire from some people. Michael Jackson was loved by millions… according to the funeral procession into the Staples Center.

    I have no doubt that they will honour the man, but it might be too soon still for some people.[/quote]
    “Honor the man” or “exploit his death”, you decide.

  • Kerry P | October 15, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”354363″]On the Niners (and Ricko, please correct me if I’m wrong):

    The Niners first put the red oval logo on their silver helmets in 1962. Stayed that way in 1963. Normally wore straight silver pants with that look. In 1964 the helmets went to gold.[/quote]
    You’re right on according to the HELMET PROJECT.

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 10:40 am |

    [quote comment=”354379″][quote comment=”354363″]On the Niners (and Ricko, please correct me if I’m wrong):

    The Niners first put the red oval logo on their silver helmets in 1962. Stayed that way in 1963. Normally wore straight silver pants with that look. In 1964 the helmets went to gold.[/quote]
    You’re right on according to the HELMET PROJECT.[/quote]

    Unfortunately, the Helmet Project is not a definitive source. It’s a damn nice site and he’s probably about 99% correct, but errors have slipped through before. Prior to about a month ago, the Raiders silver shielded helmet was not on the site at all.

  • Gabe | October 15, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    I have been staring at the Fredricks Baseball uniform since I found it. I really think that the top is a basketball warm up and the pants are definitely baseball pants. I wore ones just like them in highschool. They have the elastic cuffs at the bottom and the single pocket on the back. As for the Top it only has a uniform number on the front and nothing on the back and honestly I have never seen sleeves like that on a baseball jersey. If you look too the two whites seem a bit off. I dont know if its the age of the uniform or the lighting in the photo. The gold on is a little off too I think! Either way I thought it was a really neat find!

  • lose remerswaal | October 15, 2009 at 10:46 am |

    Junior Seau “schmoozed Derrick Burgess into giving him his old number (55) and switching to No. 53”

    http://www.boston.co...

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”354367″]It should read “Raiders: 2009 vs. Chargers.”[/quote]
    I’m sure that will be added once that page is updated to reflect this year’s white at home games.

    As for last year…

  • Kevin Kirk | October 15, 2009 at 10:48 am |

    Does anyone know what the “TTH” on the nose bumpers for Tulsa is all about?? I noticed them last night during the Boise game for the first time…

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 10:51 am |

    [quote comment=”354380″][quote comment=”354379″][quote comment=”354363″]On the Niners (and Ricko, please correct me if I’m wrong):

    The Niners first put the red oval logo on their silver helmets in 1962. Stayed that way in 1963. Normally wore straight silver pants with that look. In 1964 the helmets went to gold.[/quote]
    You’re right on according to the HELMET PROJECT.[/quote]

    Unfortunately, the Helmet Project is not a definitive source. It’s a damn nice site and he’s probably about 99% correct, but errors have slipped through before. Prior to about a month ago, the Raiders silver shielded helmet was not on the site at all.[/quote]

    And, to confuse things, there’s that SI cover (see post #31) from ’65, which has to have been taken that year because Ken Willard was a rookie in ’65.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 10:56 am |

    [quote comment=”354384″]Does anyone know what the “TTH” on the nose bumpers for Tulsa is all about?? I noticed them last night during the Boise game for the first time…[/quote]
    TTH (no relation) stands for “tougher than hell”.

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 10:58 am |

    [quote comment=”354385″][quote comment=”354380″][quote comment=”354379″][quote comment=”354363″]On the Niners (and Ricko, please correct me if I’m wrong):

    The Niners first put the red oval logo on their silver helmets in 1962. Stayed that way in 1963. Normally wore straight silver pants with that look. In 1964 the helmets went to gold.[/quote]
    You’re right on according to the HELMET PROJECT.[/quote]

    Unfortunately, the Helmet Project is not a definitive source. It’s a damn nice site and he’s probably about 99% correct, but errors have slipped through before. Prior to about a month ago, the Raiders silver shielded helmet was not on the site at all.[/quote]

    And, to confuse things, there’s that SI cover (see post #31) from ’65, which has to have been taken that year because Ken Willard was a rookie in ’65.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I don’t think I care anymore. F the Niners and their stupid color choices. A team named after the 1849 gold rush should have been wearing gold from the start.

    It’s like the Blue Jays not wearing blue… or something like that.

  • Paul Lukas | October 15, 2009 at 11:00 am |

    [quote comment=”354384″]Does anyone know what the “TTH” on the nose bumpers for Tulsa is all about?? I noticed them last night during the Boise game for the first time…[/quote]

    I’m told it stands for “Tougher Than Hell.”

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 11:01 am |

    That’s what I’ve always thought. Gold just makes too much sense for the 49ers not to have used it from the beginning. Silver? Really?

    What, did they buy their original uniforms from a defunct bowl game or something?

  • DenverGregg | October 15, 2009 at 11:08 am |

    I quit paying attention to basketball in the mid-nineties, but it sure looks weird to see that basketball shorts (see today’s top pic) are now longer than football pants.

    Also was hoping the local college hockey team was going to bring back a certain Walt Disney logo.

  • latrell | October 15, 2009 at 11:11 am |

    But Reggie Wayne was really pushing it on Monday night.

    Colts and Titans played on SUNDAY night, not Monday.

  • Rob | October 15, 2009 at 11:13 am |

    [quote comment=”354381″]I have been staring at the Fredricks Baseball uniform since I found it. I really think that the top is a basketball warm up and the pants are definitely baseball pants. I wore ones just like them in highschool. They have the elastic cuffs at the bottom and the single pocket on the back. As for the Top it only has a uniform number on the front and nothing on the back and honestly I have never seen sleeves like that on a baseball jersey. If you look too the two whites seem a bit off. I dont know if its the age of the uniform or the lighting in the photo. The gold on is a little off too I think! Either way I thought it was a really neat find![/quote]

    Looking at the top some more – it appears those are snaps not buttons…. the bottom snap is undone and you can see what looks like a metallic color where it snaps into place.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 11:14 am |

    [quote comment=”354356″]Ricko,
    Are you sure those 49ers helmets were silver? [/quote]
    I’m pretty sure they were brown.

  • Paul Lukas | October 15, 2009 at 11:18 am |

    [quote comment=”354391″]I quit paying attention to basketball in the mid-nineties, but it sure looks weird to see that basketball shorts (see today’s top pic) are now longer than football pants.[/quote]

    Brilliantly stated. I’m gonna have to steal that one.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 11:20 am |

    [quote comment=”354390″]That’s what I’ve always thought. Gold just makes too much sense for the 49ers not to have used it from the beginning. Silver? Really?

    What, did they buy their original uniforms from a defunct bowl game or something?[/quote]

    Even as a wee child, that same “why not gold?” thought came to me. As far back as the first plain metallic helmets. And every time they’d change them (adding NW stripes, then red oval, prostripe version) they’d still stick with the silver. Confusing then. Confusing now as we try to reconstruct it.

    Also, let’s keep in the mind the 49ers were born and christened just before the 100th anniversary of the strike at Sutter’s Mill. I’m sure the celebration of it was on everyone’s mind in that part of California at the time, and probably a very, very choice in a nickname.

    And, lest we diminish that gold rush as being some kind of “dated reference”, please note it had two profound effects on human history. It truly “changed the world”.
    1. It was so rich it began the shift of the financial center of the planet away from Western Europe toward North America.
    2. So many people with went west, or came to America, because of it that is also shifted the planet’s population center away from Europe.
    Two things quite literally made North America once and for all a part of the world community, and were a major step toward the United States becoming a world power.

    (Hey, my minor’s in American History…lol)

    —Ricko

  • Scott | October 15, 2009 at 11:21 am |

    Miami University can also be called Miami (Ohio), but not Miami Ohio or Miami of Ohio, per the MAC Style Guide.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    1928 Tigers spring training pic: the Olde English “D” player looks a bit older than normal, so I googled to see if Ty Cobb was still playing: I was half-hearted because I doubted it. Turns out he was still playing that year, but it was for the Phil. A’s.

  • Stuby | October 15, 2009 at 11:23 am |

    [quote comment=”354378″][quote comment=”354377″][quote comment=”354366″]Just read on Teebz site:

    “Bakersfield Condors will be wearing KING OF POP jerseys to honor Michael Jackson”…

    I think this is a tad excessive…and stupid…[/quote]

    Tasteful? Um… the jury is out. Personally, they have done promo nights before on sensitive subject – the Rod Blago night, for example – but this is the first that might actually draw fire from some people. Michael Jackson was loved by millions… according to the funeral procession into the Staples Center.

    I have no doubt that they will honour the man, but it might be too soon still for some people.[/quote]
    “Honor the man” or “exploit his death”, you decide.[/quote]
    If they get too much flak they could change it to KING OF ROCK night to honor Jam Master Jay. The uniforms would be awesome.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 11:25 am |

    [quote comment=”354397″]Miami University can also be called Miami (Ohio), but not Miami Ohio or Miami of Ohio, per the MAC Style Guide.[/quote]Take a peek at the USC guidelines on using “Southern Cal”. Good for a laugh.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 11:29 am |

    Pickup from last night’s column about seeing Bobby Hull, and “if his skating muscles are gone”.

    According the the local press, Hull recently had work done on either his knee or hip, and because of that he literally couldn’t “put on the brakes” once he started skating that night. He asked Mikita for some assistance. That’s why you see one of those pictures with Mikita grabbing him by the elbow.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 11:31 am |

    [quote comment=”354401″]Pickup from last night’s column about seeing Bobby Hull, and “if his skating muscles are gone”.[/quote]

    I said “column”: I meant “comments”. My bad.

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 11:35 am |

    There are some photos of the 49ers in gold circa 1957 in the Google Life magazine archive, but I haven’t relocated them just yet. In the meantime, check this one out:

    http://images.google...

  • EddieAtari | October 15, 2009 at 11:35 am |

    [quote comment=”354383″][quote comment=”354367″]It should read “Raiders: 2009 vs. Chargers.”[/quote]
    I’m sure that will be added once that page is updated to reflect this year’s white at home games.

    As for last year…[/quote]

    You’re right. My bad.

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 11:39 am |

    Oh, wow! Look at this one: Cardinals vs. Redskins at Griffith Stadium.

    http://images.google...

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”354405″]Oh, wow! Look at this one: Cardinals vs. Redskins at Griffith Stadium.

    http://images.google...

    So cool. Back when Cardinals were only NFL with dark road pants. Any other teams that changed for the road went to white.

    See little Eddie LeBaron (14) for Skins, and I believe the RB is Jim Podoley (24). Can’t say for sure on Cardinals QB, but could be Lamar McHan, who wore #8.

    Mentioned this before I know, but always worth noting: McHan was starting QB for Packers in Lombardi’s opening game (vs. Bears).

    —Ricko

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 11:49 am |

    Found it. The 49ers played at Yankee Stadium in 1957, then not again until 1963; by that point, we’ve established, they’d put the SF on the helmet.

    http://images.google...

    I think the ’50s Niners might be the only NFL team to have had four helmet colors in a single decade: silver, white, red and gold.

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 11:51 am |

    Back when Cardinals were only NFL with dark road pants.
    And the red helmets too, Ricko. A brief period with those during the Ollie Matson years.

    Mentioned this before I know, but always worth noting: McHan was starting QB for Packers in Lombardi’s opening game (vs. Bears).
    Yes. I’m pretty sure that’s him jogging alongside Johnny U in the fish-eye lens photo linked below.

    http://images.google...

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 11:52 am |

    [quote comment=”354407″]Found it. The 49ers played at Yankee Stadium in 1957, then not again until 1963; by that point, we’ve established, they’d put the SF on the helmet.

    http://images.google...

    I think the ’50s Niners might be the only NFL team to have had four helmet colors in a single decade: silver, white, red and gold.[/quote]

    That’s the Redskins. Remember those unis well. Only single stripe road loop filled Niners filled the entire loop area with red…like the Rams white of the royal-white era that came later.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 11:52 am |

    [quote comment=”354406″][quote comment=”354405″]Oh, wow! Look at this one: Cardinals vs. Redskins at Griffith Stadium.

    http://images.google...

    So cool. Back when Cardinals were only NFL with dark road pants. Any other teams that changed for the road went to white.

    See little Eddie LeBaron (14) for Skins, and I believe the RB is Jim Podoley (24). Can’t say for sure on Cardinals QB, but could be Lamar McHan, who wore #8.

    Mentioned this before I know, but always worth noting: McHan was starting QB for Packers in Lombardi’s opening game (vs. Bears).

