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

Monday Morning Uni Watch

2.jpg

I had a pretty good weekend (more on that later), but it would’ve been even better if I’d seen the Pats/Titans-as-Oilers game yesterday. In addition to the great throwback uniforms, the game was played in the snow. Man, look at this — and in October! Lots of additional photos here and here, and there’s a gallery of pics from previous Pats snow games here.

In other games:

• Major stripe news in Pittsburgh, where Browns receiver Josh Cribbs used the team’s striped socks as forearm sleeves (additional views here and here). If the league is smart, they’ll skip the fine and instead make this mandatory for all players. Looks great!

• The Giants continue to have problems with ghosted Reebok logos. But this time they weren’t the only ones. So were the Jags using the same new fabric and new tailoring patterns that the Jints have been using? Probably. As several readers have noted, Jacksonville’s jerseys changed last week. Earlier in the season, the Jags’ captaincy patches covered the new piping, and the piping wrapped all the way around to the back. But then last week the piping pattern shifted, leaving the captains’ patches all by their lonesome. I don’t think it’s just that those players changed to a different skill-position cut; I think something fundamental about the team’s tailoring (and fabrication..?) has changed. Joe Skiba, do you know anything about this? (Screen shot supplied by Brian Erni.)

• Maaaaybe it’s just a fold in the fabric, but it sure looks like the second two letters of John Abraham’s NOB were backwards. (Screen shot courtesy of Aaron Bell.)

• The Chiefs were in Washington, where the Redskins generally wear white at home, so of course KC wore red. As several readers have pointed out, that kept alive the Chiefs’ streak of wearing red in every game so far this season. They’re home next week, which means red again, and then they have a bye. So their white jerseys won’t make their 2009 debut until, at earliest, Week 9 in Jacksonville. Has this ever happened before?

• Chad Ocho risked another fine for a black chinstrap (and exposed knees).

Pretty quiet Sunday. But things should pick up tonight in San Diego, as the Chargers and Broncos will be wearing AFL throwbacks, whoop-whoop.

Screen shot 2009-10-15 at 6.04.42 PM.png

Nov. 14th Update: Remember those new Nike football uniforms I wrote about last Friday? Another little birdie now tells me this:

I have it on two very credible sources that Nike will design special “rivalry” uniforms for 10 Nike colleges this year. Rivaly week is scheduled for the games of November 14th. I hear that some of the uniforms are rather imaginative. I have also heard that Texas is one of the 10 schools.

In other words, you now have 25 days to get run over by a truck. Get crackin’.

Screen shot 2009-10-18 at 11.17.29 PM.png

Goal(ie)-Oriented: Remember my recent ESPN column about goalie gear? In that column, I quoted Tyler Hull from Bauer thusly: “The Reebok Revokes are the same pad build as the Reebok PS3s, just with a different graphic.”

That prompted a response from Reebok spokesman Daniel Sarro, as follows:

The Reebok Revoke and Reebok P3 are different and distinct models, with different advantages — not simply a graphic difference. The Revoke goal pad provides goalies with the ability to construct their own pad with a custom flex, custom fit, and custom strapping arrangement. The Premier III goal pads offer a fluid rotation in the leg and boot channel (helping to increase speed when going in the butterfly), a pre-curved design and adjustable strap system.

I went back to Hull, who agreed that Sarro’s point was basically correct.

IMG_3697.JPG

Oink: On Saturday afternoon I went to the East Village restaurant Back Forty, where the talented and charming chef Shanna Pacifico was teaching a class on how to make the Italian stuffed-pork preparation known as porchetta (and, as it turned out, an apple pie). It was totally enjoyable and even more totally delicious. Even the salad was good! I took lots of photos, but they’re definitely NSFV — not safe for vegetarians.

Uni Watch News Ticker: I missed Game 1 of the Yanks/Angels series because Kirsten and I had tickets for this. I’m fairly certain we saw the better uniforms. … How bad has the pigthrax scare gotten? So bad that the officials in Saturday’s Longhorns/Sooners game spelled out a composite PNOB — that’s pandemic name on back (genius grab by Mike Sullivan). … That “Ch. Brown” guy in the foreground of the photo, by the way, is Chykie Brown. The Texas roster also includes Curtis Brown. Does his NOB have “Cu. Brown”? … New hoops uniforms for Nebraska and, if you believe a video game screen shot, Cal, plus WVU has unveiled a really ugly black alternate. Another view of that one is here. … Small NHL change that slipped past all of us until now: The Blue Jackets have changed their helmet decal from their wordmark to their jersey crest (as spotted by Jeff Emhuff). … Good slogan on Dustin Tokarski’s backplate (with thanks to Tris Wykes). … Faaaascinating story disputing the party line versions of how the Yankees’ and Mets’ logos were designed here. … I still think the new Olympic medals look like warped records, but Kirsten thinks they look like potato chips, and it’s hard to argue with that. … Clark Ruhland reports that Virginia Tech will start using these throwbacks as their primary uni set next season. … Todd Richard‘s campaign to bring back Bobby Valentine to the Mets now has its own merch. … Interesting question from DJ Iverson, who writes: “For the past 30+ years, my uncle, Stretch Suba, has been the bullpen catcher for the Houston Astros. He’s seen a lot of different versions of the Astros jersey but has kept the number 61 the entire time. Who holds the record for the longest streak in the same team jersey and number?” Hmmm. Anyone? … Dylan Buell noticed a coupla things during Saturday’s Ball State/Bowling Green game. First, members of the Ball State chain gang had their own uni numbers. Second, one of the Ball State players had mismatched jersey and helmet numbers. “He’s in one of my classes, so I’ll have to ask him about it,” says Dylan. … Remember this sign, which I saw at Pittsburgh gas station back in April? As I wrote at the time, the problem with four-fingered cartoon characters is that they look like they’re flipping the bird when they extend their index finger. Apparently the Mighty Flame folks got the message, because their mascot character is now clutching a torch, not sticking out a finger (big thanks to Ryan Connelly). … Ryan also reports that he recently rediscovered his very first DIY project: “When I was very young, my favorite player was Mike Schmidt. So I took White Out and added Schmidt’s uni number to my Phillies helmet. I remember I used to wear this thing all the time! Found it recently while helping my mom with something in an old closet.” … Brooks Simpson notes that the left-sleeve piping on Kendry Morales’s road jersey has been messed up since at least Game 3 of the Division Series. … Rumor mill alert from a reader who prefers to remain anonymous: “Heard from a family close family friend who happens to be T. Boone Pickens’ lawyer that Okie State is looking to switch permanently from orange and black to black and silver.” … Now that’s a patent drawing. According to a description on a page that I won’t link to (because it’s a tripod.com page and will crash if we all try to look at it at once), “This contraption basically replaced the catcher’s mitt with a wire cage placed on the catcher’s chest. The object of the invention was to protect the catcher’s hands so that the hands would not come in contact with the ball until it was time to throw it back to the pitcher. The invention was a rectangular open-wire frame body reinforced by slotted walls of wood. The impact of the ball on the catcher’s chest is protected by springs on the rear wall of the device. After the ball has passed through the open front end, it closes automatically. At the bottom of the device is an opening where the ball passes into a pocket where it is retrieved by the catcher. The device also includes a wire mesh on the top to protect the catcher’s face.” But as Adam Brodsky notes, “It doesn’t seem to have a Nike logo.” … Wanna see the worst football uniform ever? No, I mean ever? Look, see for yourself. Once you catch your breath, go to this page and click on “South Summit 24, North Summit 6” to see a video clip that will surely change your life (horrifying find by Dom Lewis). … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: Does this car look exactly like a Seahawks uniform or what? … Southern wore gold jerseys on Saturday — first time they’ve done that since the 2006 Bayou Classic. “Not only that,” says Prentice James, “but these were the SAME gold jerseys, complete with the 2006 Bayou Classic commemorative patch on right shoulder. Can you imagine USC wearing last year’s Rose Bowl jersey against ND this past weekend? Weird.” … Alex Shuman wore stirrups to a friend’s wedding the other day. “It got many compliments,” he says. … FIU tried a blackout on Saturday, except they paired the black jerseys with their regular dark navy pants — lame-o (with thanks to Kyle Pineda and Carlos Loaiza).

 

233 comments to Monday Morning Uni Watch

  • Mycoskie | October 19, 2009 at 8:16 am |

    I guess Prentice James beat me to the Southern patch gaffe story!

  • scott | October 19, 2009 at 8:17 am |

    Manny Mota has been in uniform with the Dodgers since 1969. It’s possible that he has worn #11 during that entire stretch, which means this year was his 41st with the team.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 8:17 am |

    Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)

  • Jonathan | October 19, 2009 at 8:32 am |

    Thanks for linking to my photos Paul!!! That Pats-Oilers matchup looked incredible in person. Amazing how much in the snow that the Patriots reds stood out much more than the blues did. Just proves even more that the Patriots need a red alternate that is designed exactly as their current blues. And they need to save them for games at home that have snow forecast!

  • Kek | October 19, 2009 at 8:40 am |

    Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked!

  • Stan aka the took | October 19, 2009 at 8:49 am |

    a.) I almost went to see Naked girls reading (Gigi Lafemme is my secret wife she just doesn’t know it yet)

    b.) You failed to mention 59-0 and I know it’s all about the unis but check out the over all stats… oy vay.

    c.) That pork looks defreakinglicious

  • Joseph Skiba | October 19, 2009 at 8:55 am |

    Concerning the Jags: looks quite simple…the followed the pattern on our front shoulder and replaced it with the black/teal striping…Looks like the same uni we are wearing…Garrard’s name looks crooked on the back on the uni (where have I heard that before?)…hahahahaha

  • Peter Wunsch | October 19, 2009 at 9:02 am |

    Frank Croscetti palyed 2nd base for the New York American League team, for 17 seasons and then was the 3rd base coach for another 20 and wore #2 for all 37 seasons.

    Yes, there is a SS for thjat team who has worn it recently but Cro may have the record.

    Also, does Connie Mack’s wearing a suit as manager for 50 years count?

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 9:13 am |

    As far as non-block uni fonts go…GET RID OF THEM ALL!

    I was the official timer this past Friday night for a Varsity game in which the visitors wore all-white with peurple numbers. Because of the font, the announcer, spotter and I could not read a single one!

    http://images.berecr...

  • David | October 19, 2009 at 9:20 am |

    Anyone watching the Pats-Titans game notice the amount of issues the Titans were having keeping their helmet stripe and logo on yesterday? Chris Johnson’s stripe was almost completely off at one point and there was a defensive player who lost the Oilers logo by the end of the game.

  • MG12 | October 19, 2009 at 9:22 am |

    Tell me that someone has a screen-grab of the helmet of Tennessee’s running back Chris Johnson.

    He made a few great runs in the first quarter against the Patriots, but his helmet stripe began unpeeling from the rear of his helmet. It looked as though half of the stripe had peeled off.

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 9:24 am |

    Not nearly as bad as the High School in the ticker, I saw this entry into AWFUL FB UNIS, in my local paper this weekend:

    http://jukebox.lohud...

  • Namhob | October 19, 2009 at 9:25 am |

    [quote comment=”355071″]b.) You failed to mention 59-0 and I know it’s all about the unis but check out the over all stats… oy vay.[/quote]

    I made the comment to my father-in-law yesterday that the Titans could have an advantage wearing all white with the snow. It could make Brady think some of their defenders disappeared.

    Turns out they didn’t need the all white unis to dissapear…

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 9:26 am |

    will mike shanahan make sure the redskins never wear the maroon monochrome? cuz i can’t see zorn making it thru the week

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 9:29 am |

    [quote comment=”355079″]will mike shanahan make sure the redskins never wear the maroon monochrome? cuz i can’t see zorn making it thru the week[/quote]

    This week’s sign that the apocalypse is upon Jim Zorn:

    1. Snyder hires a “consultant”.
    2. Play-calling duties have been revoked.
    3. Uniform decisions are stripped as well?

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 9:32 am |

    [quote comment=”355079″]will mike shanahan make sure the redskins never wear the maroon monochrome? cuz i can’t see zorn making it thru the week[/quote]

    IT’S BURGUNDY!!!!!

    /if I get bitched at for calling it red last week…

    grrr

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 9:35 am |

    [quote comment=”355079″]will mike shanahan make sure the redskins never wear the maroon monochrome? cuz i can’t see zorn making it thru the week[/quote]

    Not taking the bait. :)

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 9:37 am |

    Alright, everyone, what did we learn from the “worst uni ever”?

    “Never EVER reverse the light and dark on the Bengals’ helmet.”

    Very good, class.

    (Jeez, that looks awful.)

    —Ricko

  • Joe D | October 19, 2009 at 9:38 am |

    http://www.post-gaze...

    Is that a tear in Jay McKee’s shorts or an undone zipper?

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 9:38 am |

    [quote comment=”355080″][quote comment=”355079″]will mike shanahan make sure the redskins never wear the maroon monochrome? cuz i can’t see zorn making it thru the week[/quote]

    This week’s sign that the apocalypse is upon Jim Zorn:

    1. Snyder hires a “consultant”.
    2. Play-calling duties have been revoked.
    3. Uniform decisions are stripped as well?[/quote]

    Did they let him keep his whistle?

  • thaines19 | October 19, 2009 at 9:39 am |

    Mota probably is right if he wore the same number. Honus Wagner also should be in the mix – he wore no number during his playing career but wore 33 during his entire 25 year coaching career (and had it retired by the Pirates after he died).

  • Beardface | October 19, 2009 at 9:40 am |

    Clark Ruhland reports that Virginia Tech will start using these throwbacks as their primary uni set next season.

    ————–

    If there is anyone I trust with this information, its the person who designed all the college logos that are being used on the BoxScores of the Virginia Tech Athletics website.

    And I’m very glad to hear this. I LOVE THAT LOOK! Granted we lost, but I still friggen LOVE that look.

    I have also heard that VT is gonna be doing something “special” in regards to their uniforms sometime later this season. I’ve heard the Thursday Night game against UNC (Oct 29) is when they’ll be unveiled and they’ll include… ugh… BFBS.

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 9:40 am |

    Elrod Hendricks:

    Hendricks became a fixture in Baltimore by holding the position as bullpen coach for 28 years, the longest coaching tenure in Orioles history. His contract was not renewed for that position as of October 2005, in part because he had a mild stroke in April. The 2005 season marked the 37th that Hendricks served in a Baltimore uniform as a player or coach, another club record. He also had the longest active coaching streak with one club among all major league coaches.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 9:42 am |

    Spin off question.
    Who wore the same number for the most years in pro football?

    I’d guess George Blanda. Wore 16 from his time with Bears until he was finished in Oakland. That much I do know.

    —Ricko

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 9:44 am |

    Darren Rumble:great hockey coach name.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 9:46 am |

    [quote comment=”355089″]Spin off question.
    Who wore the same number for the most years in pro football?

    I’d guess George Blanda. Wore 16 from his time with Bears until he was finished in Oakland. That much I do know.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well according to pro-football-reference.com Blanda had 2 seasons not wearing 16. But still, that’d be 24 years as #16. Has anyone else even played that long?

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 9:46 am |

    [quote comment=”355089″]Spin off question.
    Who wore the same number for the most years in pro football?

    I’d guess George Blanda. Wore 16 from his time with Bears until he was finished in Oakland. That much I do know.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Blanda changed from 22 (he was a punter/linebacker early in his career) to 16 for 1952 when he became a QB. Wore it for 23 seasons.

  • Teebz | October 19, 2009 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”355090″]Darren Rumble:great hockey coach name.[/quote]

    Too bad he was a mediocre defenceman with almost no skills in fighting during his career. But, yes, he’s a decent coach.

    I guess that watching the game from the bench as a player, he picked up a few things. LOL

  • Hank | October 19, 2009 at 9:50 am |

    This would have made Pats/Titans-Oilers a real throw-back snow game: http://i.cdn.turner....

  • DenverGregg | October 19, 2009 at 9:52 am |

    “Wanna see the worst football uniform ever? No, I mean ever? Look, see for yourself.”

    Look Paul, I know you hate purple, but they’re really not that bad. ;-)

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 9:53 am |

    [quote comment=”355092″][quote comment=”355089″]Spin off question.
    Who wore the same number for the most years in pro football?

    I’d guess George Blanda. Wore 16 from his time with Bears until he was finished in Oakland. That much I do know.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Blanda changed from 22 (he was a punter/linebacker early in his career) to 16 for 1952 when he became a QB. Wore it for 23 seasons.[/quote]

    Gary Anderson, kicker. Wore #1 for 23 seasons as well.

    Anyone else?

  • DenverGregg | October 19, 2009 at 9:55 am |

    [quote comment=\”355089\”]Spin off question.
    Who wore the same number for the most years in pro football?

    I\’d guess George Blanda. Wore 16 from his time with Bears until he was finished in Oakland. That much I do know.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Jackie Slater – one of the nicest jocks I\’ve ever met – wore 78 for 20 years.

  • Steve Naismith | October 19, 2009 at 9:57 am |

    “Interesting question from DJ Iverson, who writes: “For the past 30+ years, my uncle, Stretch Suba, has been the bullpen catcher for the Houston Astros…”

    I’m surprised that he doesn’t know how to spell his uncle’s name – it’s Strech, not Stretch.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 10:00 am |

    Lest anyone think The Jeff and I can’t count…
    He has Blanda wearing 16 for 24 seasons.
    I have it at 23.

    I subtracted years at first, too. Then I remembered that Blanda maybe had retired after ’58 and come back with new AFL in ’60. So I checked, and he was out of football in ’59.

    —Ricko

  • Hank | October 19, 2009 at 10:04 am |

    Wow! Those HS unis look like a DIY project gone amok. And who said schools are Drug Free Zones.

  • Paul Lukas | October 19, 2009 at 10:06 am |

    [quote comment=”355098″]”Interesting question from DJ Iverson, who writes: “For the past 30+ years, my uncle, Stretch Suba, has been the bullpen catcher for the Houston Astros…”

    I’m surprised that he doesn’t know how to spell his uncle’s name – it’s Strech, not Stretch.[/quote]

    Actually, he DID spell it that way. I thought it might be a typo so I looked him up on the Astros web site, which lists him as “Stretch”:
    http://houston.astro...

    So I corrected the typo. But are you saying it’s not a typo?

  • Hank | October 19, 2009 at 10:09 am |

    [quote comment=”355071″] …
    b.) You failed to mention 59-0 and I know it’s all about the unis but check out the over all stats… oy vay.

    c.) That pork looks defreakinglicious[/quote]

    b) Who said the passing game is verbotten in bad weather?

    d) Pork Rules! That apple pie must’ve been incredible.

  • Johnny F. | October 19, 2009 at 10:09 am |

    Hello old friends!

    I’ve been reading on and off, but haven’t posted in quite a while. I hope all is well.

    I was reading about a documentary that will show on HBO tonight that I thought would be of interest to many readers/contributors on here. It’s called “Schmatta: Rags to Riches”, documenting the rise and fall of the NYC garment industry. It’s on at 9pm tonight. Should be pretty cool.

    Anyway, I’ll do my best to be around more… I miss you guys!

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 10:14 am |

    Jim Marshall wore #70 for 19 seasons with Vikings.
    So Jackie Slater looks like the leader in the pro football clubhouse for most seasons, same number, same team.

    —Ricko

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 10:19 am |

    Lou Groza played 21 seasons for Browns, Not sure if he wore it the whole time, but his number, 76, is retired. (corrections welcomed).

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 10:27 am |

    [quote comment=”355105″]Lou Groza played 21 seasons for Browns, Not sure if he wore it the whole time, but his number, 76, is retired. (corrections welcomed).[/quote]

    pro football reference shows Groza first wearing 76 in 1952, first year of numbering system (same year Otto Graham changed from 60 to 14). Prior to that, Groza wore 46.

    That gives him 15 seasons wearing 76.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 10:27 am |

    [quote comment=”355105″]Lou Groza played 21 seasons for Browns, Not sure if he wore it the whole time, but his number, 76, is retired. (corrections welcomed).[/quote]

    pro football reference has him in 46 for at least 2 seasons, with no number data prior to 1950 (which would be AAFC years, not NFL)

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 10:29 am |

    Those arm socks are great for the simple fact that I didn’t even notice until I clicked on the third picture that the Browns were wearing their UPS bicycle delivery driver shorts.

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    Maaaaybe it’s just a fold in the fabric, but it sure looks like the second two letters of John Abraham’s NOB were backwards. (Screen shot courtesy of Aaron Bell.)

    That’s actually Nhoj Maharba.

  • Steve Naismith | October 19, 2009 at 10:31 am |

    [quote]So I corrected the typo. But are you saying it’s not a typo?[/quote]

    One “t”. http://houston.astro...

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 10:36 am |

    [quote comment=”355110″][quote]So I corrected the typo. But are you saying it’s not a typo?[/quote]

    One “t”. http://houston.astro...

    I don’t think they know which way it is, seeing how you’re both using the official site to show a different spelling.

    Searching google for “strech suba” including the quotes gives 264 results.

    Searching for “stretch suba” shows 553.

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”

  • Phil in Joplin (new witty name coming soon!) | October 19, 2009 at 10:40 am |

    Re: Oklahoma State switching colors

    I think a lot of this has to do with the ridiculous “Cowboys 4EVER” thing that Nike is pushing so hard for. They’ve created all kinds of silver and black gear for the team. Here’s some info from ostatesports.com

    http://www.ostatespo...

    I can’t imagine a world where Oklahoma State is anything other than orange and black (since those have been the colors for about, pardon the reference, 4EVER)

  • ScottS | October 19, 2009 at 10:47 am |

    • Maaaaybe it’s just a fold in the fabric, but it sure looks like the second two letters of John Abraham’s NOB were backwards. (Screen shot courtesy of Aaron Bell.)

    They are probably *all* backwards, we just can’t tell with the rest of the letters… :)

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 10:48 am |

    [quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Yeah, let’s not lose sight of the fact that the first and foremost reason for numbers is to clearly and quickly identify players.
    Any font that slows down that process is a bad choice by a designer. He’s choosing form over function in a situation where, according to the project’s demands, he should not.

    Doesn’t mean block numbers only. Means any number fonts MUST be easily and immediately readable.

    Period.

    —Ricko

  • Shane | October 19, 2009 at 10:51 am |

    I know he’s technically not a coach anymore, but Johnny Pesky’s STILL wearing #6 for the Red Sox.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 10:51 am |

    [quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 10:53 am |

    [quote]the first and foremost reason for numbers is to clearly and quickly identify players.
    Any font that slows down that process is a bad choice by a designer. He’s choosing form over function[/quote]

    but the kids like it

  • matt mitchell | October 19, 2009 at 10:53 am |

    red schoendienst wore No. 2 for 14 seasons as a st. louis cardinal player and 12 seasons as manager. he spent several seasons as a bench coach afterwards, so he could be in the running.

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 10:55 am |

    [quote comment=”355070″]Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked![/quote]
    Strangely enough, I did the Wite-Out number treatment on a Pirates helmet when I was a kid. The results were just as good as RyCo’s.

  • Stuby | October 19, 2009 at 10:59 am |

    [quote comment=”355116″]I know he’s technically not a coach anymore, but Johnny Pesky’s STILL wearing #6 for the Red Sox.[/quote]

    Pesky’s wearing of #6 hasn’t exactly been continuous…

    http://www.redsoxdie...

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 11:01 am |

    [quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko

  • lose remerswaal | October 19, 2009 at 11:02 am |

    we’re going to need some pictures from that reading event

  • ry co 40 | October 19, 2009 at 11:04 am |

    [quote comment=”355070″]Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked![/quote]

    “Your yinzer membership card has been revoked”

    well it’s about damn time! lol. i would have mentioned that years ago, had i knew that. ugh… yinzers!

    speaking of yinzers, i was at the steelers game and over heard this beaut:

    “huge-est”

    like:

    “so-and-so has the huge-est steelers bar in the state”

    yep…

  • Stuby | October 19, 2009 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment=”355122″][quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Redskins, Niners, Seahawks, Saints, Jets…

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment=”355122″][quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Dolphins, Jets, Colts, Cowboys, Redskins, Saints, Bucs, 49ers.