    —Ricko[/quote]
    So they went to the trouble of having a second set of pants for road games, but they stuck with those socks to go for the leotard effect?

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment=”354408″]Back when Cardinals were only NFL with dark road pants.
    And the red helmets too, Ricko. A brief period with those during the Ollie Matson years.

    Mentioned this before I know, but always worth noting: McHan was starting QB for Packers in Lombardi’s opening game (vs. Bears).
    Yes. I’m pretty sure that’s him jogging alongside Johnny U in the fish-eye lens photo linked below.

    http://images.google...

    i believe it is, yes.
    #20 with the spatted shoes is a DB named Bob Harrison, who played only one season with the Colts, and that was in early 60’s.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 11:55 am |

    Sorry, unitard, not leotard.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”354406″]So cool. Back when Cardinals were only NFL with dark road pants. Any other teams that changed for the road went to white.
    —Ricko[/quote]
    Interesting that a team that was considered one of the “poorer” franchises would spring for the second set of uniform pants.

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 11:58 am |

    Well, McHan’s walking in the photo. Someone wearing No. 20 is looking a bit more energetic.

    Lombardi had traded McHan to the Colts the previous offseason. He started four games for the Packers in 1960, winning each of them, before Starr won the starting job for good.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 11:58 am |

    [quote comment=”354410″][quote comment=”354406″][quote comment=”354405″]Oh, wow! Look at this one: Cardinals vs. Redskins at Griffith Stadium.

    http://images.google...

    So cool. Back when Cardinals were only NFL with dark road pants. Any other teams that changed for the road went to white.

    See little Eddie LeBaron (14) for Skins, and I believe the RB is Jim Podoley (24). Can’t say for sure on Cardinals QB, but could be Lamar McHan, who wore #8.

    Mentioned this before I know, but always worth noting: McHan was starting QB for Packers in Lombardi’s opening game (vs. Bears).

    —Ricko[/quote]
    So they went to the trouble of having a second set of pants for road games, but they stuck with those socks to go for the leotard effect?[/quote]

    Indeed they did. Guess that makes ’em the first leotard look NFL team.

    Also there was one year when they wore red helmets on the road and white at home. (It’s all in that Cards-Steelers piece I put togehter for Super Bowl Sunday).

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 12:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”354407″]Found it. The 49ers played at Yankee Stadium in 1957, then not again until 1963; by that point, we’ve established, they’d put the SF on the helmet.

    http://images.google...

    I think the ’50s Niners might be the only NFL team to have had four helmet colors in a single decade: silver, white, red and gold.[/quote]

    They’re probably the only team to have that many completely different colored helmets at all, at least in the modern era. I know the Redskins had a few different helmets, but the feather and spear helmets were both still red. I can’t think of anyone else even close without going back into the leather days.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 12:03 pm |

    the feather and spear helmets were both still red.

    burgundy!

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 12:04 pm |

    That’s the Redskins. Remember those unis well. Only single stripe road loop filled Niners filled the entire loop area with red…like the Rams white of the royal-white era that came later.
    A-ha! There’s the distinction. Because I would’ve sworn that that was the 49ers, especially since they also had gold helmets and gold pants for a time in the mid- to late ’50s. (NFL Films has color footage of the ’57 Western Conference playoff, when the Lions came from way back to win at Kezar.)

    #20 with the spatted shoes is a DB named Bob Harrison, who played only one season with the Colts, and that was in early 60’s.
    Should’ve known you’d recognize him, Ricko.

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 12:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”354417″]the feather and spear helmets were both still red.

    burgundy![/quote]

    Oh, bah. You know what I meant.

    /Washington Burgundyskins?

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 12:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”354419″]Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    pretty certain the name “redskin” wasn’t an allusion to their uniform color

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 12:12 pm |

    When the 49ers were born into the AAFC in 1946 they wore neither gold nor silver, if I’m not mistaken. They were just red & white. My understanding was that they first went to gold in the ’50s, then switched to silver in the early ’60s, then back to gold in ’64. They were like the Packers waffling between being blue or green.

    Regarding the Topps cards, wasn’t it a fairly common practice for NFL teams to wear years-old unis in training camp back in the ’60s/early ’70s… and hence they would show up in the Topps cards? I’ve seen that with other teams – check out this 1969 Bob Lilly card in which he’s wearing the Cowboys ’60-’63 duds:

    http://www.footballc...

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 12:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”354420″][quote comment=”354419″]Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    pretty certain the name “redskin” wasn’t an allusion to their uniform color[/quote]

    Oh for the love of…

    Sorry, I’ll try to remember to use /sarcasm tags from now on. Sheesh.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 12:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”354419″][quote comment=”354417″]the feather and spear helmets were both still red.

    burgundy![/quote]

    Oh, bah. You know what I meant.

    /Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    bah? did you say bah?
    does one refer to the raiders helmets as gray?
    i think not.
    bah?

  • Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 12:16 pm |

    From this post:

    “…Reggie Wayne was really pushing it on Monday night.”

    The Colts and Titans played on Sunday night.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 12:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”354424″]From this post:

    “…Reggie Wayne was really pushing it on Monday night.”

    The Colts and Titans played on Sunday night.[/quote]
    I know we don’t usually point it out when something is repeated but post # 49 reminded us of this fact in a more humorous manner. (Props to latrell) :)

    bah?

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 12:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”354421″]When the 49ers were born into the AAFC in 1946 they wore neither gold nor silver, if I’m not mistaken. They were just red & white. My understanding was that they first went to gold in the ’50s, then switched to silver in the early ’60s, then back to gold in ’64. They were like the Packers waffling between being blue or green.

    Regarding the Topps cards, wasn’t it a fairly common practice for NFL teams to wear years-old unis in training camp back in the ’60s/early ’70s… and hence they would show up in the Topps cards? I’ve seen that with other teams – check out this 1969 Bob Lilly card in which he’s wearing the Cowboys ’60-’63 duds:

    http://www.footballc...

    Absolutely, on wearing old gear in camp…but usually was only from the year or so before. That’s why the Bruce Taylor card confused me back then. The photo was taken, at the earliest, in ’71 because of the white adidas. But Niners, I thought, had gone to gold pants in ’65 or so. If you could hold the actual card in your hand, you’d see that the pants clearly are silver. And all the other colors are spot-on, so it isn’t printing issue.

    Just…odd.

    —Ricko

  • Chad | October 15, 2009 at 12:28 pm |

    free tickets to a charlotte bobcat practice if anyone’s interested http://www.gamerhotl...

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”354426″][quote comment=”354421″]When the 49ers were born into the AAFC in 1946 they wore neither gold nor silver, if I’m not mistaken. They were just red & white. My understanding was that they first went to gold in the ’50s, then switched to silver in the early ’60s, then back to gold in ’64. They were like the Packers waffling between being blue or green.

    Regarding the Topps cards, wasn’t it a fairly common practice for NFL teams to wear years-old unis in training camp back in the ’60s/early ’70s… and hence they would show up in the Topps cards? I’ve seen that with other teams – check out this 1969 Bob Lilly card in which he’s wearing the Cowboys ’60-’63 duds:

    http://www.footballc...

    Absolutely, on wearing old gear in camp…but usually was only from the year or so before. That’s why the Bruce Taylor card confused me back then. The photo was taken, at the earliest, in ’71 because of the white adidas. But Niners, I thought, had gone to gold pants in ’65 or so. If you could hold the actual card in your hand, you’d see that the pants clearly are silver. And all the other colors are spot-on, so it isn’t printing issue.

    Just…odd.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I recall the Steelers wearing white pants during the 1971 season, then returning to the yellow pants they had worn during the 1960s and today. I have seen NFL Films programs on the late 1970s Steelers, and players were still wearing those white pants during training camp.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 12:30 pm |

    That…
    http://www.footballc...
    …is just an old photo, carelessly selected. Guarantee you the Cowboys weren’t still wearing ’62 gear in training camp in ’68 or ’69. Once they deep-sixed that original set it was GONE.

    Besides, the quality control and concern for accuracy on football cards was pretty much a joke until at least the 70s, actually.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 12:32 pm |

    “NFL Films programs on the late 1970s Steelers, and players were still wearing those white pants during training camp.”

    Honestly don’t know about LATE 70’s, but they definitely did keep ’em around. Posted a training camp photo of them here a while back. Might be in that Super Bowl Sunday piece.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”354423″][quote comment=”354419″][quote comment=”354417″]the feather and spear helmets were both still red.

    burgundy![/quote]

    Oh, bah. You know what I meant.

    /Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    bah? did you say bah?
    does one refer to the raiders helmets as gray?
    i think not.
    bah?[/quote]

    That would depend on the Raiders helmet in question. This: http://img373.images...
    is clearly a gray helmet. :)

    /bah!

    (yeah, he’s a little dusty…and old)

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 12:33 pm |

    http://www.footballc...

    Never knew Lilly was from Throckmorton, Texas. A favorite name used by cartoonist Virgil Partch.

  • Skycat | October 15, 2009 at 12:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”354374″][quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?[/quote]
    I’ve seen this uni listed on more than one worst unis list — probably for the reasons mentioned above. Although I generally go with classic ones like the Celtics, I really like the Warriors’ duds, perhaps in a guilty pleasure sort of way. BTW, this is from a guy who has always enjoyed the Astros’ tequila sunrise effects.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko

  • Frank Mercogliano | October 15, 2009 at 12:38 pm |

    Video proof of the Raiders wearing white at home with Lane Kiffin as the coach. Also video proof for why he got fired…

    http://www.youtube.c...

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I tried to make a pun of it (too nebulous, maybe; no one remembers chubby checker, maybe; nothing there to begin with).

  • bourbon soaked idiot | October 15, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    It’s well known that Woody Johnson is a conservative who donates a great deal of money to Republican candidates. The NFL had no problem when he bought the team from Mr. Hess.

    The attack on Rush is because he’s a racist and jerk not a conservative.

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 12:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis

  • mike b | October 15, 2009 at 12:49 pm |

    Anyone have the jersey’s mocked up of the Central Hockey League??? If so, I’d like to see them.

    I’m also looking for images specifically of the two expansion teams in uniform – the Missouri Mavericks and the Allen Americans.

    I am a KC resident and and Mavs season ticket holder (haven’t seen the uni’s yet.) – trying to gear up for the season.

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 12:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”354430″]That…
    http://www.footballc...
    …is just an old photo, carelessly selected. Guarantee you the Cowboys weren’t still wearing ’62 gear in training camp in ’68 or ’69. Once they deep-sixed that original set it was GONE.
    —Ricko[/quote]
    I’m not so sure. Lilly wore his hair in a crewcut during his first few years in Dallas when he would’ve worn that uni in the regular season. He’s noticeably shaggier in that ’69 card. Plus – maybe some Cowboy fans can back me up on this – a short while back ESPN were doing documentaries on the great also-ran, non-Super Bowl-winning NFL teams of yesteryear, and one installment featured the 1970 Cowboys, and it clearly showed that squad running drills while wearing the old ’60-’63 unis.

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 12:59 pm |

    I’m not saying Topps didn’t reach back for some old photos, though. For example, Roman Gabriel did not look like this in 1969:

    http://www.footballc...

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 1:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”354434″][quote comment=”354374″][quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?[/quote]
    I’ve seen this uni listed on more than one worst unis list — probably for the reasons mentioned above. Although I generally go with classic ones like the Celtics, I really like the Warriors’ duds, perhaps in a guilty pleasure sort of way. BTW, this is from a guy who has always enjoyed the Astros’ tequila sunrise effects.[/quote]

    Liked Golden State’s uniforms better several years ago, when they had the lightning bolts on the side, instead of the standard striping. I recall the Detroit Pistons using lightning bolts on the sides of their uniforms around 1977.

  • Kek | October 15, 2009 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”354422″][quote comment=”354420″][quote comment=”354419″]Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    pretty certain the name “redskin” wasn’t an allusion to their uniform color[/quote]

    Oh for the love of…

    Sorry, I’ll try to remember to use /sarcasm tags from now on. Sheesh.[/quote]
    Was it true Jim Zorn wanted to rename the team the “maroon-and-black skins”?

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 1:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.

  • Kek | October 15, 2009 at 1:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”354361″]From today’s Ticker linked article by Colin Dunlap in the Pittsburgh paper/website on WVU’s yellow jerseys:

    “I have no idea why some people get so worked up, or are so into what uniforms the team is going to wear, but I just wanted to pass that along for all you unirform (sic) gurus.”