    That’s 13. Did I miss anyone?

    —Ricko

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

    [quote comment=”355126″][quote comment=”355122″][quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Dolphins, Jets, Colts, Cowboys, Redskins, Saints, Bucs, 49ers.

    That’s 13. Did I miss anyone?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Forgot Seahawks. That’s 14. Still in the minority.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 11:11 am |

    [quote comment=”355122″][quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Since you insist…

    Bills, Jets, Browns, Colts, Raiders, Chiefs, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants, Packers, Vikings are damn close, Bucs, Saints, Panthers, 49ers, Seahawks.

    And up until this season, the Jags & Lions did as well.

    That’s half the league. So it’s not quite as overpowering as I was thinking, but it’s not exactly a minority either.

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

    [quote comment=”355121″][quote comment=”355116″]I know he’s technically not a coach anymore, but Johnny Pesky’s STILL wearing #6 for the Red Sox.[/quote]

    Pesky’s wearing of #6 hasn’t exactly been continuous…

    http://www.redsoxdie...

    I stand corrected. Thanks for that link though. A friend and I were trying to remember what # Pedroia wore in 2006, the other day.

    True, but (counting 2001-08) that’s still like 15 years or so.

  • Shane | October 19, 2009 at 11:15 am |

    …wow, I thought I deleted that last bit.

    Do your JOB, coffee.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 11:16 am |

    and block numbers (as the sole criterion) is bad because?

    they’re traditional?

    they’re readable?

    they don’t conflict with any colorscheme?

    don’t get me wrong, i don’t mind rounded numbers (like stillers, old oilers, even the ravens or titans, but that’s pushing it)…but why exactly are the “college font” numbers and NOB so bad?

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 11:17 am |

    [quote comment=”355128″]

    Since you insist…

    Bills, Jets, Browns, Colts, Raiders, Chiefs, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants, Packers, Vikings are damn close, Bucs, Saints, Panthers, 49ers, Seahawks.

    And up until this season, the Jags & Lions did as well.

    That’s half the league. So it’s not quite as overpowering as I was thinking, but it’s not exactly a minority either.[/quote]

    Scratch the Jags, I’m thinking of a messed up Madden uniform, not reality. Add the Dolphins since you counted them and I didn’t due to the shadow.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 11:17 am |

    [quote comment=”355128″][quote comment=”355122″][quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Since you insist…

    Bills, Jets, Browns, Colts, Raiders, Chiefs, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants, Packers, Vikings are damn close, Bucs, Saints, Panthers, 49ers, Seahawks.

    And up until this season, the Jags & Lions did as well.

    That’s half the league. So it’s not quite as overpowering as I was thinking, but it’s not exactly a minority either.[/quote]

    I didn’t count “damn close”. LOL

    And 14 IS a minority, i.e, it’s not the majority.

    Honestly, I thought it would be around half or just less.

    Not arguing, just making clear that is isn’t like only four or five teams have adopted more modern fonts.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 11:20 am |

    [quote comment=”355131″]and block numbers (as the sole criterion) is bad because?

    they’re traditional?

    they’re readable?

    they don’t conflict with any colorscheme?

    don’t get me wrong, i don’t mind rounded numbers (like stillers, old oilers, even the ravens or titans, but that’s pushing it)…but why exactly are the “college font” numbers and NOB so bad?[/quote]

    I don’t think they’re bad in & of themselves, but when half the league uses the same thing…

    We want the teams to have an identity and not all look the same, right? And, we generally don’t like the goofy piping that teams like the Jags or Cardinals use, right? So, give each team unique (but still readable) numbers.

  • Stuby | October 19, 2009 at 11:21 am |

    [quote comment=”355128″][quote comment=”355122″][quote comment=”355117″][quote comment=”355112″][quote comment=”355068″]Can I just say that I think it’d be interesting to see the number font from that “worst football uniform ever” used for Tampa Bay? I think more teams could benefit from using numbers that match their wordmarks rather than 3/4ths of the league all using block numbers. I know, traditional blah blah… but the Bears have had rounded numbers for decades, and it seems cool enough on the Oilers throwback uniforms… so why not?

    (please don’t kill me)[/quote]
    I was at a Northwestern game last year and my friend and I were looking at some old framed jerseys on the wall. One of the jerseys had a similar number font and he says, “those numbers look pretty cool.”

    I turned to him and just said, “Really?”

    He considered it for a moment then replied, “No, they look like bleeding trumpets or something.”[/quote]

    Ok maybe the font in that picture is a little extreme… but a little more variety around the league wouldn’t hurt.

    For example, I think this:
    http://img188.images...
    …would look perfectly fine instead of the standard block numbers they currently use.[/quote]

    A little more variety? Go through a list of NFL teams and count how many are still wearing traditional block numbers. I’ll bet it’s a minority, or at least a lot fewer than people realize.

    Giants, Packers, Chiefs, Raiders. Browns and… (a pretty short list)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Since you insist…

    Bills, Jets, Browns, Colts, Raiders, Chiefs, Cowboys, Redskins, Giants, Packers, Vikings are damn close, Bucs, Saints, Panthers, 49ers, Seahawks.

    And up until this season, the Jags & Lions did as well.

    That’s half the league. So it’s not quite as overpowering as I was thinking, but it’s not exactly a minority either.[/quote]
    On the flip side, I would say the Titans and Broncos have the worst number fonts in the league. An “open” 4 doesn’t belong on a footbal uniform.

    http://www3.pictures...

    http://assets.gearli...

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    [quote comment=”355135″]
    On the flip side, I would say the Titans and Broncos have the worst number fonts in the league. An “open” 4 doesn’t belong on a footbal uniform.

    http://www3.pictures...

    http://assets.gearli...

    Are open 4’s allowed on other sports?

    http://media.photobu...

    (ok, that uniform is bad too, but that’s for other reasons)

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 11:29 am |

    [quote comment=”355133″]
    I didn’t count “damn close”. LOL[/quote]
    Sure, the corners are rounded off, but those are just basic varsity block numbers on the Vikes.

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 11:37 am |

    [quote comment=”355124″][quote comment=”355070″]Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked![/quote]

    “Your yinzer membership card has been revoked”

    well it’s about damn time! lol. i would have mentioned that years ago, had i knew that. ugh… yinzers!

    speaking of yinzers, i was at the steelers game and over heard this beaut:

    “huge-est”

    like:

    “so-and-so has the huge-est steelers bar in the state”

    yep…[/quote]

    What are the requirements for membership?

    A. Lacking two or more teeth per jaw.
    B. Having gotten to at least second base with a cousin.
    C. You remember locker combinations by using Nascar drivers.
    D. Your house has wheels.
    E. Your family tree is a stump.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 11:49 am |

    [quote comment=”355137″][quote comment=”355133″]
    I didn’t count “damn close”. LOL[/quote]
    Sure, the corners are rounded off, but those are just basic varsity block numbers on the Vikes.[/quote]

    Well, on that basis the Patriots might even closer to traditional block numbers than the Vikings. But we could say Dolphins are not (no base on #1, for example).

    For purposes of that tally, I went strictly by the book…mostly cuz I was curious to see how many teams HAVE farted around with their numbers, from just a little to a whole lot (and to eliminate “marginal” calls).

    Didn’t include drop shadows as a change, cuz numbers still block (as with Dolphins).

    If wasn’t strictly standard block I didn’t count it. Wanted a clear delineation, that’s all. Didn’t want, “is it or isn’t it”.

    You guys can argue about that. I was a strict grader, that’s all.

    —Ricko

  • M.Princip | October 19, 2009 at 11:51 am |

    [quote comment=”355137″][quote comment=”355133″]
    I didn’t count “damn close”. LOL[/quote]
    Sure, the corners are rounded off, but those are just basic varsity block numbers on the Vikes.[/quote]

    Ugh! Just another detail I don’t like about those Vikings jerseys.

  • anotherguy | October 19, 2009 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”355140″]
    For purposes of that tally, I went strictly by the book…mostly cuz I was curious to see how many teams HAVE farted around with their numbers, from just a little to a whole lot (and to eliminate “marginal” calls).[/quote]
    Well Ricko you have to admit that that Bears haven’t farted around; and their look is traditional (and long-lived) even if its not block numerals.

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 12:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”355141″][quote comment=”355137″][quote comment=”355133″]
    I didn’t count “damn close”. LOL[/quote]
    Sure, the corners are rounded off, but those are just basic varsity block numbers on the Vikes.[/quote]

    Ugh! Just another detail I don’t like about those Vikings jerseys.[/quote]
    Indeed. It’s the numeric font equivalent of a mullet.

    Pick a lane, already. Either use block numbers or don’t. Don’t try to do both at the same time.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”355141″][quote comment=”355137″][quote comment=”355133″]
    I didn’t count “damn close”. LOL[/quote]
    Sure, the corners are rounded off, but those are just basic varsity block numbers on the Vikes.[/quote]

    Ugh! Just another detail I don’t like about those Vikings jerseys.[/quote]

    Because I see the Viking unis all the time, they’re becoming sort of a “relative damage” thing. I don’t like ’em, but I remember how bad they were with the purple pants the first year…and I am relieved those britches apparently have been scuttled.

    “Count Your Blessings.” Know what I mean?

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”355142″][quote comment=”355140″]
    For purposes of that tally, I went strictly by the book…mostly cuz I was curious to see how many teams HAVE farted around with their numbers, from just a little to a whole lot (and to eliminate “marginal” calls).[/quote]
    Well Ricko you have to admit that that Bears haven’t farted around; and their look is traditional (and long-lived) even if its not block numerals.[/quote]

    I never argued for block numerals. Just said whatever font is used should be clearly and quickly readable. Then it occurred to me that at least half the teams in the NFL probably did not wear true full-block numbers anymore. And it turned out to be true. Was just checking the numbers…so to speak.

    —Ricko

  • Pats Fan | October 19, 2009 at 12:13 pm |

    hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.

  • Chris | October 19, 2009 at 12:14 pm |

    Is there no length?
    http://www.tiretatto...

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:14 pm |

    Question…

    While looking at that Raiders mockup with a different number font and thinking, “Why change fonts just for the hell of it, especially on a uni you’ve been wearing for, what, 46 years now?”, something struck me…

    Are the Steelers the only NFL team to change just the number font and nothing else on the uniform?

    It seems to me most all the other number font changes were as part of a uni redesign. But I’m not sure.

    Anybody?

    —Ricko

  • chance michaels | October 19, 2009 at 12:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”355148″]Question…

    While looking at that Raiders mockup with a different number font and thinking, “Why change fonts just for the hell of it, especially on a uni you’ve been wearing for, what, 46 years now?”, something struck me…

    Are the Steelers the only NFL team to change just the number font and nothing else on the uniform?

    It seems to me most all the other number font changes were as part of a uni redesign. But I’m not sure.

    Anybody?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That’s the only one I can think of. It struck me as being odd at the time, in a sort of “Why bother changing, then?” fashion.

  • Kek | October 19, 2009 at 12:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”355138″][quote comment=”355124″][quote comment=”355070″]Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked![/quote]

    “Your yinzer membership card has been revoked”

    well it’s about damn time! lol. i would have mentioned that years ago, had i knew that. ugh… yinzers!

    speaking of yinzers, i was at the steelers game and over heard this beaut:

    “huge-est”

    like:

    “so-and-so has the huge-est steelers bar in the state”

    yep…[/quote]

    What are the requirements for membership?

    A. Lacking two or more teeth per jaw.
    B. Having gotten to at least second base with a cousin.
    C. You remember locker combinations by using Nascar drivers.
    D. Your house has wheels.
    E. Your family tree is a stump.[/quote]
    I think you’re mixing this up with someone from West Virginia

  • anotherguy | October 19, 2009 at 12:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”355145″] Was just checking the numbers…so to speak.[/quote]
    So the figures speak for themselves?

    They certainly do in the case of Erin Andrews…

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

    Just noticed Bills didn’t get included.
    Make it 15.
    Still less than half.

    Again, don’t sweat the preciseness. Just noting that somewhere around half (or more) of the NFL teams have messed with their number font, to varying degrees.

    And I didn’t realize the percentage was that high until I stopped to think about it.

    That’s the only point.

    —Ricko

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”355146″]hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.[/quote]

    If they’re not on the NFLshop website, try Ebay or the Foxboro Thrift and Consignment shop!

    Last week, they had a run on these:

    http://www.cnnsi.com...

  • anotherguy | October 19, 2009 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”355150″]”huge-est”
    [/quote]

    Wasn’t he the guy who was caught with his pants down while he was living with Elizabeth Hurley?

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”355148″]Question…

    While looking at that Raiders mockup with a different number font and thinking, “Why change fonts just for the hell of it, especially on a uni you’ve been wearing for, what, 46 years now?”, something struck me…

    Are the Steelers the only NFL team to change just the number font and nothing else on the uniform?

    It seems to me most all the other number font changes were as part of a uni redesign. But I’m not sure.

    Anybody?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I’ll have you know I made the facemask black on that too. I also have a concept sitting here with a black helmet and alternate silver logo and a silver jersey, but I figure I’ll spare everyone from seeing that.

    In my little fantasy world, all the teams would have unique fonts, so it’d be a change to match the wordmark. In the case of the Raiders, maybe it could spark something. They haven’t exactly been playing like the glory days. The last half of the 80’s sucked, most of the 90’s sucked, this decade has been even worse.

    I think you’re right about the Steelers, at least as far as noticeable changes go. If you want to stretch a little, I know that the Colts & Cowboys both used to use a more western looking variation on the block numbers back in the 60’s & 70’s… I’m not sure exactly when they changed those but I don’t think the rest of the uniform changed with it.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”355153″][quote comment=”355146″]hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.[/quote]

    If they’re not on the NFLshop website, try Ebay or the Foxboro Thrift and Consignment shop!

    Last week, they had a run on these:

    http://www.cnnsi.com...

    Sleeves pre-cut? Or is that a DIY deal?

  • Stuby | October 19, 2009 at 12:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”355149″][quote comment=”355148″]Question…

    While looking at that Raiders mockup with a different number font and thinking, “Why change fonts just for the hell of it, especially on a uni you’ve been wearing for, what, 46 years now?”, something struck me…

    Are the Steelers the only NFL team to change just the number font and nothing else on the uniform?

    It seems to me most all the other number font changes were as part of a uni redesign. But I’m not sure.

    Anybody?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    That’s the only one I can think of. It struck me as being odd at the time, in a sort of “Why bother changing, then?” fashion.[/quote]

    It’s minor, but when the Rams first did their re-design in 2000, they had block numerals:

    http://photos.upi.co...

    The next year, they went with more rounded numerals:

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

  • JRJR | October 19, 2009 at 12:36 pm |

    Don’t know if it got touched on, but Cliff Lee went buttonless on his cap again last night. Only seems to be the home uni…odd…

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | October 19, 2009 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”355113″]Re: Oklahoma State switching colors

    I think a lot of this has to do with the ridiculous “Cowboys 4EVER” thing that Nike is pushing so hard for. They’ve created all kinds of silver and black gear for the team. Here’s some info from ostatesports.com

    http://www.ostatespo...

    I can’t imagine a world where Oklahoma State is anything other than orange and black (since those have been the colors for about, pardon the reference, 4EVER)[/quote]

    Well one thing for sure… I would be glad to see those “Better shade of orange” OSU ads leave my Houston airports!!!

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:38 pm |

    I don’t know that lowering a classic uniform—with a considerable tradition of excellence—to the incompetent level of your current team is much of a solution. Yankees had some horrible years, but they didn’t panic and rework their image.

    Instead, they built the image back up with their performance on the field. Changing a truly iconic uni of 46 years just because you suck right now would be a consummate cop out: “Okay, we quit; can’t possibly ever live up those Raider teams.”

    –Ricko

  • EddieAtari | October 19, 2009 at 12:39 pm |

    Snap Poll: On the subject of block numbers, which number 2 do you like better? The old-school diagonal 2, or the modern square 2?

  • Jonathan | October 19, 2009 at 12:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”355153″][quote comment=”355146″]hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.[/quote]

    If they’re not on the NFLshop website, try Ebay or the Foxboro Thrift and Consignment shop!

    Last week, they had a run on these:

    http://www.cnnsi.com...

    i just saw them yesterday at my Sports Authority store. Made a mental note of it because I had heard some people asking about them

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 12:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”355156″][quote comment=”355153″][quote comment=”355146″]hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.[/quote]

    If they’re not on the NFLshop website, try Ebay or the Foxboro Thrift and Consignment shop!

    Last week, they had a run on these:

    http://www.cnnsi.com...

    Sleeves pre-cut? Or is that a DIY deal?[/quote]

    I have no idea, however word has it that this customer seemed to purchase the entire stock:

    http://cache.daylife...

    http://www.sportingn...

  • Mike | October 19, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    The Champions Tour gave away bobbleheads at their event this weekend in Texas, including Arnold Palmer, Tom Watson, Craig Stadler and Bernhard Langer.

  • Red | October 19, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    I’ve heard from several sources (including members of the team) that BYU will be another school getting Rivalry Unis from Nike. What theyre saying right now is that they might be royal blue throwbacks. When Bronco Mendenhall took over for BYU he wanted to go back to royal but Nike vetoed that, since navy sells better…

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | October 19, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    Is it just me, or does anyone else think the Titan’s Oilers Throwbacks 6s really look like an upside down 9???

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | October 19, 2009 at 12:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”355161″]Snap Poll: On the subject of block numbers, which number 2 do you like better? The old-school diagonal 2, or the modern square 2?[/quote]
    Diagonal, without a doubt – point being we don’t want all the numbers looking the same!

  • EddieAtari | October 19, 2009 at 12:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”355166″]Is it just me, or does anyone else think the Titan’s Oilers Throwbacks 6s really look like an upside down 9???[/quote]

    Dude, all 6’s look like upside down 9’s…

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”355166″]Is it just me, or does anyone else think the Titan’s Oilers Throwbacks 6s really look like an upside down 9???[/quote]

    Yup, and it did in 1960, too.

  • EddieAtari | October 19, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”355168″][quote comment=”355166″]Is it just me, or does anyone else think the Titan’s Oilers Throwbacks 6s really look like an upside down 9???[/quote]

    Dude, all 6’s look like upside down 9’s…[/quote]

    Case in point.

  • HawkDog | October 19, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    Why are the Patriots being so lame as to not use their actual 1960 helmet when all the other teams are?
    They continue to be a rogue organization. It’s amazing how ex-Pat assistant coaches fail when they don’t have the “advantages” that the Pat’s seem to have.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 12:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”355161″]Snap Poll: On the subject of block numbers, which number 2 do you like better? The old-school diagonal 2, or the modern square 2?[/quote]

    interesting snapshot of namath…

    seems like the jets have a few different versions of the “12” going on over the years

    heh

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 12:50 pm |

    Dude, all 6’s look like upside down 9’s…

    “White-collar conservative flashing down the street, pointing his plastic finger at me…..”

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 12:51 pm |

    “When Bronco Mendenhall took over for BYU he wanted to go back to royal but Nike vetoed that, since navy sells better…”

    Well, there ya go.

    Now let’s ask ourselves, compared to many, many other schools, how much BYU stuff gets bought anyway (outside of Provo, et al)?

    And wouldn’t, perchance, the royal make BYU stand out against all the dark stuff out there? One thing I’ve learned about advertising/marketing: You always want your client’s ads/products to blend in; don’t make them stand out. Oh, riiiiiiiiiiight.

    —Ricko

  • We Got Ns In The Backfield | October 19, 2009 at 12:52 pm |

    Didn’t the Steelers add the patch to the front shoulder at the same time they changed the font?

    Speaking of which, that font change had to be one of the worst uniform changes in NFL history.

    Why would you go to skinny wimpy looking numbers when your whole contrived image is tough and burly?

  • JimV19 | October 19, 2009 at 12:56 pm |

    Wow, that uni is terrible. http://farm3.static....
    That’s right, Phil, even I wouldn’t wear that mess.

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 12:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”355171″]Why are the Patriots being so lame as to not use their actual 1960 helmet when all the other teams are?
    They continue to be a rogue organization. It’s amazing how ex-Pat assistant coaches fail when they don’t have the “advantages” that the Pat’s seem to have.[/quote]
    Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans); the other half aren’t (Chargers, Raiders, Bills and the aforementioned Pats).

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 12:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”355177″][quote comment=”355171″]Why are the Patriots being so lame as to not use their actual 1960 helmet when all the other teams are?
    They continue to be a rogue organization. It’s amazing how ex-Pat assistant coaches fail when they don’t have the “advantages” that the Pat’s seem to have.[/quote]
    Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs/Texans, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans); the other half aren’t (Chargers, Raiders, Bills and the aforementioned Pats).[/quote]
    Fixed.

  • JimV19 | October 19, 2009 at 1:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”355167″][quote comment=”355161″]Snap Poll: On the subject of block numbers, which number 2 do you like better? The old-school diagonal 2, or the modern square 2?[/quote]
    Diagonal, without a doubt – point being we don’t want all the numbers looking the same![/quote]

    I agree. The other ones are cool, but they look like an upside down 5.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 1:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355160″]I don’t know that lowering a classic uniform—with a considerable tradition of excellence—to the incompetent level of your current team is much of a solution. Yankees had some horrible years, but they didn’t panic and rework their image.

    Instead, they built the image back up with their performance on the field. Changing a truly iconic uni of 46 years just because you suck right now would be a consummate cop out: “Okay, we quit; can’t possibly ever live up those Raider teams.”

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Do you really consider a number font swap to be a “reworking of their image”?

    Just because they’ve worn it virtually unchanged since 1971, doesn’t mean it couldn’t use a tweak. The Steelers, Packers & Cowboys were all just as iconic, and all 3 are different now than they were in 1975.

    Obviously you don’t announce the change “because we suck now”, but it could still trigger something.

    Besides that, you’re never going to convince me that the current black numbers are better than the silver ones. Never. The silver numbers fucking rule. Period. :)

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”355171″]Why are the Patriots being so lame as to not use their actual 1960 helmet when all the other teams are?
    They continue to be a rogue organization. It’s amazing how ex-Pat assistant coaches fail when they don’t have the “advantages” that the Pat’s seem to have.[/quote]

    In this “Legacy” thing, only three of the eight original AFL teams attempted to be accurate to 1960. Broncos and Chiefs got things right; “Oilers” came damn close, just a couple errors.

    The other five picked different years altogether.

    From a history standpoint, kinda like 62% of the Revolutionary War reactors showing up in unis from the War of 1812.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 1:08 pm |

    [quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | October 19, 2009 at 1:09 pm |

    Oh, and I think we already knew that Texas was included in the rivalry deal – theirs will just be worn on Thanksgiving! Let’s hope more are throwbacks instead of jicky Nike shenanigans…

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 1:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 1:11 pm |

    oh and another thing in re: legacy unis

    i bet, somehow, someway, we can blame al davis for the teams not ALL throwing back to 1960

    NO WAY was he putting the raiders in black and gold (almost stiller colors)

    once he put down the foot, im sure the other afc teams said, ‘well if the raiders won’t do it, then why should we?’

    and that’s why MORE THAN HALF are doing it kinda half-assed

    /just my thoughts, i have no proof about davis, but i suspect it

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”355180″][quote comment=”355160″]I don’t know that lowering a classic uniform—with a considerable tradition of excellence—to the incompetent level of your current team is much of a solution. Yankees had some horrible years, but they didn’t panic and rework their image.

    Instead, they built the image back up with their performance on the field. Changing a truly iconic uni of 46 years just because you suck right now would be a consummate cop out: “Okay, we quit; can’t possibly ever live up those Raider teams.”

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Do you really consider a number font swap to be a “reworking of their image”?

    Just because they’ve worn it virtually unchanged since 1971, doesn’t mean it couldn’t use a tweak. The Steelers, Packers & Cowboys were all just as iconic, and all 3 are different now than they were in 1975.

    Obviously you don’t announce the change “because we suck now”, but it could still trigger something.

    Besides that, you’re never going to convince me that the current black numbers are better than the silver ones. Never. The silver numbers fucking rule. Period. :)[/quote]

    “Do you really consider a number font swap to be a “reworking of their image”?