    I guess he just doesn’t “get it”.[/quote]
    If you only knew….he doesn’t “get it” on several levels, this being the least of those.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”354444″][quote comment=”354422″][quote comment=”354420″][quote comment=”354419″]Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    pretty certain the name “redskin” wasn’t an allusion to their uniform color[/quote]

    Oh for the love of…

    Sorry, I’ll try to remember to use /sarcasm tags from now on. Sheesh.[/quote]
    Was it true Jim Zorn wanted to rename the team the “maroon-and-black skins”?[/quote]

    Assuming you are serious:
    At one of Zorn’s first press conferences, he was asked off-handedly if he knew the team’s colors. His response of “maroon and black” doomed him to the purgatory in which he now finds himself. He might as well as referred to them as the Cowboys.

  • MPowers1634 | October 15, 2009 at 1:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”354434″][quote comment=”354374″][quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?[/quote]
    I’ve seen this uni listed on more than one worst unis list — probably for the reasons mentioned above. Although I generally go with classic ones like the Celtics, I really like the Warriors’ duds, perhaps in a guilty pleasure sort of way. BTW, this is from a guy who has always enjoyed the Astros’ tequila sunrise effects.[/quote]

    I too, love the Tequila Sunrise, the Rainbow Nuggets, the creamsicle Bucs and the Striped Broncos, however the Warriors are just too busy and nonsensicl to me…What’s with the lightning bolt?

    To me, they are the NBA’s Buffalo Bills home uni.

    To counter that, the Blazers Rip City uniforms are beauties:

    http://www.scottsspo...

    simple, symmetrical side panels with no extraneous crap.

  • Paul Lukas | October 15, 2009 at 1:33 pm |

    Today’s ESPN column is up:
    http://sports.espn.g...

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 1:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]

    sorry i paint with such a broad brush…perhaps al sharpton is not a great a racist as is rush limbaugh…but lets face it, they’re both pretty good with the inflamatory rhetoric

    im glad you feel mr. sharpton would also be denied a minority stake in an nfl ownership bid, were he to attempt one (i donno, does he even have that kind of scratch?)

    i just wonder if he actually would be denied, and, if he were, on what grounds

  • Skycat | October 15, 2009 at 1:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”354450″][quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]

    sorry i paint with such a broad brush…perhaps al sharpton is not a great a racist as is rush limbaugh…but lets face it, they’re both pretty good with the inflamatory rhetoric

    im glad you feel mr. sharpton would also be denied a minority stake in an nfl ownership bid, were he to attempt one (i donno, does he even have that kind of scratch?)

    i just wonder if he actually would be denied, and, if he were, on what grounds[/quote]
    Clearly, the majority of NFL owners are conservative. All you need to do is check out the list of contributors to political parties. The San Diego Chargers dwarf everyone else in its (Alex Spanos) contributions to the Republican Party. Ironically (or not so), the leading contributor to the Dems is the St. Louis Rams. Check it out:
    http://www.opensecre...

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 1:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”354449″]Today’s ESPN column is up:
    http://sports.espn.g...
    Hey Paul, the Jaguars entry on the poll is kinda funky….

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 1:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”354441″][quote comment=”354430″]That…
    http://www.footballc...
    …is just an old photo, carelessly selected. Guarantee you the Cowboys weren’t still wearing ’62 gear in training camp in ’68 or ’69. Once they deep-sixed that original set it was GONE.
    —Ricko[/quote]
    I’m not so sure. Lilly wore his hair in a crewcut during his first few years in Dallas when he would’ve worn that uni in the regular season. He’s noticeably shaggier in that ’69 card. Plus – maybe some Cowboy fans can back me up on this – a short while back ESPN were doing documentaries on the great also-ran, non-Super Bowl-winning NFL teams of yesteryear, and one installment featured the 1970 Cowboys, and it clearly showed that squad running drills while wearing the old ’60-’63 unis.[/quote]

    Y’know after I typed that my brain flashed on a photo of Landry talking to a player wearing the old jersey and the silver helmet. But seems to me was closer the year when they changed.

    Anyway, all we’re really doiing is confirming that, yes, back then teams often would wear old stuff in training camp.

    Not to mention really short gym trunks. I should scan and post some of the stuff I stumbled upon the other night. Training camp and practice looked SO different from today.

    Even found a shot of Packer practice. All manner of sweatpants and other gear…and Bart Starr wearing an old #77 home jersey.

    Yeah, things weren’t as “imaged-up” as today.

    –Ricko

  • Marc M. | October 15, 2009 at 1:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]
    Oh really? And he is a racist because you say he is a racist? ok then, you are ignorant because I say you are ignorant.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 1:48 pm |

    My reaction when I heard the comment was…
    Well, clearly Rush has made a career out of attacking people who are Liberal, and holding them accountable for everything they say.

    That sword cuts both ways, doesn’t it?

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”354451″][quote comment=”354450″][quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]

    sorry i paint with such a broad brush…perhaps al sharpton is not a great a racist as is rush limbaugh…but lets face it, they’re both pretty good with the inflamatory rhetoric

    im glad you feel mr. sharpton would also be denied a minority stake in an nfl ownership bid, were he to attempt one (i donno, does he even have that kind of scratch?)

    i just wonder if he actually would be denied, and, if he were, on what grounds[/quote]
    Clearly, the majority of NFL owners are conservative. All you need to do is check out the list of contributors to political parties. The San Diego Chargers dwarf everyone else in its (Alex Spanos) contributions to the Republican Party. Ironically (or not so), the leading contributor to the Dems is the St. Louis Rams. Check it out:
    http://www.opensecre...
    Exactly.

    This was never about Limbaugh’s politics. This was about his racism. Or the racist character he plays on the radio, to be charitable. Some people on the right are trying to gain political advantage by equating the two, in an ironic twist.

    As for what grounds the NFL would use to prevent Sharpton or any other person from becoming a member, as a private organization they don’t really need to give any as a legal matter. As a practical matter, I would presume that they’d handle it as they handled Limbaugh – a few quiet words of discouragement and the problem goes away.

  • Marc M. | October 15, 2009 at 1:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”354456″][quote comment=”354451″][quote comment=”354450″][quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]

    sorry i paint with such a broad brush…perhaps al sharpton is not a great a racist as is rush limbaugh…but lets face it, they’re both pretty good with the inflamatory rhetoric

    im glad you feel mr. sharpton would also be denied a minority stake in an nfl ownership bid, were he to attempt one (i donno, does he even have that kind of scratch?)

    i just wonder if he actually would be denied, and, if he were, on what grounds[/quote]
    Clearly, the majority of NFL owners are conservative. All you need to do is check out the list of contributors to political parties. The San Diego Chargers dwarf everyone else in its (Alex Spanos) contributions to the Republican Party. Ironically (or not so), the leading contributor to the Dems is the St. Louis Rams. Check it out:
    http://www.opensecre...
    Exactly.

    This was never about Limbaugh’s politics. This was about his racism. Or the racist character he plays on the radio, to be charitable. Some people on the right are trying to gain political advantage by equating the two, in an ironic twist.

    As for what grounds the NFL would use to prevent Sharpton or any other person from becoming a member, as a private organization they don’t really need to give any as a legal matter. As a practical matter, I would presume that they’d handle it as they handled Limbaugh – a few quiet words of discouragement and the problem goes away.[/quote]
    I love how people just throw around terms like “racist” with disrgard. Rush is not a racist and I challenge you to prove it, because you can’t. You disagree with him politically so you attack him personally, just a sign of someone with little intelligence and even less character.

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 1:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”354456″]This was never about Limbaugh’s politics. This was about his racism.[/quote]

    george preston marshall must be rolling over in his grave

    wait…do they have graves in hell?

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 1:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”354454″][quote comment=”354445″]Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]
    Oh really? And he is a racist because you say he is a racist? ok then, you are ignorant because I say you are ignorant.[/quote]
    No, he’s a racist because he says race-baiting things. We could quibble about whether he really believes them, or whether it’s just a character he plays on the radio, but I find that to be a distinction without a difference.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 1:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”354448″][quote comment=”354434″][quote comment=”354374″][quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?[/quote]
    I’ve seen this uni listed on more than one worst unis list — probably for the reasons mentioned above. Although I generally go with classic ones like the Celtics, I really like the Warriors’ duds, perhaps in a guilty pleasure sort of way. BTW, this is from a guy who has always enjoyed the Astros’ tequila sunrise effects.[/quote]

    I too, love the Tequila Sunrise, the Rainbow Nuggets, the creamsicle Bucs and the Striped Broncos, however the Warriors are just too busy and nonsensicl to me…What’s with the lightning bolt?

    To me, they are the NBA’s Buffalo Bills home uni.

    To counter that, the Blazers Rip City uniforms are beauties:

    http://www.scottsspo...

    simple, symmetrical side panels with no extraneous crap.[/quote]

    Yes, sometimes the regular side panels are fine, but if the opportunity presents itself to do something different within the context of the logo, then individuality should be encouraged. I prefer the Warriors thunderbolts for just that reason. The old circa 1977 uniform of the 76ers was terrific with the stars running down the side panels as well. In football, I preferred the New England Patriots 1993 red/blue merging pants striping pattern to what they wear today.

  • Marc M. | October 15, 2009 at 2:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”354459″][quote comment=”354454″][quote comment=”354445″]Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]
    Oh really? And he is a racist because you say he is a racist? ok then, you are ignorant because I say you are ignorant.[/quote]
    No, he’s a racist because he says race-baiting things. We could quibble about whether he really believes them, or whether it’s just a character he plays on the radio, but I find that to be a distinction without a difference.[/quote]
    Ok, what does he say specifically, give me an example. Typical rhetoric with no facts to back up your slanderous statements.

  • Steve May | October 15, 2009 at 2:02 pm |

    On a different – somewhat uni-related topic – They announced what the medals are going to look like for the 2010 Winter Olympics today – Interesting concept – I like the “waves” – no surprise with the West Coast Aboriginal artwork.

    Link – with Video – http://www.vancouver...

  • Shaun | October 15, 2009 at 2:03 pm |

    Not exactly uni related, but how can you sell this as \”glass home plate\”?

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

  • Randy Miller | October 15, 2009 at 2:05 pm |

    As a kid growing up in Dallas, I remember that the Cowboys did practice in the early ’60s duds for quite a while. My recollection as a hero-worshipping kid is that Lilly wore 68 in practice…

  • The Jeff | October 15, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”354463″]Not exactly uni related, but how can you sell this as \”glass home plate\”?

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

    Because no one wants to buy an engraved glass pentagon.

  • Teebz | October 15, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”354440″]Anyone have the jersey’s mocked up of the Central Hockey League??? If so, I’d like to see them.

    I’m also looking for images specifically of the two expansion teams in uniform – the Missouri Mavericks and the Allen Americans.

    I am a KC resident and and Mavs season ticket holder (haven’t seen the uni’s yet.) – trying to gear up for the season.[/quote]

    From what I could dig up…

    Mavs on the road

    The Americans played all their pre-season games in Dallas Stars’ practice jerseys. I’m not sure what they are wearing at this point.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    Look, politics and charges of racism aside, Limbaugh thrives on, and profits from, being bombastic. It’s his schtick, and he’s plays to a specific and receptive audience…meaning people who agree with him.

    In that kind of performance mode he’s gonna say some things that will sound pretty outrageous to some people. It’s just gonna happen.

    And somewhere along the line it’s gonna get scrutinized, too.

    Welcome to the world of being a public figure, Rush.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 2:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”354461″][quote comment=”354459″][quote comment=”354454″][quote comment=”354445″]Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]
    Oh really? And he is a racist because you say he is a racist? ok then, you are ignorant because I say you are ignorant.[/quote]
    No, he’s a racist because he says race-baiting things. We could quibble about whether he really believes them, or whether it’s just a character he plays on the radio, but I find that to be a distinction without a difference.[/quote]
    Ok, what does he say specifically, give me an example. Typical rhetoric with no facts to back up your slanderous statements.[/quote]

    Anyone who listens to an entire show, instead of only hearing soundbites taken from other sources, will soon discover he is not a racist. A loudmouth, yes. Inflammatory, yes. And when I used to listen to him, I also listened to NPR news to get the liberal perspective, then I made up my own mind.

    Bottom line, Phil has two points: 1) if Limbaugh can’t buy into a team, perhaps Sharpton shouldn’t either. 2) yes, let’s get back to the unis.

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”354467″]Look, politics and charges of racism aside, Limbaugh thrives on, and profits from, being bombastic. It’s his schtick, and he’s plays to a specific and receptive audience…meaning people who agree with him.

    In that kind of performance mode he’s gonna say some things that will sound pretty outrageous to some people. It’s just gonna happen.

    And somewhere along the line it’s gonna get scrutinized, too.