    No.

    I was referencing the ideas about the black helmet, etc., not changing the number font. And talking about how teams often make the mistake of changing, thinking it will solve the problem. Raiders don’t need a new number font. They need, I think, to realize it’s time the organization moved on…if you know what I mean.

    “Just because they’ve worn it virtually unchanged since 1971, doesn’t mean it couldn’t use a tweak.”

    Doesn’t mean it’s in need of one, either.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”355185″]oh and another thing in re: legacy unis

    i bet, somehow, someway, we can blame al davis for the teams not ALL throwing back to 1960

    NO WAY was he putting the raiders in black and gold (almost stiller colors)

    once he put down the foot, im sure the other afc teams said, ‘well if the raiders won’t do it, then why should we?’

    and that’s why MORE THAN HALF are doing it kinda half-assed

    /just my thoughts, i have no proof about davis, but i suspect it[/quote]

    This…
    http://www.weirdwolf...
    …is the ’62-only uni. And the helmet stripe should be light gold, as should the home numbers. No white at all on the home jerseys in ’62.

    (And don’t ask if “I’m sure”. I’m sure)

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 1:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”355186″][quote comment=”355180″][quote comment=”355160″]I don’t know that lowering a classic uniform—with a considerable tradition of excellence—to the incompetent level of your current team is much of a solution. Yankees had some horrible years, but they didn’t panic and rework their image.

    Instead, they built the image back up with their performance on the field. Changing a truly iconic uni of 46 years just because you suck right now would be a consummate cop out: “Okay, we quit; can’t possibly ever live up those Raider teams.”

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Do you really consider a number font swap to be a “reworking of their image”?

    Just because they’ve worn it virtually unchanged since 1971, doesn’t mean it couldn’t use a tweak. The Steelers, Packers & Cowboys were all just as iconic, and all 3 are different now than they were in 1975.

    Obviously you don’t announce the change “because we suck now”, but it could still trigger something.

    Besides that, you’re never going to convince me that the current black numbers are better than the silver ones. Never. The silver numbers fucking rule. Period. :)[/quote]

    “Do you really consider a number font swap to be a “reworking of their image”?

    No.

    I was referencing the ideas about the black helmet, etc., not changing the number font. And talking about how teams often make the mistake of changing, thinking it will solve the problem. Raiders don’t need a new number font. They need, I think, to realize it’s time the organization moved on…if you know what I mean.

    “Just because they’ve worn it virtually unchanged since 1971, doesn’t mean it couldn’t use a tweak.”

    Doesn’t mean it’s in need of one, either.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Al Davis is going to live to be 125, so moving on is probably not happening for a while.

    Just for the hell of it then, my black helmet concept:
    http://img237.images...

    Honestly, I don’t particularly want them to do this, but it’s part of my “no white jerseys in the NFL” thing, and I mainly stuck it in for the people that wouldn’t want to see all-silver.

    My mind is a strange and twisted thing.

  • Kek | October 19, 2009 at 1:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”355176″]Wow, that uni is terrible. http://farm3.static....
    That’s right, Phil, even I wouldn’t wear that mess.[/quote]
    Seriously, and this could be what might happen if you let corporate sponsorship makes its way from the practice field to gameday. I could see Monster Energy drink putting their logo on that POS.

  • Kek | October 19, 2009 at 1:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”355189″][quote comment=”355176″]Wow, that uni is terrible. http://farm3.static....
    That’s right, Phil, even I wouldn’t wear that mess.[/quote]
    Seriously, and this might happen if you let corporate sponsorship makes its way from the practice field to gameday. I could see Monster Energy drink putting their logo on that POS.[/quote]
    fixed

  • Gabe | October 19, 2009 at 1:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”355163″][quote comment=”355156″][quote comment=”355153″][quote comment=”355146″]hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.[/quote]

    If they’re not on the NFLshop website, try Ebay or the Foxboro Thrift and Consignment shop!

    [/quote]

    The hat is on the Patriots pro shop site, just click on Hats and select winter.

  • Kek | October 19, 2009 at 1:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”355175″]Didn’t the Steelers add the patch to the front shoulder at the same time they changed the font?

    Speaking of which, that font change had to be one of the worst uniform changes in NFL history.

    Why would you go to skinny wimpy looking numbers when your whole contrived image is tough and burly?[/quote]
    Yes to the chest patch, came in with the new font, which was a Nike thing IIRC.

    You know, I used to hate the font switch, but now, I’m used to it, and so long as they wear the throwbacks twice a year, I can get my block number fix from those games.

  • liz | October 19, 2009 at 1:25 pm |

    Once we got started on fonts for numbers I remembered these pics I saw while researching a blog entry for my own blog. Check out the numbers on the visiting team. (Burlington [VT] vs. South Burlington [VT]).

    http://www.burlingto...

  • EddieAtari | October 19, 2009 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”355172″][quote comment=”355161″]Snap Poll: On the subject of block numbers, which number 2 do you like better? The old-school diagonal 2, or the modern square 2?[/quote]

    interesting snapshot of namath…

    seems like the jets have a few different versions of the “12” going on over the years

    heh[/quote]

    I’ve also noticed slight variations on the Yankees #2 over the years…

  • Seth E | October 19, 2009 at 1:27 pm |

    The striping on the Jaguars uniforms were different this week because they are now wearing the prototype uniforms. I saw close ups of their uniforms and the Giants uniforms. They’re definitely made out of the same stuff.

  • Matt UK | October 19, 2009 at 1:27 pm |

    Morales jersey has had bobbled piping for most of the season, and his is the only Angels jersey that has it. I don’t know if he picks it or something?

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 1:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”355187″][quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”355185″]oh and another thing in re: legacy unis

    i bet, somehow, someway, we can blame al davis for the teams not ALL throwing back to 1960

    NO WAY was he putting the raiders in black and gold (almost stiller colors)

    once he put down the foot, im sure the other afc teams said, ‘well if the raiders won’t do it, then why should we?’

    and that’s why MORE THAN HALF are doing it kinda half-assed

    /just my thoughts, i have no proof about davis, but i suspect it[/quote]

    This…
    http://www.weirdwolf...
    …is the ’62-only uni. And the helmet stripe should be light gold, as should the home numbers. No white at all on the home jerseys in ’62.

    (And don’t ask if “I’m sure”. I’m sure)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    are you sure?

    seems like FUPP made a mistake then…im shocked

  • Bryan | October 19, 2009 at 1:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”355168″][quote comment=”355166″]Is it just me, or does anyone else think the Titan’s Oilers Throwbacks 6s really look like an upside down 9???[/quote]

    Dude, all 6’s look like upside down 9’s…[/quote]

    Was anyone watching the Jets-Bills game where they mentioned that Sanchez chose the #6 thinking it was #9? It ended up being upside down.

  • Matt Hackethal | October 19, 2009 at 1:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”355191″][quote comment=”355163″][quote comment=”355156″][quote comment=”355153″][quote comment=”355146″]hate to be this guy but…

    Any idea if this hat ( http://espn.go.com/n... ) is available for sale? Cannot find it anywhere online.[/quote]

    If they’re not on the NFLshop website, try Ebay or the Foxboro Thrift and Consignment shop!

    [/quote]

    The hat is on the Patriots pro shop site, just click on Hats and select winter.[/quote]

    Also on Lids.com

  • Skycat | October 19, 2009 at 1:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    I definitely prefer the loopless unis of the old Titans to the ones with the loops. As a matter of fact, I’ll go as far as saying I prefer most uniforms without loops. I don’t know when loops became fashionable, but for the most part they seem to be an unnecessary embellishment. I wonder if they were just introduced today by Nike perhaps they would be considered in the same way we think of as those obtrusive side panels. Perhaps for legacy purposes I would give a pass to the Colts (and the throwback Patriots, especially because they are far superior to the contemporary unis). In fact, I’ve noticed most NFL teams seemed to have abandoned the loops (e.g., the Vikings’ road unis). They seem to be far more prevalent in college football.

  • chance michaels | October 19, 2009 at 1:42 pm |

    So in 1962, the Raiders changed the white numbers to gold? Any other changes?

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”355197″][quote comment=”355187″][quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”355185″]oh and another thing in re: legacy unis

    i bet, somehow, someway, we can blame al davis for the teams not ALL throwing back to 1960

    NO WAY was he putting the raiders in black and gold (almost stiller colors)

    once he put down the foot, im sure the other afc teams said, ‘well if the raiders won’t do it, then why should we?’

    and that’s why MORE THAN HALF are doing it kinda half-assed

    /just my thoughts, i have no proof about davis, but i suspect it[/quote]

    This…
    http://www.weirdwolf...
    …is the ’62-only uni. And the helmet stripe should be light gold, as should the home numbers. No white at all on the home jerseys in ’62.

    (And don’t ask if “I’m sure”. I’m sure)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    are you sure?

    seems like FUPP made a mistake then…im shocked[/quote]

    Let’s see…on 1960 AFL…
    Pats wrong
    Oilers wrong
    Bills wrong
    Chargers wrong
    Titans wrong
    Broncos wrong
    Raiders wrong
    Chiefs wrong

    8-for-8. All have something wrong.
    Sometimes minor.
    Sometimes major.

    –Ricko

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”355198″][quote comment=”355168″][quote comment=”355166″]Is it just me, or does anyone else think the Titan’s Oilers Throwbacks 6s really look like an upside down 9???[/quote]

    Dude, all 6’s look like upside down 9’s…[/quote]

    Was anyone watching the Jets-Bills game where they mentioned that Sanchez chose the #6 thinking it was #9? It ended up being upside down.[/quote]

    Color Blind, dyslexic…what else?

  • Leaky | October 19, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    At some point, we need answers for this Blackhawks stripping problem. It can be cured but maybe the designers for Reebok (Canton, MA) are anti-Blackhawks (maybe they are Bruins fans)…

    It must be stopped.

    http://www.chicagono...

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”355201″]So in 1962, the Raiders changed the white numbers to gold? Any other changes?[/quote]

    Considerable changes from ’60 and ’61.
    ’60 and ’61 were the Bears unis in black and light gold.
    See Paul’s column last Monday. In old Bronco photos are at least two vs. Raiders.

    —Ricko

  • chance michaels | October 19, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    Right, I’m trying to figure out when they wore the white-numbered versions.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 1:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”355202″]

    seems like FUPP made a mistake then…im shocked[/quote]

    Let’s see…on 1960 AFL…
    Pats wrong
    Oilers wrong
    Bills wrong
    Chargers wrong
    Titans wrong
    Broncos wrong
    Raiders wrong
    Chiefs wrong

    8-for-8. All have something wrong.
    Sometimes minor.
    Sometimes major.

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Ok… Raiders I assume shouldn’t have a helmet stripe, at least. The Chargers probably had some yellow trim that isn’t shown. Um.. Oilers and the red number thing, Titans stripes… What’s wrong with the Pats, Broncos, Bills & Texans?

  • EddieAtari | October 19, 2009 at 1:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”355202″][quote comment=”355197″][quote comment=”355187″][quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”355185″]oh and another thing in re: legacy unis

    i bet, somehow, someway, we can blame al davis for the teams not ALL throwing back to 1960

    NO WAY was he putting the raiders in black and gold (almost stiller colors)

    once he put down the foot, im sure the other afc teams said, ‘well if the raiders won’t do it, then why should we?’

    and that’s why MORE THAN HALF are doing it kinda half-assed

    /just my thoughts, i have no proof about davis, but i suspect it[/quote]

    This…
    http://www.weirdwolf...
    …is the ’62-only uni. And the helmet stripe should be light gold, as should the home numbers. No white at all on the home jerseys in ’62.

    (And don’t ask if “I’m sure”. I’m sure)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    are you sure?

    seems like FUPP made a mistake then…im shocked[/quote]

    Let’s see…on 1960 AFL…
    Pats wrong
    Oilers wrong
    Bills wrong
    Chargers wrong
    Titans wrong
    Broncos wrong
    Raiders wrong
    Chiefs wrong

    8-for-8. All have something wrong.
    Sometimes minor.
    Sometimes major.

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Could you point out what wrong with the Bronco’s (besides the obvious ugliness)?

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”355205″][quote comment=”355201″]So in 1962, the Raiders changed the white numbers to gold? Any other changes?[/quote]

    Considerable changes from ’60 and ’61.
    ’60 and ’61 were the Bears unis in black and light gold.
    See Paul’s column last Monday. In old Bronco photos are at least two vs. Raiders.

    ’62 went away from goofy small Bears-style helmets, new helmets had light gold stripe.
    Took all white off home jerseys and home socks.
    Only gold on road jerseys or road socks was around numbers.

    —Ricko

    —Ricko[/quote]

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 1:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”355207″][quote comment=”355202″]

    seems like FUPP made a mistake then…im shocked[/quote]

    Let’s see…on 1960 AFL…
    Pats wrong
    Oilers wrong
    Bills wrong
    Chargers wrong
    Titans wrong
    Broncos wrong
    Raiders wrong
    Chiefs wrong

    8-for-8. All have something wrong.
    Sometimes minor.
    Sometimes major.

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Ok… Raiders I assume shouldn’t have a helmet stripe, at least. The Chargers probably had some yellow trim that isn’t shown. Um.. Oilers and the red number thing, Titans stripes… What’s wrong with the Pats, Broncos, Bills & Texans?[/quote]

    PATS wore white high socks on road.
    BRONCOS pants were same home and road (lt. gold stripes).
    BILLS wore silver pants, home and road, not white. Road socks white with royal NW style stripes.
    TEXANS wore white high socks on road.

    Only Chargers and Titans did NOT wear white version of socks o road.

    —Ricko

  • Christopher | October 19, 2009 at 2:02 pm |

    I was looking at the Football uniform site. I’m not a big NFL expert, but I have a totally off-topic question.

    In 1966 and 1967, there were no regular season games between an NFL and AFL team right?

    In 1966 the NFL had 15 teams, in 1967 they added the Saints for 16 teams.

    How did they complete a schedule in ’66 with an odd number of teams? Did they have bye weeks?

    Maybe I’m missing something?

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 2:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”355212″]I was looking at the Football uniform site. I’m not a big NFL expert, but I have a totally off-topic question.

    In 1966 and 1967, there were no regular season games between an NFL and AFL team right?

    In 1966 the NFL had 15 teams, in 1967 they added the Saints for 16 teams.

    How did they complete a schedule in ’66 with an odd number of teams? Did they have bye weeks?

    Maybe I’m missing something?[/quote]

    As recall, every team had a bye week that year. Could be wrong, but seem to remember it was kind of a novel thing.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 2:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”355212″]I was looking at the Football uniform site. I’m not a big NFL expert, but I have a totally off-topic question.

    In 1966 and 1967, there were no regular season games between an NFL and AFL team right?

    In 1966 the NFL had 15 teams, in 1967 they added the Saints for 16 teams.

    How did they complete a schedule in ’66 with an odd number of teams? Did they have bye weeks?

    Maybe I’m missing something?[/quote]

    Yes, they had bye weeks, just like how the NFL dealt with having 31 teams for those couple seasons with Cleveland 2.0 before the Texans joined the league.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 2:07 pm |

    Dammit Ricko, stop posting at the same time as me.

  • HokieFan | October 19, 2009 at 2:09 pm |

    quote comment=\”355087\”]Clark Ruhland reports that Virginia Tech will start using these throwbacks as their primary uni set next season.

    ————–

    If there is anyone I trust with this information, its the person who designed all the college logos that are being used on the BoxScores of the Virginia Tech Athletics website.

    And I\’m very glad to hear this. I LOVE THAT LOOK! Granted we lost, but I still friggen LOVE that look.

    I have also heard that VT is gonna be doing something \”special\” in regards to their uniforms sometime later this season. I\’ve heard the Thursday Night game against UNC (Oct 29) is when they\’ll be unveiled and they\’ll include… ugh… BFBS.[/quote]

    loved the look on saturday night, hated the outcome. but what does BFBS stand for?

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 2:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”355216″]quote comment=\”355087\”]Clark Ruhland reports that Virginia Tech will start using these throwbacks as their primary uni set next season.

    ————–

    If there is anyone I trust with this information, its the person who designed all the college logos that are being used on the BoxScores of the Virginia Tech Athletics website.

    And I\’m very glad to hear this. I LOVE THAT LOOK! Granted we lost, but I still friggen LOVE that look.

    I have also heard that VT is gonna be doing something \”special\” in regards to their uniforms sometime later this season. I\’ve heard the Thursday Night game against UNC (Oct 29) is when they\’ll be unveiled and they\’ll include… ugh… BFBS.[/quote]

    loved the look on saturday night, hated the outcome. but what does BFBS stand for?[/quote]

    Black for Black’s Sake…meaning no point at all

  • James Craven | October 19, 2009 at 2:29 pm |

    You forgot yesterday’s MIN-BAL game, a/k/a the Paul Lukas UniWatch Bowl.

    Lots of purple.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”355216″]what does BFBS stand for?[/quote]

    wow…i thought for sure that term was in the Uni Watch Glossary, but it’s not (if you’re unfamiliar with a certain term used on here, it’s always helpful to check the glossary — located on the right side of the column — under the header Research Projects).

    guess we need to update

  • Sam | October 19, 2009 at 2:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”355212″]I was looking at the Football uniform site. I’m not a big NFL expert, but I have a totally off-topic question.

    In 1966 and 1967, there were no regular season games between an NFL and AFL team right?

    In 1966 the NFL had 15 teams, in 1967 they added the Saints for 16 teams.

    How did they complete a schedule in ’66 with an odd number of teams? Did they have bye weeks?

    Maybe I’m missing something?[/quote]

    I’m not 100-percent certain, but I thought I remembered that interleague games started in 1970 (and that’s when the Steelers, Browns and Colts went from NFL to AFC).

  • Sam | October 19, 2009 at 3:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”355220″][quote comment=”355212″]I was looking at the Football uniform site. I’m not a big NFL expert, but I have a totally off-topic question.

    In 1966 and 1967, there were no regular season games between an NFL and AFL team right?

    In 1966 the NFL had 15 teams, in 1967 they added the Saints for 16 teams.

    How did they complete a schedule in ’66 with an odd number of teams? Did they have bye weeks?

    Maybe I’m missing something?[/quote]

    I’m not 100-percent certain, but I thought I remembered that interleague games started in 1970 (and that’s when the Steelers, Browns and Colts went from NFL to AFC).[/quote]

    … and they still had 14-game schedules

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 3:12 pm |

    paul has now updated the glossary to reflect “BFBS” as Uni Watch acronym

    thanks, paul

  • joey | October 19, 2009 at 3:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”355222″]paul has now updated the glossary to reflect “BFBS” as Uni Watch acronym

    thanks, paul[/quote]

    lots of broken links in the glossary.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 3:22 pm |

    One other note on 1960 AFL unis at FUPP, if I may.

    The ’60 and ’61 Raiders used the same number font as the ’60 Oilers. It just looked different–thicker–on the Raider homes cuz it was white with a light gold edge.

    They continued to use it in ’62, only in light gold with no border on the home blacks.

    They didn’t use the more condensed font shown at FUPP.
    Ever.

    —Ricko

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 3:33 pm |

    Here is Lou Groza #46

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    At least I think the bottom picture is Lou

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 3:33 pm |

    Just thought I’d point out that…
    ESPN has some new network ID graphics…
    and AOL has announced a new upgrade with its own sub-logo…

    ..both of which are built around a version of Seahawk green.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 3:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”355225″]Here is Lou Groza #46

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    At least I think the bottom picture is Lou[/quote]

    And Marion Motley, right? (#76)

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 3:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”355227″][quote comment=”355225″]Here is Lou Groza #46

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    At least I think the bottom picture is Lou[/quote]

    And Marion Motley, right? (#76)[/quote]

    Yep that is Marion Motley. On one of my dvds they talked about changing the Browns numbers when the rules went into effect for positions. Basically making minor adjustments to the players old numbers to give them new ones.

  • Jamie | October 19, 2009 at 3:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”355224″]That “Ch. Brown” guy in the foreground of the photo, by the way, is Chykie Brown. The Texas roster also includes Curtis Brown. Does his NOB have “Cu. Brown”?[/quote]

    Yep. I’ve seen it on a couple different occasions, but I sadly have no screen caps.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 3:44 pm |

    oh man…

    that is a GREAT PICTURE of the toe

    chucks on everyone, except lou’s kicking foot

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 3:47 pm |

    Not sure I got the Bengals helmet comment about reverse.

    I did make a mini helmet with that reverse image look as shown in this picture

    http://img121.images...

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 3:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”355230″]oh man…

    that is a GREAT PICTURE of the toe

    chucks on everyone, except lou’s kicking foot[/quote]

    That’s cuz that one held…”The Toe”.

  • Paul Lukas | October 19, 2009 at 3:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”355223″][quote comment=”355222″]paul has now updated the glossary to reflect “BFBS” as Uni Watch acronym

    thanks, paul[/quote]

    lots of broken links in the glossary.[/quote]

    Oh, not SO many….. Anyway, I just went in and fixed them all.

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 3:52 pm |

    Ok I saw the comment in Kek’s post with that sorta Bengal looking helmet. Now that did not look good

  • JimV19 | October 19, 2009 at 3:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”355200″][quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    I definitely prefer the loopless unis of the old Titans to the ones with the loops.

    As a matter of fact, I’ll go as far as saying I prefer most uniforms without loops. I don’t know when loops became fashionable, but for the most part they seem to be an unnecessary embellishment. I wonder if they were just introduced today by Nike perhaps they would be considered in the same way we think of as those obtrusive side panels. Perhaps for legacy purposes I would give a pass to the Colts (and the throwback Patriots, especially because they are far superior to the contemporary unis). In fact, I’ve noticed most NFL teams seemed to have abandoned the loops (e.g., the Vikings’ road unis). They seem to be far more prevalent in college football.[/quote]

    Speaking as one who is loopy for loops, allow me to defend them. Yes, I love a classic jersey like the ’50s Giants, but I don’t want every team to look like that. Loops can be a very useful “bumper sticker,” especially in the past when teams had a limited number of colors from which to choose.

    I think the difference between the loops and today’s embellishments is this: the loops are clean and they separate two distinct members of the body, the shoulders and the arms. Some of today’s striping just goes all over and doesn’t have much sense to it.

    Now for a modern equivalent, I’m in the minority of folks who like two things about the UFL jerseys. http://www.getufl.co... I think the black shoulder piping is fine, because it serves the same function as the loops. Also, the stripes in the front separarte the shoulders from the torso. Now the other stuff I could do without, but that’s my point – a “bumper sticker” or two on a car or a uni is a good thing, but add too many and it’s a mess.

  • Phil | October 19, 2009 at 3:57 pm |

    “So their white jerseys won’t make their 2009 debut until, at earliest, Week 9 in Jacksonville. Has this ever happened before?”

    Don’t know if someone already mentioned this but back in 2004 Steelers did not wear their road unis until week 10 when they were at Cleveland. They wore their black jerseys for their games in Baltimore, Miami and Dallas.

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 4:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355234″]Ok I saw the comment in Kek’s post with that sorta Bengal looking helmet. Now that did not look good[/quote]
    It probably looked OK on paper. On the field, not so much.

  • MPowers1634 | October 19, 2009 at 4:03 pm |

    Paging Scott Little!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You posted these pics from the Blazers/Suns Rip City game of Steve Blake’s mystery Shoes:

    http://www.scottsspo...

    http://www.scottsspo...

    They are the AND1 Street2Elite:

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

  • Chuck | October 19, 2009 at 4:06 pm |

    question: could the Angels put Los Angeles on their road unis, or would there be legal ramifications stemming from the whole LA Angels of Anaheim deal?

  • Chris | October 19, 2009 at 4:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”355239″]question: could the Angels put Los Angeles on their road unis, or would there be legal ramifications stemming from the whole LA Angels of Anaheim deal?[/quote]
    On a similar note, could the Texas Texases put Rangers on their unis and people know what state they’re from?