    Welcome to the world of being a public figure, Rush.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    There is that. For the record, I have no great problem with him, even share some of his political convictions. Heck, I admire the guy for the career he’s carved out for himself. You have to respect that.

    But it’s impossible to listen to him for any lengthy period and not hear his race-baiting. The school bus incident is the most recent one I can think of. His comments about McNabb on ESPN certainly injected race into a conversation that didn’t particularly need it. Works better in a radio monologue than on television.

  • mike 2 | October 15, 2009 at 2:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”354463″]Not exactly uni related, but how can you sell this as \”glass home plate\”?

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

    1. Shouldn’t home plate be shaped somewhat like home plate?

    2. Who the heck buys something like that? Five Hundred bucks?

  • mike 2 | October 15, 2009 at 2:17 pm |

    And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 2:19 pm |

    I too was struck by the thought that basketball shorts are now longer than football pants. I’d rather see the long sleeves look than today’s goofy baggy pants.

    Well, Ricko, if the NFL doesn’t warm to your idea of striped compression shirts, contact the NBA.

  • timmy b | October 15, 2009 at 2:19 pm |

    This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 2:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”354471″]And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).[/quote]
    There’s a certain amount of that, to be sure. I’ve really been chomping at the bit over the last couple days. But I don’t know how baseball could really have avoided it, with three sweeps.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 2:22 pm |

    Does anyone else to this…

    Sometimes have different opinions on the same uniform?

    I find myself reacting to how they look in the full shot (at the snap of the ball, as the point guard is bringing the ball up court, etc.)…

    …and then also how I feel about them when I get closer look.

    Usually the opinions (good or bad) are the same.

    Not always. Take the Indiana Pacers pins of a few years ago. Looked kind cool when you saw all 10 players on the court, but up close, just WAY too much going on.

    So, when I said I liked the Warriors, I don’t really have an up close opinion. But as to the unique color combination and basic “feel” they look pretty good when, say, I’m watching a highlight package. Guess I’ll have to take closer look now.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 2:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”354471″]And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).[/quote]

    You don’t have TBS either?

    Yeah, I’m kinda out of it as far as baseball is concerned. All I know is we’ve been spared from yet another Sox/Yanks (yawn) classic. How ’bout bringing back some day baseball?

  • BM | October 15, 2009 at 2:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”354461″][quote comment=”354459″][quote comment=”354454″][quote comment=”354445″]Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]
    Oh really? And he is a racist because you say he is a racist? ok then, you are ignorant because I say you are ignorant.[/quote]
    No, he’s a racist because he says race-baiting things. We could quibble about whether he really believes them, or whether it’s just a character he plays on the radio, but I find that to be a distinction without a difference.[/quote]
    Ok, what does he say specifically, give me an example. Typical rhetoric with no facts to back up your slanderous statements.[/quote]

    http://newsone.com/o...

  • Graf Zeppelin | October 15, 2009 at 2:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”354457″] You disagree with him politically so you attack him personally, just a sign of someone with little intelligence and even less character.[/quote]

    That’s funny. To me, remarks like this are a sign of low intelligence and character. But that’s just me.

    Back to uni talk, please.

  • stirpey | October 15, 2009 at 2:30 pm |

    Pitt was supposed to release their system of dress basketball uniforms today. any one have any leaked twitpics or anything?

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 2:30 pm |

    I like that the Suns and Warriors played at that tennis facility. Anyone else think outdoor basketball would be cool? Not during the NBA season, of course…although I like the thought of having the All-Star Game outside at, say, Dodger Stadium?

    Maybe the developmental or summer leagues could experiment with the idea. You’d need a different surface, obviously, if weather is an issue, but it could be done.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 2:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”354473″]This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.[/quote]

    You sure at least a couple of those years from 57 to 59 they weren’t silver? I have yet to see a B&W photo from those years where the helmets and pants were as dark as, say, the Redskins or Notre Dame or Georgia Tech any of the teams that DID wear gold? They virtually always track as about the same shade of “gray” as the Lions. And we know “Vegas Gold” wasn’t around yet

    Now go to thumbnail page 26 in this 1959 issue of SI for a color photo inciuding 49er Abe Woodson at Kezar in, clearly, silver, red, silver.
    http://sportsillustr...

    (Imagine my confusion at the time, LOL)

    —Ricko

  • Kek | October 15, 2009 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”354447″][quote comment=”354444″][quote comment=”354422″][quote comment=”354420″][quote comment=”354419″]Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    pretty certain the name “redskin” wasn’t an allusion to their uniform color[/quote]

    Oh for the love of…

    Sorry, I’ll try to remember to use /sarcasm tags from now on. Sheesh.[/quote]
    Was it true Jim Zorn wanted to rename the team the “maroon-and-black skins”?[/quote]

    Assuming you are serious:
    At one of Zorn’s first press conferences, he was asked off-handedly if he knew the team’s colors. His response of “maroon and black” doomed him to the purgatory in which he now finds himself. He might as well as referred to them as the Cowboys.[/quote]
    (GROAN!) if you have to explain my joke, I guess it wasn’t as funny as I originally thought it was!!!!!!

  • Kek | October 15, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”354479″]Pitt was supposed to release their system of dress basketball uniforms today. any one have any leaked twitpics or anything?[/quote]
    Follow a couple guys on twitter, but haven’t noticed anything yet

  • LarryB | October 15, 2009 at 2:40 pm |

    TimmyB not sure if you saw the pictures from yesterday. A great site with many old sports photos.

    Anyhow there was one of the Bears playing in the 1940’s. And some guesses were made as to who the Bears were playing.

    I will try and find it in case you see this.

  • Kek | October 15, 2009 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”354449″]Today’s ESPN column is up:
    http://sports.espn.g...
    Fancy new glamour shot in graphic?

  • rhdii | October 15, 2009 at 2:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”354457″][quote comment=”354456″][quote comment=”354451″][quote comment=”354450″][quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]

    sorry i paint with such a broad brush…perhaps al sharpton is not a great a racist as is rush limbaugh…but lets face it, they’re both pretty good with the inflamatory rhetoric

    im glad you feel mr. sharpton would also be denied a minority stake in an nfl ownership bid, were he to attempt one (i donno, does he even have that kind of scratch?)

    i just wonder if he actually would be denied, and, if he were, on what grounds[/quote]
    Clearly, the majority of NFL owners are conservative. All you need to do is check out the list of contributors to political parties. The San Diego Chargers dwarf everyone else in its (Alex Spanos) contributions to the Republican Party. Ironically (or not so), the leading contributor to the Dems is the St. Louis Rams. Check it out:
    http://www.opensecre...
    Exactly.

    This was never about Limbaugh’s politics. This was about his racism. Or the racist character he plays on the radio, to be charitable. Some people on the right are trying to gain political advantage by equating the two, in an ironic twist.

    As for what grounds the NFL would use to prevent Sharpton or any other person from becoming a member, as a private organization they don’t really need to give any as a legal matter. As a practical matter, I would presume that they’d handle it as they handled Limbaugh – a few quiet words of discouragement and the problem goes away.[/quote]
    I love how people just throw around terms like “racist” with disrgard. Rush is not a racist and I challenge you to prove it, because you can’t. You disagree with him politically so you attack him personally, just a sign of someone with little intelligence and even less character.[/quote]

    I don’t come on here for politics but I just can’t let this go. Rush sells hate and anger and that doesn’t guarantee you an NFL team. The same NFL that suspended a dog fighter doesn’t want an owner who blames “immigrants” for the housing crisis, compares the president’s logo to the Nazi’s logo, and says white kids get beat up by black kids in Obama’s America.

    You may not call that racism but the NFL–and a whole bunch of Americans–do.

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 2:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”354481″]go to thumbnail page 26 in this 1959 issue of SI for a color photo inciuding 49er Abe Woodson at Kezar in, clearly, silver, red, silver.
    http://sportsillustr...

    here’s that pic in case anyone didn’t click thru ricko’s link

    what’s with the two tone pants?

    did nike design those?

  • Brendan | October 15, 2009 at 2:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”354479″]Pitt was supposed to release their system of dress basketball uniforms today. any one have any leaked twitpics or anything?[/quote]

    Here ya go:

    http://pittsburgh.ri...

  • LarryB | October 15, 2009 at 2:45 pm |

    http://imgs.inkfrog....

    Bears vs?

    Warren’s page also had a nice shot of the 49ers with white leather helmets and stripe.

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 2:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”354487″]href=http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2525/4014955464_6abc8b2100_o.jpg rel=”nofollow”>here’s that pic in case anyone didn’t click thru ricko’s link

    [/quote]
    What is it that half of the crowd is wearing on their heads – 49ers visors?

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 2:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”354482″][quote comment=”354447″][quote comment=”354444″][quote comment=”354422″][quote comment=”354420″][quote comment=”354419″]Washington Burgundyskins?[/quote]

    pretty certain the name “redskin” wasn’t an allusion to their uniform color[/quote]

    Oh for the love of…

    Sorry, I’ll try to remember to use /sarcasm tags from now on. Sheesh.[/quote]
    Was it true Jim Zorn wanted to rename the team the “maroon-and-black skins”?[/quote]

    Assuming you are serious:
    At one of Zorn’s first press conferences, he was asked off-handedly if he knew the team’s colors. His response of “maroon and black” doomed him to the purgatory in which he now finds himself. He might as well as referred to them as the Cowboys.[/quote]
    (GROAN!) if you have to explain my joke, I guess it wasn’t as funny as I originally thought it was!!!!!![/quote]

    Oh.
    You’re right.

  • LarryB | October 15, 2009 at 2:50 pm |

    ESPN Classic now has the 1969 Texas vs Oklahoma game. Started at 2 pm.

    I am taping it. I saw the beginning and remember when the players would get introduced before the game on camera. Bill Fleming did the intros

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 2:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”354487″][quote comment=”354481″]go to thumbnail page 26 in this 1959 issue of SI for a color photo inciuding 49er Abe Woodson at Kezar in, clearly, silver, red, silver.
    http://sportsillustr...

    here’s that pic in case anyone didn’t click thru ricko’s link

    what’s with the two tone pants?

    did nike design those?[/quote]

    Pretty much the norm back then. Hadn’t figured out how to make “satiny” fabrics stretch yet. Most teams pants had a matte finish stretchable material on the back and the other stuff (sometimes shiny) on the front. Was like that even into the 80’s I think.

    Check Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, USC, UCLA, the Lions, the Raiders, the Niners…even teams like Michigan. It’s just so much more noticeable when the two different fabrics aren’t separated by pants striping.

    —Ricko

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 2:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”354473″]This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.[/quote]

    I noticed some negative comments about the 49ers mixing the silver and gold colors on those 1960s uniforms by some people on this board. Yet, I wonder if the Niners had kept the silver/gold combo to the present day, if that would still be the case. Initially, my reaction was negative, but started to change. Obviously, when you consider the actual 1849 miners, they did mine for silver along with gold. It would have been a unique color combination, but all three colors might have produced a tremendous uniform. Of course, the face mask would have to remain grey.

  • stirpey | October 15, 2009 at 2:51 pm |

    [quote comment=\”354488\”][quote comment=\”354479\”]Pitt was supposed to release their system of dress basketball uniforms today. any one have any leaked twitpics or anything?[/quote]

    Here ya go:

    http://pittsburgh.ri...

    I love how we are going to a simple, clean, fresh look with nike. Someone on that message board say they are like that syracuse crap. I disagree, yeah its SOD but its clean and keeps up with today’s sports fashion.

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 2:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”354487″][quote comment=”354481″]go to thumbnail page 26 in this 1959 issue of SI for a color photo inciuding 49er Abe Woodson at Kezar in, clearly, silver, red, silver.
    http://sportsillustr...

    here’s that pic in case anyone didn’t click thru ricko’s link

    what’s with the two tone pants?

    did nike design those?[/quote]

    Those look a little like the pants the Packers wore in the late 1940s.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 2:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”354494″][quote comment=”354473″]This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.[/quote]

    I noticed some negative comments about the 49ers mixing the silver and gold colors on those 1960s uniforms by some people on this board. Yet, I wonder if the Niners had kept the silver/gold combo to the present day, if that would still be the case. Initially, my reaction was negative, but started to change. Obviously, when you consider the actual 1849 miners, they did mine for silver along with gold. It would have been a unique color combination, but all three colors might have produced a tremendous uniform. Of course, the face mask would have to remain grey.[/quote]

    Did a little research, it seems silver mining did not occur in California until the 1860s, so grey is best left only to the 49er face mask.