  • Brandon | October 19, 2009 at 4:32 pm |

    I work for Dick’s sporting Goods in Cleveland. I saw Drop ship report last week that the week before the ohio state Michigan game we were getting some “rivalry” t-shirts and jerseys from Nike. T shirts will be 25 and jerseys will be 80. If I get a picture i will pass it along

  • EddieAtari | October 19, 2009 at 4:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”355239″]question: could the Angels put Los Angeles on their road unis, or would there be legal ramifications stemming from the whole LA Angels of Anaheim deal?[/quote]

    Stupid name… It’s like calling either one of the NFl teams here the “New York (Jets/Giants) of East Rutherford, New Jersey.”

    What was so wrong with calling them the California Angels anyway?

  • JimV19 | October 19, 2009 at 4:46 pm |

    Sorry, no screen grabs, but Adam Sandler is sitting with Jack Nicholson at the Yanks/Angels game. Jack’s wearing a red stars & stripes Yankees hat. Pat Sajak’s right behind home plate. No sign of Vanna.

  • chance michaels | October 19, 2009 at 4:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”355242″][quote comment=”355239″]question: could the Angels put Los Angeles on their road unis, or would there be legal ramifications stemming from the whole LA Angels of Anaheim deal?[/quote]

    Stupid name… It’s like calling either one of the NFl teams here the “New York (Jets/Giants) of East Rutherford, New Jersey.”

    What was so wrong with calling them the California Angels anyway?[/quote]

    Of course it’s a stupid name. Moreno didn’t want to call them that, but under the deal Disney signed with the city of Anaheim, he didn’t have a whole lot of options.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 5:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”355242″][quote comment=”355239″]question: could the Angels put Los Angeles on their road unis, or would there be legal ramifications stemming from the whole LA Angels of Anaheim deal?[/quote]

    Stupid name… It’s like calling either one of the NFl teams here the “New York (Jets/Giants) of East Rutherford, New Jersey.”

    What was so wrong with calling them the California Angels anyway?[/quote]

    They’re trying to please everyone with that name, and it’s cumbersome to say the least.

    But California Angels isn’t the solution. On some visceral level it indicates a lack of confidence in, or connection with, their home town. But mostly it looks presumptuous to claim the entire state as their market when they share it with four other teams. Or it comes off as silly, as if they don’t even understand their own circumstances.

    State names make some sense in places where the chances of the state being home to another team in the same sport are slim and none. Yes, that means I don’t think much of “Texas Rangers”. For many, many years, Dallas was home to minor league baseball teams nicknamed the Eagles and, later, the Rangers. Notwithstanding the football and hockey teams in Philadelphia and New York, pairing Dallas with either name would have worked just fine…and not made it look they didn’t know the Astros existed, or that they were somehow superior to them.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 5:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”355245″][quote comment=”355242″][quote comment=”355239″]question: could the Angels put Los Angeles on their road unis, or would there be legal ramifications stemming from the whole LA Angels of Anaheim deal?[/quote]

    Stupid name… It’s like calling either one of the NFl teams here the “New York (Jets/Giants) of East Rutherford, New Jersey.”

    What was so wrong with calling them the California Angels anyway?[/quote]

    They’re trying to please everyone with that name, and it’s cumbersome to say the least.

    But California Angels isn’t the solution. On some visceral level it indicates a lack of confidence in, or connection with, their home town. But mostly it looks presumptuous to claim the entire state as their market when they share it with four other teams. Or it comes off as silly, as if they don’t even understand their own circumstances.

    State names make some sense in places where the chances of the state being home to another team in the same sport are slim and none. Yes, that means I don’t think much of “Texas Rangers”. For many, many years, Dallas was home to minor league baseball teams nicknamed the Eagles and, later, the Rangers. Notwithstanding the football and hockey teams in Philadelphia and New York, pairing Dallas with either name would have worked just fine…and not made it look they didn’t know the Astros existed, or that they were somehow superior to them.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    I don’t really see the Rangers choosing “Texas” as a way of claiming the state. They aren’t really a Dallas team. They’ve always played in Arlington, which is between Dallas and Fort Worth.

    The Mavericks and Stars have always played in Dallas. Yes, the Cowboys play in Arlington now and they’re not calling themselves the “Texas Cowboys,” but they started in Dallas and were there for more than a decade before moving to Irving (which I believe is located in Dallas County).

  • Ben | October 19, 2009 at 5:30 pm |

    UConn will be wearing a JH sticker on their helmets this week at West Virginia in remembrance of Jasper Howard. WV also said they will do something at the game for him.

  • Randy Miller | October 19, 2009 at 5:33 pm |

    In the late ’60s, the only minor league baseball in the Dallas area was played in Arlington by the Dallas-Fort Worth Spurs, who I think were an Orioles farm team.

    The mayor of Arlington, Tom Vandergriff, was much more proactive in seeking a major league team than the mayors of Dallas or Fort Worth. And, with an existing stadium, it seemed logical to put the team in Arlington, roughly halfway between Dallas and Fort Worth.

    I remember as a much younger person expecting the team to continue to be DFW, but my memory vaguely recalls that Bob Short wanted to team to be called Texas.

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 5:48 pm |

    Some good info or history on the early AFL uniforms in today’s comments from Ricko and others.

    I finally got around to watching every Showtime episode about the AFL. I really enjoyed that show.

  • BurghFan | October 19, 2009 at 6:14 pm |

    Didn’t the Steelers add the patch to the front shoulder at the same time they changed the font?

    Speaking of which, that font change had to be one of the worst uniform changes in NFL history.

    Why would you go to skinny wimpy looking numbers when your whole contrived image is tough and burly?

    As Kek said, those changes took place at the same time, which was when Nike became the Steelers’ suppliers. I remember seeing Dan Rooney quoted as saying that Nike wanted to make major changes, but changing the numbers and adding the logo patch (presumably instead of a wordmark) was as far as the team would go.

    At least the current number font reads well.

  • Bob W | October 19, 2009 at 6:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”355120″][quote comment=”355070″]Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked![/quote]
    Strangely enough, I did the Wite-Out number treatment on a Pirates helmet when I was a kid. The results were just as good as RyCo’s.[/quote]

    Orioles plastic helmet. Frank Robinson’s #20. But I went the high-end route and used Rydell model paint. Wore it for front-yard whiffle ball.

  • whiteray | October 19, 2009 at 6:33 pm |

    About “shoulder loops,” as they’ve been called. Unless I’m very much wrong, those would be called “UCLA stripes.” (I suppose that implies that UCLA was the first – or among the first – to use them, but I’m not sure about that.) At least, that’s what I read long ago when I first became fascinated by uniform design. My source? I don’t recall, but it’s been thirty-nine years, at least. Why do I remember reading it? Because I’m a Vikings fan, and from 1969 until the recent horrible change, the Vikings were one of the few teams to have different stripe patterns on their home and road jerseys, with the Northwestern stripes on the home purples and the UCLA stripes on the road whites. (And I’d love to see both jerseys come back!)

  • whiteray | October 19, 2009 at 6:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”355252″]About “shoulder loops,” as they’ve been called. Unless I’m very much wrong, those would be called “UCLA stripes.” (I suppose that implies that UCLA was the first – or among the first – to use them, but I’m not sure about that.) At least, that’s what I read long ago when I first became fascinated by uniform design. My source? I don’t recall, but it’s been thirty-nine years, at least. Why do I remember reading it? Because I’m a Vikings fan, and from 1969 until the recent horrible change, the Vikings were one of the few teams to have different stripe patterns on their home and road jerseys, with the Northwestern stripes on the home purples and the UCLA stripes on the road whites. (And I’d love to see both jerseys come back!)[/quote]

    [I should have said “maybe the only pro team to have different stripe patterns.” Does anyone know of another?]

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 6:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”355252″]About “shoulder loops,” as they’ve been called. Unless I’m very much wrong, those would be called “UCLA stripes.” (I suppose that implies that UCLA was the first – or among the first – to use them, but I’m not sure about that.) [/quote]

    i believe you are correct…ricko sent me this chart back when we did our piece on comp sleeves … scroll down to the section on “getting loopy on you” — we call them different things (“loops” or “arches”)…but they are all essentially the UCLA striping you refer to

  • Tall Paul | October 19, 2009 at 6:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”355250″]Didn’t the Steelers add the patch to the front shoulder at the same time they changed the font?

    Speaking of which, that font change had to be one of the worst uniform changes in NFL history.

    Why would you go to skinny wimpy looking numbers when your whole contrived image is tough and burly?

    As Kek said, those changes took place at the same time, which was when Nike became the Steelers’ suppliers. I remember seeing Dan Rooney quoted as saying that Nike wanted to make major changes, but changing the numbers and adding the logo patch (presumably instead of a wordmark) was as far as the team would go.

    At least the current number font reads well.[/quote]

    I was always under the impression that the uniform number font change, while considered to be a tewak or an upgrade, was done to mirror (closely, if not perfectly) the number font on the helmets.

  • MJM | October 19, 2009 at 6:48 pm |

    http://www.spiritsoc...

    Guess what I’m showing to my high school football team next year!

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 6:49 pm |

    From the aformentioned UniWatch glossary:

    UCLA stripes or UCLA inserts: A triple-striped knit panel inserted in between the sleeve and shoulder. Most frequently used by football teams and occasionally by baseball teams as well. Pioneered in 1954 by UCLA football coach Red Sanders, who believed the stripes would create the feeling of motion.

    Northwestern stripes: A stripe pattern consisting of one wide stripe bordered by two thinner stripes. It can appear on socks, sleeves, pants, and anywhere else stripes can be applied. Pioneered by the Northwestern University football team in 1928 (further details here).

  • Tall Paul | October 19, 2009 at 6:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”355202″][quote comment=”355197″][quote comment=”355187″][quote comment=”355184″][quote comment=”355182″][quote]Half the teams are throwing back to 1960 (Broncos, Chiefs, Titans/Oilers, Jets/Titans)[/quote]

    i think the titans of new york are throwing back to 61-2

    original titans din’t have teh loops[/quote]
    I was actually referring only to the helmets, not the full unis.[/quote]
    [quote comment=”355185″]oh and another thing in re: legacy unis

    i bet, somehow, someway, we can blame al davis for the teams not ALL throwing back to 1960

    NO WAY was he putting the raiders in black and gold (almost stiller colors)

    once he put down the foot, im sure the other afc teams said, ‘well if the raiders won’t do it, then why should we?’

    and that’s why MORE THAN HALF are doing it kinda half-assed

    /just my thoughts, i have no proof about davis, but i suspect it[/quote]

    This…
    http://www.weirdwolf...
    …is the ’62-only uni. And the helmet stripe should be light gold, as should the home numbers. No white at all on the home jerseys in ’62.

    (And don’t ask if “I’m sure”. I’m sure)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    are you sure?

    seems like FUPP made a mistake then…im shocked[/quote]

    Let’s see…on 1960 AFL…
    Pats wrong
    Oilers wrong
    Bills wrong
    Chargers wrong
    Titans wrong
    Broncos wrong
    Raiders wrong
    Chiefs wrong

    8-for-8. All have something wrong.
    Sometimes minor.
    Sometimes major.

    –Ricko[/quote]

    Not to mention the misspelling on “San Fransisco” up in the NFL section…

  • Chris | October 19, 2009 at 6:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”355250″]Didn’t the Steelers add the patch to the front shoulder at the same time they changed the font?

    Speaking of which, that font change had to be one of the worst uniform changes in NFL history.

    Why would you go to skinny wimpy looking numbers when your whole contrived image is tough and burly?

    As Kek said, those changes took place at the same time, which was when Nike became the Steelers’ suppliers. I remember seeing Dan Rooney quoted as saying that Nike wanted to make major changes, but changing the numbers and adding the logo patch (presumably instead of a wordmark) was as far as the team would go.

    At least the current number font reads well.[/quote]
    It seems absurd to me that companies would be telling the teams what to do, shouldn’t it be the other way around? Otherwise, you get the abominations coming out of Canton, MA.

  • bartusball | October 19, 2009 at 7:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”355150″][quote comment=”355138″][quote comment=”355124″][quote comment=”355070″]Connelly, you wore a Phillies hat growing up. For shame, for shame. Your yinzer membership card has been revoked![/quote]

    “Your yinzer membership card has been revoked”

    well it’s about damn time! lol. i would have mentioned that years ago, had i knew that. ugh… yinzers!

    speaking of yinzers, i was at the steelers game and over heard this beaut:

    “huge-est”

    like:

    “so-and-so has the huge-est steelers bar in the state”

    yep…[/quote]

    What are the requirements for membership?