  • Ricko | October 15, 2009 at 3:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”354494″][quote comment=”354473″]This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.[/quote]

    I noticed some negative comments about the 49ers mixing the silver and gold colors on those 1960s uniforms by some people on this board. Yet, I wonder if the Niners had kept the silver/gold combo to the present day, if that would still be the case. Initially, my reaction was negative, but started to change. Obviously, when you consider the actual 1849 miners, they did mine for silver along with gold. It would have been a unique color combination, but all three colors might have produced a tremendous uniform. Of course, the face mask would have to remain grey.[/quote]

    Thank you for noting there was a helluva lot of silver involved that “gold” rush, too.

    You’re right about nothing wrong with wearing silver and gold at the same. The 49ers certainly would the most likely pro team to give it a shot. Colorado had done it (this year as a throwback). Idaho (or is it Idaho State?) has done it, and may still be doing it. I haven’t see them for a long time.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 3:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”354492″][quote comment=”354487″][quote comment=”354481″]go to thumbnail page 26 in this 1959 issue of SI for a color photo inciuding 49er Abe Woodson at Kezar in, clearly, silver, red, silver.
    http://sportsillustr...

    here’s that pic in case anyone didn’t click thru ricko’s link

    what’s with the two tone pants?

    did nike design those?[/quote]

    Pretty much the norm back then. Hadn’t figured out how to make “satiny” fabrics stretch yet. Most teams pants had a matte finish stretchable material on the back and the other stuff (sometimes shiny) on the front. Was like that even into the 80’s I think.

    Check Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, USC, UCLA, the Lions, the Raiders, the Niners…even teams like Michigan. It’s just so much more noticeable when the two different fabrics aren’t separated by pants striping.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    thanks rick, i actually knew that…should have put the [sarcasm] tags on

    was referring to this phenomenon (a/k/a “sweatbox”)

    /thanks for the history lesson for the younguns tho ;)

  • Nick | October 15, 2009 at 3:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”354430″]That…
    http://www.footballc...
    …is just an old photo, carelessly selected. Guarantee you the Cowboys weren’t still wearing ’62 gear in training camp in ’68 or ’69. Once they deep-sixed that original set it was GONE.

    Besides, the quality control and concern for accuracy on football cards was pretty much a joke until at least the 70s, actually.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The NFL Network show on the 1972 Dallas Cowboys Superbowl Champs show training camp/practice film of that team wearing the 1960-1963 jerseys, the later three-stripe jerseys, and more modern two stripe jerseys, with players easily identifiable as 1970-1971 players.

    Apparently, they had not yet invented practice jerseys.

    In addition to the cheapness of hanging on to the same jerseys for ten years, it’s 1970-1971 and you are wearing durene jerseys for 95 degree training camp in August, as the Cowboys wore non-mesh durene and/or doubleknit jerseys well into the 1970’s.

    Crazy for the heat!!!

  • Nick | October 15, 2009 at 3:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”354429″][quote comment=”354426″][quote comment=”354421″]When the 49ers were born into the AAFC in 1946 they wore neither gold nor silver, if I’m not mistaken. They were just red & white. My understanding was that they first went to gold in the ’50s, then switched to silver in the early ’60s, then back to gold in ’64. They were like the Packers waffling between being blue or green.

    Regarding the Topps cards, wasn’t it a fairly common practice for NFL teams to wear years-old unis in training camp back in the ’60s/early ’70s… and hence they would show up in the Topps cards? I’ve seen that with other teams – check out this 1969 Bob Lilly card in which he’s wearing the Cowboys ’60-’63 duds:

    http://www.footballc...

    Absolutely, on wearing old gear in camp…but usually was only from the year or so before. That’s why the Bruce Taylor card confused me back then. The photo was taken, at the earliest, in ’71 because of the white adidas. But Niners, I thought, had gone to gold pants in ’65 or so. If you could hold the actual card in your hand, you’d see that the pants clearly are silver. And all the other colors are spot-on, so it isn’t printing issue.

    Just…odd.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I recall the Steelers wearing white pants during the 1971 season, then returning to the yellow pants they had worn during the 1960s and today. I have seen NFL Films programs on the late 1970s Steelers, and players were still wearing those white pants during training camp.[/quote]

    I once read somewhere, from a pretty reputable source, that the main reason that 1960s-1970s Steelers game jerseys were so rare and valuable to obtain was that old man Art Rooney had an arrangement where he donated the Steelers’ gamers to the Pennsylvania PRISON SYSTEM !!!

    Anybody know the true story on that?

  • Mark K | October 15, 2009 at 3:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”354492″]
    here’s that pic in case anyone didn’t click thru ricko’s link

    [/quote]

    You’ve GOT to be kidding me! Chalk FLEW UP!

  • DenverGregg | October 15, 2009 at 3:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”354498″][quote comment=”354494″][quote comment=”354473″]This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.[/quote]

    I noticed some negative comments about the 49ers mixing the silver and gold colors on those 1960s uniforms by some people on this board. Yet, I wonder if the Niners had kept the silver/gold combo to the present day, if that would still be the case. Initially, my reaction was negative, but started to change. Obviously, when you consider the actual 1849 miners, they did mine for silver along with gold. It would have been a unique color combination, but all three colors might have produced a tremendous uniform. Of course, the face mask would have to remain grey.[/quote]

    Thank you for noting there was a helluva lot of silver involved that “gold” rush, too.

    You’re right about nothing wrong with wearing silver and gold at the same. The 49ers certainly would the most likely pro team to give it a shot. Colorado had done it (this year as a throwback). Idaho (or is it Idaho State?) has done it, and may still be doing it. I haven’t see them for a long time.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    AFAIK the Vandals and Buffs are the only two teams that have silver and gold as official colors.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 3:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”354503″]AFAIK the Vandals and Buffs are the only two teams that have silver and gold as official colors.[/quote]That Burl Ives Christmas special uses Silver and Gold too.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 3:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”354493″]ESPN Classic now has the 1969 Texas vs Oklahoma game. Started at 2 pm.

    I am taping it. I saw the beginning and remember when the players would get introduced before the game on camera. Bill Fleming did the intros[/quote]
    I loved that! They would say their name and position, correct?

    Today it wouldn’t work out so well, but really good back then.

  • SBC | October 15, 2009 at 3:45 pm |

    To rhdii, chance michaels, and others calling Limbaugh a racist…

    …have you no shame? More importantly, have you no HONOR?

    Outside of murderer or rapist calling someone a racist is just about the most serious thing you can accuse someone of. Seems to me we ought to be VERY VERY careful before throwing those kinds of accusations around. We don’t normally opine about someone being a murderer or rapist without some ultra-serious proof and we shouldn’t be doing so with racist either. It’s a HORRIBLE trend in society today to demonize political opponents by throwing out the most personal of character assassination terms and it needs to stop.

    I apologize deeply for my post as I hate politics entering this site as much as anyone, but this is about basic civility and decency and I couldn’t let the libelous claims pass without comment.

    Since this is a uniform site: like others have stated it’s hard to fathom a team named after the 1849 gold strike having silver, not gold, as a color. But then again, I could never imagine the 76ers being anything but red white and blue. :)

    Ricko said:
    “You’re right about nothing wrong with wearing silver and gold at the same. The 49ers certainly would the most likely pro team to give it a shot. Colorado had done it (this year as a throwback). Idaho (or is it Idaho State?) has done it, and y still be doing it. I haven’t see them for a long time.”

    Didn’t the Univ of Montana for awhile try to have gold silver and/or bronze as part of their pallette? Or is my mind playing tricks on me?

  • DenverGregg | October 15, 2009 at 3:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”354506″]To rhdii, chance michaels, and others calling Limbaugh a racist…

    …have you no shame? More importantly, have you no HONOR?

    Outside of murderer or rapist calling someone a racist is just about the most serious thing you can accuse someone of. Seems to me we ought to be VERY VERY careful before throwing those kinds of accusations around. We don’t normally opine about someone being a murderer or rapist without some ultra-serious proof and we shouldn’t be doing so with racist either. It’s a HORRIBLE trend in society today to demonize political opponents by throwing out the most personal of character assassination terms and it needs to stop.

    I apologize deeply for my post as I hate politics entering this site as much as anyone, but this is about basic civility and decency and I couldn’t let the libelous claims pass without comment.

    Since this is a uniform site: like others have stated it’s hard to fathom a team named after the 1849 gold strike having silver, not gold, as a color. But then again, I could never imagine the 76ers being anything but red white and blue. :)

    Ricko said:
    “You’re right about nothing wrong with wearing silver and gold at the same. The 49ers certainly would the most likely pro team to give it a shot. Colorado had done it (this year as a throwback). Idaho (or is it Idaho State?) has done it, and y still be doing it. I haven’t see them for a long time.”

    Didn’t the Univ of Montana for awhile try to have gold silver and/or bronze as part of their pallette? Or is my mind playing tricks on me?[/quote]
    Even though Montana’s motto is Oro y Plata, the school wore copper and gold, then maroon and silver, but not silver and gold at the same time.

    Also agreed on (a) too much politicking at Uniwatch and (b) the unspeakable vileness of

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 3:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”354506″]To rhdii, chance michaels, and others calling Limbaugh a racist…

    …have you no shame? More importantly, have you no HONOR?

    Outside of murderer or rapist calling someone a racist is just about the most serious thing you can accuse someone of. Seems to me we ought to be VERY VERY careful before throwing those kinds of accusations around. We don’t normally opine about someone being a murderer or rapist without some ultra-serious proof and we shouldn’t be doing so with racist either. It’s a HORRIBLE trend in society today to demonize political opponents by throwing out the most personal of character assassination terms and it needs to stop.

    I apologize deeply for my post as I hate politics entering this site as much as anyone, but this is about basic civility and decency and I couldn’t let the libelous claims pass without comment.

    Since this is a uniform site: like others have stated it’s hard to fathom a team named after the 1849 gold strike having silver, not gold, as a color. But then again, I could never imagine the 76ers being anything but red white and blue. :)

    Ricko said:
    “You’re right about nothing wrong with wearing silver and gold at the same. The 49ers certainly would the most likely pro team to give it a shot. Colorado had done it (this year as a throwback). Idaho (or is it Idaho State?) has done it, and y still be doing it. I haven’t see them for a long time.”

    Didn’t the Univ of Montana for awhile try to have gold silver and/or bronze as part of their pallette? Or is my mind playing tricks on me?[/quote]
    Or the Washington Capitals

  • LarryB | October 15, 2009 at 3:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”354505″][quote comment=”354493″]ESPN Classic now has the 1969 Texas vs Oklahoma game. Started at 2 pm.

    I am taping it. I saw the beginning and remember when the players would get introduced before the game on camera. Bill Fleming did the intros[/quote]
    I loved that! They would say their name and position, correct?

    Today it wouldn’t work out so well, but really good back then.[/quote]

    Yep, It was pretty cool. I was thinking what if they did that today.

    And after the players were introduced the head coach was.

  • Jeff P(udlo) | October 15, 2009 at 3:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”354454″][quote comment=”354445″][quote comment=”354439″][quote comment=”354435″][quote comment=”354428″]NFL apparently refuses to lower bar for Limbaugh.[/quote]

    “Clearly,” FOX News said this morning, “this is an attack on him because he is a Conservative.”

    I didn’t say it. FOX News said it. Make of it what you will.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i do have to wonder about tremendous double standards applying

    what if al sharpton had voiced an interest in being a minority (no, not that kind of minority) owner in an NFL franchise? he’s equally as bad as limbaugh in his rhetoric…would he have been denied a stake?

    back to unis[/quote]
    Not so fast, pardner. You can’t just toss that out and expect us to ignore it.

    Equally bad? I don’t know about that. Sharpton sure has his moments, but Limbaugh has a larger platform, so he can utter a far greater amount of racist nonsense.

    But yes, I expect that he would be denied a stake. The NFL doesn’t like attracting controversy, and to put a racist loudmouth in the owner’s box is a surefire method of doing just that.[/quote]
    Oh really? And he is a racist because you say he is a racist? ok then, you are ignorant because I say you are ignorant.[/quote]

    You don’t have to just take his word for it.

  • ry co 40 | October 15, 2009 at 4:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”354495″][quote comment=\”354488\”][quote comment=\”354479\”]Pitt was supposed to release their system of dress basketball uniforms today. any one have any leaked twitpics or anything?[/quote]

    Here ya go:

    http://pittsburgh.ri...

    I love how we are going to a simple, clean, fresh look with nike. Someone on that message board say they are like that syracuse crap. I disagree, yeah its SOD but its clean and keeps up with today’s sports fashion.[/quote]

    ahhh… welcome to pitt, nike!

    old panther logo on the shorts?!?!

  • Paul Lukas | October 15, 2009 at 4:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”354485″][quote comment=”354449″]Today’s ESPN column is up:
    http://sports.espn.g...
    Fancy new glamour shot in graphic?[/quote]

    It actually ran in my two recent NHL columns, too. And the day after that photo was taken, I got a new pair of glasses, so it’s already out of date… But it’s one of the few photos of myself I don’t totally hate….

  • Geeman | October 15, 2009 at 4:33 pm |

    Don’t like to bring politics in, but:

    Limbaugh deserves to be stomped. You reap what you sow. The man is filled with hate and has a problem with minorities. Well, sorry, pal, but minories are the majority in the NFL and they don’t want you in their club. Thank God.

    Besides, he’s a chickenhawk who because of a bum knee got out of military service. Probably ran home to mommy to complain when the draft board came knocking. Good riddance!

  • rpm | October 15, 2009 at 5:00 pm |

    doing some sock research on nfl teams, and came across this. wtf is going on here? theeeesman is wearing two different socks, and neither of them is the team’s socks. i’m just saying it’s odd, i hope i didn’t short circuit anyone.

  • JohnnyO | October 15, 2009 at 5:04 pm |

    I am usually pretty good at google searching, but I can’t seem to find any pictures of the Packers playing a pre-season game at Camp Randall Stadium in Madison, WI. The Pack played 12 pre-season games there from 1986-1999 and I can’t find any pics! Any help would be greatly appreciated. The last game was a 27-12 victory over the Giants on Aug. 23, 1999. It was witnessed by 78,184 fans, the largest crowd ever to attend a Packers game in the state of Wisconsin.

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 5:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”354513″]Don’t like to bring politics in, but:

    Limbaugh deserves to be stomped. You reap what you sow. The man is filled with hate and has a problem with minorities. Well, sorry, pal, but minories are the majority in the NFL and they don’t want you in their club. Thank God.

    Besides, he’s a chickenhawk who because of a bum knee got out of military service. Probably ran home to mommy to complain when the draft board came knocking. Good riddance![/quote]
    So you apparently you like to skip facts like how Limbaugh’s draft number was above those called so the draft board never came knocking, granted his classification was changed, but during the ’60s many people were looking for loopholes out, e.g. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Dan Quayle.

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 5:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”354516″][quote comment=”354513″]Don’t like to bring politics in, but:

    Limbaugh deserves to be stomped. You reap what you sow. The man is filled with hate and has a problem with minorities. Well, sorry, pal, but minories are the majority in the NFL and they don’t want you in their club. Thank God.

    Besides, he’s a chickenhawk who because of a bum knee got out of military service. Probably ran home to mommy to complain when the draft board came knocking. Good riddance![/quote]
    So you apparently you like to skip facts like how Limbaugh’s draft number was above those called so the draft board never came knocking, granted his classification was changed, but during the ’60s many people were looking for loopholes out, e.g. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Dan Quayle.[/quote]
    I think you misidentified one of the recent Vice Presidents. Al Gore actually served in the Army as a journalist in Vietnam. Were you thinking of Dick Cheney?

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 5:20 pm |

    [quote]I think you misidentified one of the recent Vice Presidents. Al Gore actually served in the Army as a journalist in Vietnam. Were you thinking of Dick Cheney?[/quote]

    al gore was a journalist? next thing you’re gonna tell me he wrote a best seller, won an academy award and invented the Interwebs

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 5:20 pm |

    Well, since we can’t seem to get off politics….

    I have no problem with anybody trying to get out of the draft. Had I been of age at the time, I would have been among them.

    My problem is with the chickenhawks of either party who then impugn the patriotism of anybody, especially when they go after someone who served. Lower than low.

  • chance michaels | October 15, 2009 at 5:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”354518″][quote]I think you misidentified one of the recent Vice Presidents. Al Gore actually served in the Army as a journalist in Vietnam. Were you thinking of Dick Cheney?[/quote]

    al gore was a journalist? next thing you’re gonna tell me he wrote a best seller, won an academy award and invented the Interwebs[/quote]
    All lies spread by his accomplices in the Liberal Media Elite.

    Al Gore weren’t ever on Futurama, neither.

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 5:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”354517″][quote comment=”354516″][quote comment=”354513″]Don’t like to bring politics in, but:

    Limbaugh deserves to be stomped. You reap what you sow. The man is filled with hate and has a problem with minorities. Well, sorry, pal, but minories are the majority in the NFL and they don’t want you in their club. Thank God.

    Besides, he’s a chickenhawk who because of a bum knee got out of military service. Probably ran home to mommy to complain when the draft board came knocking. Good riddance![/quote]
    So you apparently you like to skip facts like how Limbaugh’s draft number was above those called so the draft board never came knocking, granted his classification was changed, but during the ’60s many people were looking for loopholes out, e.g. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Al Gore, and Dan Quayle.[/quote]
    I think you misidentified one of the recent Vice Presidents. Al Gore actually served in the Army as a journalist in Vietnam. Were you thinking of Dick Cheney?[/quote]
    Mea culpa, wasn’t thinking of Cheney but did make a statement without checking facts, so maybe I was thinking like him. Gore did indeed serve in the 20th Engineer Brigade. I was trying to balance it politically, but suffice it to say there was a lot of avoidance by people who are now on both sides of the aisle.

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 5:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”354416″][quote comment=”354407″]Found it. The 49ers played at Yankee Stadium in 1957, then not again until 1963; by that point, we’ve established, they’d put the SF on the helmet.

    http://images.google...

    I think the ’50s Niners might be the only NFL team to have had four helmet colors in a single decade: silver, white, red and gold.[/quote]

    They’re probably the only team to have that many completely different colored helmets at all, at least in the modern era. I know the Redskins had a few different helmets, but the feather and spear helmets were both still red. I can’t think of anyone else even close without going back into the leather days.[/quote]
    Houston Oilers, sort of.
    1965 light blue
    1966 silver
    1972 a slightly darker shade of light blue
    1975 white

  • rpm | October 15, 2009 at 5:43 pm |

    and what is this? orange socks in the supa? do i just not remember that?

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 5:47 pm |

    If Limbaugh is a racist or has problems with blacks, etc. why is he wanting to be a MINORITY owner in the NFL?

    -rimshot-

    Thank you, thank you, I’ve got shows nightly 9 and 11, but parents leave the kiddies at home for the late show…it gets a little raunchy!

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 5:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”354518″]Al Gore actually served in the Army…[/quote]
    It ain’t me. I ain’t no Senator’s son. I ain’t no fortunate one.

  • KT | October 15, 2009 at 5:52 pm |

    The “Rip City” jerseys were awesome. Even moreso if they pissed anybody off who doesn’t live in Portland and who doesn’t think anything other than the official and full name of a franchise belongs on a jersey.

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 5:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”354515″]I am usually pretty good at google searching, but I can’t seem to find any pictures of the Packers playing a pre-season game at Camp Randall Stadium in Madison, WI. [/quote]
    JohnnyO, good luck to you.

    Strangely enough, the most readily available pictures of the Packers in Madison involve them playing BASKETBALL. :-)

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 6:01 pm |

    I once read somewhere, from a pretty reputable source, that the main reason that 1960s-1970s Steelers game jerseys were so rare and valuable to obtain was that old man Art Rooney had an arrangement where he donated the Steelers’ gamers to the Pennsylvania PRISON SYSTEM !!!

    Anybody know the true story on that?

    O.J. can probably find out.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 6:12 pm |

    So you apparently you like to skip facts like how Limbaugh’s draft number was above those called so the draft board never came knocking

    Can you direct me to a reliable source for his draft lottery number and what year he was in it?
    (not arguing for either side, just like to know).

  • rpm | October 15, 2009 at 6:18 pm |

    no socks, but here is a style of posed shot featuring ed podolak i came across that i have not seen done before.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 6:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”354511″][quote comment=”354495″][quote comment=\”354488\”][quote comment=\”354479\”]Pitt was supposed to release their system of dress basketball uniforms today. any one have any leaked twitpics or anything?[/quote]

    Here ya go:

    http://pittsburgh.ri...

    I love how we are going to a simple, clean, fresh look with nike. Someone on that message board say they are like that syracuse crap. I disagree, yeah its SOD but its clean and keeps up with today’s sports fashion.[/quote]

    ahhh… welcome to pitt, nike!

    old panther logo on the shorts?!?![/quote]

    I do like the panther head logo, introduced in 1997, but wish they would ditch the gold and bring back yellow along with the script “Pitt”.

  • leon | October 15, 2009 at 6:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”354529″]So you apparently you like to skip facts like how Limbaugh’s draft number was above those called so the draft board never came knocking

    Can you direct me to a reliable source for his draft lottery number and what year he was in it?
    (not arguing for either side, just like to know).[/quote]

    never mind, i figured it out for myself, with the help of our friend and basic arithmetic.

    Now, let’s play some ball!

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 6:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”354529″]So you apparently you like to skip facts like how Limbaugh’s draft number was above those called so the draft board never came knocking

    Can you direct me to a reliable source for his draft lottery number and what year he was in it?
    (not arguing for either side, just like to know).[/quote]
    It’s about 3/4 of the way down
    http://www.snopes.co...

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 6:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”354530″]no socks, but here is a style of posed shot featuring ed podolak i came across that i have not seen done before.[/quote]

    Ed Podolak, that’s a name from the past, I think he always wore that distinctive dungard face mask of the era. For anyone who has watched those 90 minute NFL Films greatest games series, the 1971 Miami-KC classic playoff game is long overdue to be produced. Podolak was outstanding in that game, with his all purpose running. Sadly for the Chiefs, Jan Stenerud missed a couple of field goals which would have put KC in the AFC title game against Baltimore, in which the Chiefs would have been favored to win.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 7:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”354476″][quote comment=”354471″]And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).[/quote]

    You don’t have TBS either?

    Yeah, I’m kinda out of it as far as baseball is concerned. All I know is we’ve been spared from yet another Sox/Yanks (yawn) classic. How ’bout bringing back some day baseball?[/quote]
    You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason. And that rivalry has made for some seriously memorable baseball.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 7:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”354503″][quote comment=”354498″][quote comment=”354494″][quote comment=”354473″]This much we know on the 49ers helmets (base color) from 1953 when they switched to red helmets thru 1964:

    1953: red, silver stripe
    1954: red, silver stripe
    1955: red, broader white stripe
    1956: white
    1957: gold
    1958: gold
    1959: gold
    1960: silver, red NW stripes
    1961: silver, red NW stripes
    1962: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1963: silver, logo, red/white/red stripes
    1964: gold, logo, red/white/red stripes

    Then ricko throws a wrench into all of this with the Ken Willard and friend silver hat/pants from the 1965 SI cover. Drat! That shot was at the Coliseum AFAIK as Kezar did not have seats/chairbacks, but bleachers with a cyclone fence in front of the stands with the section area {“NK”) tacked onto the fence.

    Mix and match, for 1964 and 1965, perhaps???

    Cardinals: 1956 and 1957, red helmets worn with white jersey and red pants. 1958-1960, white helmets with white jersey and red pants away.[/quote]

    I noticed some negative comments about the 49ers mixing the silver and gold colors on those 1960s uniforms by some people on this board. Yet, I wonder if the Niners had kept the silver/gold combo to the present day, if that would still be the case. Initially, my reaction was negative, but started to change. Obviously, when you consider the actual 1849 miners, they did mine for silver along with gold. It would have been a unique color combination, but all three colors might have produced a tremendous uniform. Of course, the face mask would have to remain grey.[/quote]

    Thank you for noting there was a helluva lot of silver involved that “gold” rush, too.

    You’re right about nothing wrong with wearing silver and gold at the same. The 49ers certainly would the most likely pro team to give it a shot. Colorado had done it (this year as a throwback). Idaho (or is it Idaho State?) has done it, and may still be doing it. I haven’t see them for a long time.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    AFAIK the Vandals and Buffs are the only two teams that have silver and gold as official colors.[/quote]

    Just thought of another pro football team which used silver and gold in their color scheme, the New York-New Jersey Knights of the World League of American Football. Usually, the only time the WLAF comes up is when the Orlando Thunder is discussed, but the Knights had solid uniforms. I recall the Birmingham Fire also looked good, and so did the Frankfurt Galaxy. Frankfurt would continue in NFL Europe after the USA based clubs bought the farm.

  • MJM | October 15, 2009 at 7:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”354460″][quote comment=”354448″][quote comment=”354434″][quote comment=”354374″][quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?[/quote]
    I’ve seen this uni listed on more than one worst unis list — probably for the reasons mentioned above. Although I generally go with classic ones like the Celtics, I really like the Warriors’ duds, perhaps in a guilty pleasure sort of way. BTW, this is from a guy who has always enjoyed the Astros’ tequila sunrise effects.[/quote]

    I too, love the Tequila Sunrise, the Rainbow Nuggets, the creamsicle Bucs and the Striped Broncos, however the Warriors are just too busy and nonsensicl to me…What’s with the lightning bolt?

    To me, they are the NBA’s Buffalo Bills home uni.

    To counter that, the Blazers Rip City uniforms are beauties:

    http://www.scottsspo...

    simple, symmetrical side panels with no extraneous crap.[/quote]

    Yes, sometimes the regular side panels are fine, but if the opportunity presents itself to do something different within the context of the logo, then individuality should be encouraged. I prefer the Warriors thunderbolts for just that reason. The old circa 1977 uniform of the 76ers was terrific with the stars running down the side panels as well. In football, I preferred the New England Patriots 1993 red/blue merging pants striping pattern to what they wear today.[/quote]

    The Warrior’s semi-arched, semi-italicised Microsoft Word text is awful and the navy road jerseys are a good example of why gold and orange shouldn’t be used that closely together (they bleed into each other). The collar is what makes the uniform busy with 3 colors. Also, the orange stripe down the side is just a little too loud for me. A little bit of reconfiguration and recoloring could make the Warriors a good looking team. Thumbs up on the thunderbolt!

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 7:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”354535″][quote comment=”354476″][quote comment=”354471″]And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).[/quote]

    You don’t have TBS either?

    Yeah, I’m kinda out of it as far as baseball is concerned. All I know is we’ve been spared from yet another Sox/Yanks (yawn) classic. How ’bout bringing back some day baseball?[/quote]
    You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason. And that rivalry has made for some seriously memorable baseball.[/quote]
    I’m from Mass and after the 2004 ALCS & WS, the Red Sox/Yankees rivalry seems like a concoction of ESPN/Fox because it gives them ratings, personally I think it’s past its prime and I get angry when they play nationally because I know that game will last 3 1/2 to 4 hours and that’s a 9 inning game

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 7:20 pm |

    I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    Well, that’s just it, Kenny. There are three other time zones, mine included, whose views on Yankees-Red Sox range from marginally interested to WGAF.

    I think some of the backlash is a product of ESPN forcing it down our throats all through the season. It’s a regional rivalry, so by definition it’s not quite as fascinating outside its region.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 7:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”354538″][quote comment=”354535″][quote comment=”354476″][quote comment=”354471″]And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).[/quote]

    You don’t have TBS either?

    Yeah, I’m kinda out of it as far as baseball is concerned. All I know is we’ve been spared from yet another Sox/Yanks (yawn) classic. How ’bout bringing back some day baseball?[/quote]
    You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason. And that rivalry has made for some seriously memorable baseball.[/quote]
    I’m from Mass and after the 2004 ALCS & WS, the Red Sox/Yankees rivalry seems like a concoction of ESPN/Fox because it gives them ratings, personally I think it’s past its prime and I get angry when they play nationally because I know that game will last 3 1/2 to 4 hours and that’s a 9 inning game[/quote]
    It DOES give them ratings… that’s because a lot of people watch. Look, I’m ok with saying, “can’t deal with Yanks/Sox this year, don’t have the energy” cause I’m there myself. But for those of us who root for either of those teams, when they lock horns, it’s fun as hell.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 7:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”354539″]I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    Well, that’s just it, Kenny. There are three other time zones, mine included, whose views on Yankees-Red Sox range from marginally interested to WGAF.

    I think some of the backlash is a product of ESPN forcing it down our throats all through the season. It’s a regional rivalry, so by definition it’s not quite as fascinating outside its region.[/quote]
    Ok, but just about any other series draws little interest outside of the two participating cities.

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 7:33 pm |

    i got no dog in a yankees/sawks playoff fight either (it’s a shame someone has to win)…but isn’t bitching about the rivalry (and/or the foxspn conspiracy) kinda played out too?

    if anything, i’d complain about having them on during the regular season so damn often … and god knows, it seems if they’re not playing each other on national TV, then one of the two is playing someone else

    nothing wrong with them playing for keeps tho…you know there’s gonna be great plays, beanballs, maybe a coach or two will get thrown down…and the unis kick ass too

    and after the past 5 straight world series, and a bunch of clunkers for ‘LDS & LCS’s, those 2003 & 2004 ALCS games were classics

    as long as my team aint in the playoffs, i don’t mind yanks/sawks at all…just don’t show em every sunday night during the regular season…since i’m never seeing the pirates or royals in the post season, i’d rather see those teams for the national game(s)

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 7:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”354539″]I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    Well, that’s just it, Kenny. There are three other time zones, mine included, whose views on Yankees-Red Sox range from marginally interested to WGAF.

    I think some of the backlash is a product of ESPN forcing it down our throats all through the season. It’s a regional rivalry, so by definition it’s not quite as fascinating outside its region.[/quote]

    Good point, back when baseball was still the national pastime, the game had greater national interest, and TV ratings. Regardless of who was in the Series, the entire nation was focused. I remember the unpredictability that surrounded each season, beginning in spring training. Those were the good old days.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 7:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”354543″][quote comment=”354539″]I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    Well, that’s just it, Kenny. There are three other time zones, mine included, whose views on Yankees-Red Sox range from marginally interested to WGAF.

    I think some of the backlash is a product of ESPN forcing it down our throats all through the season. It’s a regional rivalry, so by definition it’s not quite as fascinating outside its region.[/quote]

    Good point, back when baseball was still the national pastime, the game had greater national interest, and TV ratings. Regardless of who was in the Series, the entire nation was focused. I remember the unpredictability that surrounded each season, beginning in spring training. Those were the good old days.[/quote]
    Well baseball made that bed and now baseball has to lie in it. They put teams in every nook and cranny of the country and you’re gonna end up with a bunch of teams NO ONE outside that city cares about. Eventually they get good and make the playoffs… and you have LCS and WS matchups that no one watches.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 7:53 pm |

    South Florida is wearing their alternate helmets tonight against Cincy. Good or bad?

  • BurghFan | October 15, 2009 at 8:03 pm |

    You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    More like “the bulk of the eastern time zone north of Pennsylvania and east of Ohio”.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 8:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”354546″]You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    More like “the bulk of the eastern time zone north of Pennsylvania and east of Ohio”.[/quote]
    Look at things objectively and I think you’ll find that Yanks/Sox is one of very few matchups that can draw any sort of national attention.

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 8:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”354543″]
    Good point, back when baseball was still the national pastime, the game had greater national interest, and TV ratings. Regardless of who was in the Series, the entire nation was focused. I remember the unpredictability that surrounded each season, beginning in spring training. Those were the good old days.[/quote]
    Yeah, it was unpredictable who the Yankees were gonna beat in the Series every year.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 8:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”354548″][quote comment=”354543″]
    Good point, back when baseball was still the national pastime, the game had greater national interest, and TV ratings. Regardless of who was in the Series, the entire nation was focused. I remember the unpredictability that surrounded each season, beginning in spring training. Those were the good old days.[/quote]
    Yeah, it was unpredictable who the Yankees were gonna beat in the Series every year.[/quote]

    Except for the late 60s, 70s, 80s, and part of the 90s that is.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 8:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”354549″][quote comment=”354548″][quote comment=”354543″]
    Good point, back when baseball was still the national pastime, the game had greater national interest, and TV ratings. Regardless of who was in the Series, the entire nation was focused. I remember the unpredictability that surrounded each season, beginning in spring training. Those were the good old days.[/quote]
    Yeah, it was unpredictable who the Yankees were gonna beat in the Series every year.[/quote]

    Except for the late 60s, 70s, 80s, and part of the 90s that is.[/quote]
    Yanks won 2 in the late 70s.

  • Gusto44 | October 15, 2009 at 8:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”354547″][quote comment=”354546″]You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    More like “the bulk of the eastern time zone north of Pennsylvania and east of Ohio”.[/quote]
    Look at things objectively and I think you’ll find that Yanks/Sox is one of very few matchups that can draw any sort of national attention.[/quote]

    That’s the problem, back in the day it didn’t take a New York/Boston matchup to bring national attention and interest. Now, many people outside those cities could care less, and wasn’t always that way.

  • Giancarlo | October 15, 2009 at 8:44 pm |

    Baseball hasn’t really been THE national pastime since about 1964. A Harris poll from October 1965 showed that pro football had become “America’s No. 1 Sport.”

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 8:48 pm |

    [quote] it was unpredictable who the Yankees were gonna beat in the Series every year.[/quote]

    or who the braves would lose to

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 8:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”354542″]i got no dog in a yankees/sawks playoff fight either (it’s a shame someone has to win)…but isn’t bitching about the rivalry (and/or the foxspn conspiracy) kinda played out too?

    if anything, i’d complain about having them on during the regular season so damn often … and god knows, it seems if they’re not playing each other on national TV, then one of the two is playing someone else

    nothing wrong with them playing for keeps tho…you know there’s gonna be great plays, beanballs, maybe a coach or two will get thrown down…and the unis kick ass too

    and after the past 5 straight world series, and a bunch of clunkers for ‘LDS & LCS’s, those 2003 & 2004 ALCS games were classics

    as long as my team aint in the playoffs, i don’t mind yanks/sawks at all…just don’t show em every sunday night during the regular season…since i’m never seeing the pirates or royals in the post season, i’d rather see those teams for the national game(s)[/quote]

    Ding ding, Phil, you hit the nail on the head. The reason I don’t want to see the Sox/Yanks in the postseason is because they’re on sooooooo much in the regular season.

    I think it was the ’99 playoffs when they met, and I thought it was very cool. I also thought the 2000 Subway Series was great (well, the matchup, not the actual outcome). That doesn’t mean I want to see the same teams ALL SEASON LONG.

    I know, I know, get cable or DirecTV and I’ll have all the variety of baseball I could ever want. For now, that ain’t gonna happen. And I won’t bother complaining about the rivalry, I’ll just watch something else until MLB fixes its goofy unbalanced schedule.

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 8:52 pm |

    if anything, i’d complain about having them on during the regular season so damn often … and god knows, it seems if they’re not playing each other on national TV, then one of the two is playing someone else
    That is, in fact, my complaint, Phil. ;-) It becomes tedious to get the Yankees, Red Sox or both seemingly every Sunday night from the WWL.

    nothing wrong with them playing for keeps tho
    Of course not! Then I’m interested … because it’s the playoffs. I’m interested in the playoffs generally.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 8:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”354551″][quote comment=”354547″][quote comment=”354546″]You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    More like “the bulk of the eastern time zone north of Pennsylvania and east of Ohio”.[/quote]
    Look at things objectively and I think you’ll find that Yanks/Sox is one of very few matchups that can draw any sort of national attention.[/quote]

    That’s the problem, back in the day it didn’t take a New York/Boston matchup to bring national attention and interest. Now, many people outside those cities could care less, and wasn’t always that way.[/quote]
    I agree with you… but a) it’s not the Yanks’ or Sox’ fault and b) baseball has to do whatever it can to get ratings and at most opportunities that means Yanks/Sox on Sunday night, etc.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 9:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”354556″][quote comment=”354551″][quote comment=”354547″][quote comment=”354546″]You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason.

    More like “the bulk of the eastern time zone north of Pennsylvania and east of Ohio”.[/quote]
    Look at things objectively and I think you’ll find that Yanks/Sox is one of very few matchups that can draw any sort of national attention.[/quote]

    That’s the problem, back in the day it didn’t take a New York/Boston matchup to bring national attention and interest. Now, many people outside those cities could care less, and wasn’t always that way.[/quote]
    I agree with you… but a) it’s not the Yanks’ or Sox’ fault and b) baseball has to do whatever it can to get ratings and at most opportunities that means Yanks/Sox on Sunday night, etc.[/quote]
    I guess it comes down to this: on a night when the Yanks and Sox are playing… what ELSE should ESPN show? Someone mentioned the unbalanced schedule as a reason for the Yanks and Sox meeting too often and THAT I’ll agree with. The unbalanced schedule is dumb.

  • pflava | October 15, 2009 at 9:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”354553″][quote] it was unpredictable who the Yankees were gonna beat in the Series every year.[/quote]

    or who the braves would lose to[/quote]

    Ouch! That one hurt.

  • Skycat | October 15, 2009 at 9:05 pm |

    Sorry about the politics, but you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube (or words to that effect). Just had to get this off my chest. Mr. Limbaugh may not be a racist, but he sure has a knack of saying racist things:

    http://www.huffingto...

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 9:05 pm |

    Here’s a question: watching Dodgers/Phillies tonight and I’m wondering what happened to the Dodgers’ rear uni numbers having a white outline even on the white jersey. I used to like that touch. When did it go away?

  • Tom Farley | October 15, 2009 at 9:07 pm |

    baseball has to do whatever it can to get ratings and at most opportunities that means Yanks/Sox on Sunday night, etc.
    I don’t dispute that, Kenny. I get that doing it the way ESPN does it is a sound business decision. I’m sure it does get better ratings than just about any other regular-season matchup.

    But you responded to the guy saying a Yanks-Sox series would be a yawner. I agree with that guy because I’m burned out from the force-feeding of Yankees and Red Sox in the regular season — from FOX as well as ESPN, now that I think about it. It starts to feel like a rerun rather than something eagerly awaited.

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 9:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”354535″][quote comment=”354476″][quote comment=”354471″]And going completely off-topic but back to something in the weekend comments, is the momentum of the baseball playoffs completely dead now? I’m a fan and I’m having trouble remembering what’s going on (or that there’s still playoffs going on).[/quote]

    You don’t have TBS either?

    Yeah, I’m kinda out of it as far as baseball is concerned. All I know is we’ve been spared from yet another Sox/Yanks (yawn) classic. How ’bout bringing back some day baseball?[/quote]
    You may not have a dog in the Yanks/Sox fight (no idea where you live and all) but I assure you, the bulk of the eastern time zone gets in a big, old tizzy when those teams meet up in the postseason. And that rivalry has made for some seriously memorable baseball.[/quote]

    I’m from Ohio, by the way – not an Indians fan, but I know many people who are and they almost universally hate the Yankees. I don’t dislike the Yankees, and I love watching Tim Wakefield pitch for the Sox. Therefore, I enjoy the occasional viewing of those teams. I just want to see other teams as well.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 9:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”354561″]baseball has to do whatever it can to get ratings and at most opportunities that means Yanks/Sox on Sunday night, etc.
    I don’t dispute that, Kenny. I get that doing it the way ESPN does it is a sound business decision. I’m sure it does get better ratings than just about any other regular-season matchup.

    But you responded to the guy saying a Yanks-Sox series would be a yawner. I agree with that guy because I’m burned out from the force-feeding of Yankees and Red Sox in the regular season — from FOX as well as ESPN, now that I think about it. It starts to feel like a rerun rather than something eagerly awaited.[/quote]
    I’ll agree that Yanks/Sox gets tedious during the regular season… but when’s the last time they had a boring playoff series?

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 9:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”354545″]South Florida is wearing their alternate helmets tonight against Cincy. Good or bad?[/quote]
    South Florida has alternate HELMETS?

  • anotherguy | October 15, 2009 at 9:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”354544″]
    Well baseball made that bed and now baseball has to lie in it. They put teams in every nook and cranny of the country and you’re gonna end up with a bunch of teams NO ONE outside that city cares about. Eventually they get good and make the playoffs… and you have LCS and WS matchups that no one watches.[/quote]
    Ooh ver EXPAN shun (clap clap clapclapclap)
    Ooh ver EXPAN shun (clap clap clapclapclap)

  • MJM | October 15, 2009 at 10:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”354564″][quote comment=”354545″]South Florida is wearing their alternate helmets tonight against Cincy. Good or bad?[/quote]
    South Florida has alternate HELMETS?[/quote]

    USF Alt. helmets aren’t bad, they’re just uneeded.

  • Chris | October 15, 2009 at 10:18 pm |

    Check out these shirts
    http://shop.mlb.com/...|under+%2424.99

  • whiteray | October 15, 2009 at 10:38 pm |

    Living in St. Cloud, Minnesota, I’ve followed with interest the saga of the baseball cap for Sartell High School. And I thought you might like a peek at the Sabres’ home football unis from a gallery in the St. Cloud Times.

    http://www.sctimes.c...

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 10:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”354560″]Here’s a question: watching Dodgers/Phillies tonight and I’m wondering what happened to the Dodgers’ rear uni numbers having a white outline even on the white jersey. I used to like that touch. When did it go away?[/quote]
    2-3 years ago? I know that’s when the white was removed from the road grays.

    Speaking of which, I really don’t like the Dodgers road unis without the white. I know the blue on gray is supposedly more “classic” but I don’t give a shit. Royal blue against gray flannel is a classic look. Royal blue against gray doubleknit just looks dull and lifeless.

  • JTH | October 15, 2009 at 10:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”354569″]Living in St. Cloud, Minnesota, I’ve followed with interest the saga of the baseball cap for Sartell High School. And I thought you might like a peek at the Sabres’ home football unis from a gallery in the St. Cloud Times.

    http://www.sctimes.c...
    Some of those cap logo designs would look really nice in place of that script wordmark on the helmet.

  • JohnnyO | October 15, 2009 at 10:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”354569″]Living in St. Cloud, Minnesota, I’ve followed with interest the saga of the baseball cap for Sartell High School. And I thought you might like a peek at the Sabres’ home football unis from a gallery in the St. Cloud Times.

    http://www.sctimes.c...

    I play in the KVSC Trivia contest every year… so I love me some St. Cloud. Just don’t like when people there call soda “pop”. =)

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 15, 2009 at 10:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”354570″][quote comment=”354560″]Here’s a question: watching Dodgers/Phillies tonight and I’m wondering what happened to the Dodgers’ rear uni numbers having a white outline even on the white jersey. I used to like that touch. When did it go away?[/quote]
    2-3 years ago? I know that’s when the white was removed from the road grays.

    Speaking of which, I really don’t like the Dodgers road unis without the white. I know the blue on gray is supposedly more “classic” but I don’t give a shit. Royal blue against gray flannel is a classic look. Royal blue against gray doubleknit just looks dull and lifeless.[/quote]
    Yeah, I think the blue-on-gray needs the white outline to pop a bit better.

    But the white outline on the blue-on-white added just a touch of dimension that looked really good.

  • Rover | October 15, 2009 at 11:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”354528″]I once read somewhere, from a pretty reputable source, that the main reason that 1960s-1970s Steelers game jerseys were so rare and valuable to obtain was that old man Art Rooney had an arrangement where he donated the Steelers’ gamers to the Pennsylvania PRISON SYSTEM !!!

    Anybody know the true story on that?

    O.J. can probably find out.[/quote]
    that explains why the original ‘mean machine’ had those black tops.

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 11:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”354572″][quote comment=”354569″]Living in St. Cloud, Minnesota, I’ve followed with interest the saga of the baseball cap for Sartell High School. And I thought you might like a peek at the Sabres’ home football unis from a gallery in the St. Cloud Times.

    http://www.sctimes.c...

    I play in the KVSC Trivia contest every year… so I love me some St. Cloud. Just don’t like when people there call soda “pop”. =)[/quote]

    We call it that in Ohio, too. ;)

  • LI Phil | October 15, 2009 at 11:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”354569″]Living in St. Cloud, Minnesota, I’ve followed with interest the saga of the baseball cap for Sartell High School. And I thought you might like a peek at the Sabres’ home football unis from a gallery in the St. Cloud Times.

    http://www.sctimes.c...

    wow! those are awesome unis…like james said, i bet some of the cap logo sumbissions would look great on those lids

    hopefully coach nemanich will have the winner (or at least finalists) of the contest so i can announce them this weekend

    that other team in the pic? blecch…i hope the sabes kicked their asses

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 11:39 pm |

    Just took the ESPN UniWatch poll. Can’t believe how low the Chiefs and Jets are rated. At least it’s good to see people are for traditional striping and against BFBS.

    Also the AFL ref unis appear to be a love ’em or hate ’em thing. I love ’em!

  • JimV19 | October 15, 2009 at 11:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”354567″][quote comment=”354564″][quote comment=”354545″]South Florida is wearing their alternate helmets tonight against Cincy. Good or bad?[/quote]
    South Florida has alternate HELMETS?[/quote]

    USF Alt. helmets aren’t bad, they’re just uneeded.[/quote]

    Correction: the regular helmets are unneeded. Just saw the alts and I like them better.
    http://a.espncdn.com...

  • Joe D | October 16, 2009 at 12:07 am |

    [quote comment=”354348″]I have a hunch USF will wear their white helmets again tonight against Cincinnati.[/quote]

    Called it!

  • whiteray | October 16, 2009 at 12:10 am |

    [quote comment=”354576″][quote comment=”354569″]Living in St. Cloud, Minnesota, I’ve followed with interest the saga of the baseball cap for Sartell High School. And I thought you might like a peek at the Sabres’ home football unis from a gallery in the St. Cloud Times.

    http://www.sctimes.c...

    wow! those are awesome unis…like james said, i bet some of the cap logo sumbissions would look great on those lids

    hopefully coach nemanich will have the winner (or at least finalists) of the contest so i can announce them this weekend

    that other team in the pic? blecch…i hope the sabes kicked their asses[/quote]

    That’s the Sauk Rapids Storm (I hate singular nicknames!), and I agree that those unis are uuuuugly. The Sabres won 38-13, taking a 28-0 lead before the Storm earned a first down. Sartell went into the game ranked No. 4 in Minnesota’s Class 4A. (Classes go from 1A for the smallest schools with eleven-man football to 5A for the largest.)

  • Mike R. | October 16, 2009 at 12:32 am |

    [quote comment=”354537″][quote comment=”354460″][quote comment=”354448″][quote comment=”354434″][quote comment=”354374″][quote comment=”354371″][quote comment=”354364″][quote comment=”354350″]You know, the Warriors unis are quite nice. Very unique and colorful without being ridiculous and overdone as so many designs are today.

    Not comparable to the “traincar” unis of old, but for this generation, they have to be among my favs — love the colors orange + yellow + blue.

    PS, why the hell wasn’t that outdoor game played during the DAY? What a missed opportunity![/quote]

    I was thinking the same thing (about the Warriors uni). The orange headband makes it look even better.[/quote]

    I have to disagree. I consider the Warriors unis to be one of the NBA’s worst.
    Dazzle material, poor color combo, strange rear design, and that mascot/logo is unenthused.

    Accessorizing is a plus, however it is whipped cream on —-.[/quote]

    Unenthused? Would you rather it was growling and looking all pissed off for no reason?[/quote]
    I’ve seen this uni listed on more than one worst unis list — probably for the reasons mentioned above. Although I generally go with classic ones like the Celtics, I really like the Warriors’ duds, perhaps in a guilty pleasure sort of way. BTW, this is from a guy who has always enjoyed the Astros’ tequila sunrise effects.[/quote]

    I too, love the Tequila Sunrise, the Rainbow Nuggets, the creamsicle Bucs and the Striped Broncos, however the Warriors are just too busy and nonsensicl to me…What’s with the lightning bolt?

    To me, they are the NBA’s Buffalo Bills home uni.

    To counter that, the Blazers Rip City uniforms are beauties:

    http://www.scottsspo...

    simple, symmetrical side panels with no extraneous crap.[/quote]

    Yes, sometimes the regular side panels are fine, but if the opportunity presents itself to do something different within the context of the logo, then individuality should be encouraged. I prefer the Warriors thunderbolts for just that reason. The old circa 1977 uniform of the 76ers was terrific with the stars running down the side panels as well. In football, I preferred the New England Patriots 1993 red/blue merging pants striping pattern to what they wear today.[/quote]

    The Warrior’s semi-arched, semi-italicised Microsoft Word text is awful and the navy road jerseys are a good example of why gold and orange shouldn’t be used that closely together (they bleed into each other). The collar is what makes the uniform busy with 3 colors. Also, the orange stripe down the side is just a little too loud for me. A little bit of reconfiguration and recoloring could make the Warriors a good looking team. Thumbs up on the thunderbolt![/quote]
    Well if you don’t like the Warriors uniforms. You don’t have to worry about them after this year. They gets new ones next year. They were suppose to be this year, but the cheap owner didn’t want to pay the league fee to change them now.

    Rumor is they are a take off on the old city jersey’s with the new bay bridge instead of the golden gate. Back to the blue and yellow colors of old.

    Paul, since they were already made and you see things before they are ever out. Have you seen the new warriors jerseys at all?

  • Scott Little | October 16, 2009 at 2:41 am |

    Late night uniwatchblog update:

    Added two more pics to that little page of pics at:
    http://www.scottsspo...

    I have heard back that Steve Blake is still wearing And1, so that must be the new logo they’re sportin (that A thing on the heel).