    A. Lacking two or more teeth per jaw.
    B. Having gotten to at least second base with a cousin.
    C. You remember locker combinations by using Nascar drivers.
    D. Your house has wheels.
    E. Your family tree is a stump.[/quote]
    I think you’re mixing this up with someone from West Virginia[/quote]

    My thoughts exactly n’at

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 7:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”355253″]
    [I should have said “maybe the only pro team to have different stripe patterns.” Does anyone know of another?][/quote]
    Cowboys have two distinctly different striping patterns on the blue and white jerseys.

    Of course, the Giants have no stripes at all on the blue jersey.

    Does this count?

  • bartusball | October 19, 2009 at 7:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”355147″]Is there no length?
    http://www.tiretatto...

    Why don’t they just tatoo “Insert knife here!” on they tire.

  • James Craven | October 19, 2009 at 7:10 pm |

    When was the last pro football game when both teams had nunbers on the sides of the helmets as per tonight’s Chargers throwback-Broncos throwups contest?

  • pflava | October 19, 2009 at 7:29 pm |

    Regarding the Rangers:

    Somewhat like the Angels, or the teams in the Twin Cities, they are in a special circumstance – representing an area (the DFW Metroplex) and not one particular city. Yes, Dallas is the principal city of said Metroplex, but the Rangers have never played in Dallas. Or Fort Worth. Logically, the only names that would have made sense would be DFW or Texas (certainly not Arlington). Really it’s just a unique situation with no perfect solution.

  • Tall Paul | October 19, 2009 at 7:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”355264″]Regarding the Rangers:

    Somewhat like the Angels, or the teams in the Twin Cities, they are in a special circumstance – representing an area (the DFW Metroplex) and not one particular city. Yes, Dallas is the principal city of said Metroplex, but the Rangers have never played in Dallas. Or Fort Worth. Logically, the only names that would have made sense would be DFW or Texas (certainly not Arlington). Really it’s just a unique situation with no perfect solution.[/quote]

    Did the fact that there is an actual “Texas Rangers” (http://www.txdps.sta...) play into the naming decision at all?

  • Tall Paul | October 19, 2009 at 7:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”355265″][quote comment=”355264″]Regarding the Rangers:

    Somewhat like the Angels, or the teams in the Twin Cities, they are in a special circumstance – representing an area (the DFW Metroplex) and not one particular city. Yes, Dallas is the principal city of said Metroplex, but the Rangers have never played in Dallas. Or Fort Worth. Logically, the only names that would have made sense would be DFW or Texas (certainly not Arlington). Really it’s just a unique situation with no perfect solution.[/quote]

    Did the fact that there is an actual “Texas Rangers” (http://www.txdps.sta...) play into the naming decision at all?[/quote]

    Trying again with the linkie: http://www.txdps.sta...

  • leon | October 19, 2009 at 8:05 pm |

    Really it’s just a unique situation with no perfect solution.

    I believe roller derby’s Bay Area Bombers faced the same dilemma.

  • Jordan Pope | October 19, 2009 at 8:33 pm |

    are the broncos wearing the wrong pants?
    http://www.weirdwolf...

  • Ray | October 19, 2009 at 8:42 pm |

    Those yellow stripes ONLY on the pants really bothers me. Is that how their road unis were originally?

  • Ray | October 19, 2009 at 8:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”355269″]Those yellow stripes ONLY on the pants really bothers me. Is that how their road unis were originally?[/quote]

    The Broncos that is

  • Steve | October 19, 2009 at 8:44 pm |

    It looks like Vincent Jackson’s NOB has the new font, versus the old font on his Chargers’ throwback.

  • Stuby | October 19, 2009 at 8:58 pm |

    I’m loving the paint job in that end zone

  • jp | October 19, 2009 at 9:07 pm |

    Am I the only one who really likes the Broncos Legacy set? If the pant stripes on the road get up were white, they would be awesome.

  • Stuby | October 19, 2009 at 9:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”355273″]Am I the only one who really likes the Broncos Legacy set? If the pant stripes on the road get up were white, they would be awesome.[/quote]
    No you’re not, and I agree about the pants striping. I also admire them for trying to give us a uniform set that hasn’t been seen in a long time. San Diego trots out the same tired throwback and acts like this is the only other uniform they have ever worn.

  • mtjaws | October 19, 2009 at 9:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”355263″]When was the last pro football game when both teams had nunbers on the sides of the helmets as per tonight’s Chargers throwback-Broncos throwups contest?[/quote]

    Ugh, I just totally hate that! Sure it is traditional, but is just ugly. The lightning bolt is fine, but the numbers are just plain blech.

  • JimV19 | October 19, 2009 at 9:16 pm |

    Former Winnipeg Blue Bombers kicker Troy Westwood is coming back to punt. http://www.tsn.ca/cf...
    Instead of his old number 7, he’s getting his original number, 74. Glad to see the CFL’s still cooler than the stodgy NFL when it comes to numbers.

  • The Jeff | October 19, 2009 at 9:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”355273″]Am I the only one who really likes the Broncos Legacy set? If the pant stripes on the road get up were white, they would be awesome.[/quote]

    You’re one of few. They would probably look better with white on the pants…or with yellow on the helmet… but it’s still ugly as hell.

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 9:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”355268″]are the broncos wearing the wrong pants?
    http://www.weirdwolf...

    no

    ricko pointed out earlier that every single uniform on the FUPP 1960 set is wrong…he and i will be tackling that and other things in a future post

    long story short: broncos only had one set of pants in 1960-brown with mustard stripes; so what they’re wearing tonight is correct (historically)

  • JTH | October 19, 2009 at 9:25 pm |

    I’ll admit that I kinda liked the Broncos’ unis last Sunday even though the helmet matched no other part of the uniform. But tonight’s are just beyond bad. I can not get past the fact that the hosiery and trousers are mismatched.

    But I agree that they deserve credit for the “warts and all” approach and that they didn’t cop out and go with the throwbacks we’ve already seen, a la the Chargers.

  • Ricko | October 19, 2009 at 9:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”355268″]are the broncos wearing the wrong pants?
    http://www.weirdwolf...

    See post #144

  • jp | October 19, 2009 at 9:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”355274″][quote comment=”355273″]Am I the only one who really likes the Broncos Legacy set? If the pant stripes on the road get up were white, they would be awesome.[/quote]
    No you’re not, and I agree about the pants striping. I also admire them for trying to give us a uniform set that hasn’t been seen in a long time. San Diego trots out the same tired throwback and acts like this is the only other uniform they have ever worn.[/quote]

    The socks are different than anything else I’ve seen in a while and I love them. Even with the players that are giving them the “barberpole” treatment, to me, it gives them another discernible element.

    It is a uniform that most of us have never seen or long forgotten about and with a few tweaks, I feel they could be a great set.

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 9:56 pm |

    Found these 2 b&w pictures of the Broncos in the white jerseys

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    And this one of the Raiders b&w

    http://img.photobuck...

  • Greenie | October 19, 2009 at 10:00 pm |

    ran across a rather blatant use of an NFL logo today

    http://noahjagsbaseb...

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 10:09 pm |

    And earlier today the talk about NY Titans without the shoulder loops or stripes. Here is b&w action

    http://lh4.ggpht.com...

    http://lh4.ggpht.com...

    http://lh6.ggpht.com...

  • timmy b | October 19, 2009 at 10:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”355272″]I’m loving the paint job in that end zone[/quote]

    Y’know, there are eight white diamonds in each end zone. IIRC, back in the day, one EZ had “SANDIEGO” and the other had “CHARGERS”. One letter per diamond. It would be perfect.

  • JimV19 | October 19, 2009 at 10:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”355282″]Found these 2 b&w pictures of the Broncos in the white jerseys

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    And this one of the Raiders b&w

    http://img.photobuck...

    The first one is a home jersey. It’s a shade darker than the guy in the background, plus the lighter stripe is darker than the white part of the sock.

  • super390 | October 19, 2009 at 10:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”355263″]When was the last pro football game when both teams had nunbers on the sides of the helmets as per tonight’s Chargers throwback-Broncos throwups contest?[/quote]

    It would have to have been in 1962. The Steelers stopped wearing numbers on their helmets during the playoffs that year, substituting the logo. The Browns still wore them, alone in the NFL. The Chargers were already alone in the AFL, the Bills and Broncos having completely changed their uniforms that year. And there was no interleague play then.

    I think numbers combined with a logo like the ’60 Patriots or the ’63 Longhorns are great. I wouldn’t mind a team with a logo on one side and a number on the other, if it was in college where sleeve numbers are not required.

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 11:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”355287″][quote comment=”355282″]Found these 2 b&w pictures of the Broncos in the white jerseys

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    Ooops good eye Jim

    And this one of the Raiders b&w

    http://img.photobuck...

    The first one is a home jersey. It’s a shade darker than the guy in the background, plus the lighter stripe is darker than the white part of the sock.[/quote]

  • LarryB | October 19, 2009 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”355289″][quote comment=”355287″][quote comment=”355282″]Found these 2 b&w pictures of the Broncos in the white jerseys

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    Ooops good eye Jim

    And this one of the Raiders b&w

    http://img.photobuck...

    The first one is a home jersey. It’s a shade darker than the guy in the background, plus the lighter stripe is darker than the white part of the sock.[/quote][/quote]
    [quote comment=”355287″][quote comment=”355282″]Found these 2 b&w pictures of the Broncos in the white jerseys

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    And this one of the Raiders b&w

    http://img.photobuck...

    The first one is a home jersey. It’s a shade darker than the guy in the background, plus the lighter stripe is darker than the white part of the sock.[/quote]

    Good eye Jim. I did not pay attention to the other team there which is the Raiders in white

  • LI Phil | October 19, 2009 at 11:53 pm |

    FUCK

  • Kurt Allen | October 20, 2009 at 12:04 am |

    Just got home – kind of like the Broncos uni’s despite the socks, the helmets for some reason in particular (dark chocolate??)

    I probably said this before, but I like back in the day when they actually painted the opponents colors in one of the end zones (Kezar Stadium/Tulane Stadium)…

  • Matthew | October 20, 2009 at 12:10 am |

    I know I’m late to the party on the shoulder loops, but as a Colts fan I don’t like them going that much around. There isn’t enough fabric on today’s jerseys and it just clutters the whole front of the jersey, especially with the captain patches. I think that the half loops are actually a good compromise.

  • Ricko | October 20, 2009 at 1:09 am |

    [quote comment=”355293″]I know I’m late to the party on the shoulder loops, but as a Colts fan I don’t like them going that much around. There isn’t enough fabric on today’s jerseys and it just clutters the whole front of the jersey, especially with the captain patches. I think that the half loops are actually a good compromise.[/quote]

    When is a loop not a loop? When does it become just a front-facing shoulder stripe?

  • Jordan Pope | October 20, 2009 at 1:25 am |

    [quote comment=”355280″][quote comment=”355268″]are the broncos wearing the wrong pants?
    http://www.weirdwolf...

    See post #144[/quote]

    thanks

  • Curt | October 20, 2009 at 1:45 am |

    New third uni for the Memphis Grizzlies:

    http://www.commercia...

  • Matthew | October 20, 2009 at 2:14 am |

    [quote comment=”355294″][quote comment=”355293″]I know I’m late to the party on the shoulder loops, but as a Colts fan I don’t like them going that much around. There isn’t enough fabric on today’s jerseys and it just clutters the whole front of the jersey, especially with the captain patches. I think that the half loops are actually a good compromise.[/quote]

    When is a loop not a loop? When does it become just a front-facing shoulder stripe?[/quote]

    I guess I’m just used to the shoulder stripe and the loop would look, well, loopy to me.

  • mary | October 20, 2009 at 4:54 am |

    Morales’ sleeve piping has been terrible since the regular season. I’m guessing since early september or late october.

    It is bothersome that it is yet to be fixed. Maybe if they fix it K-Mo will get a friggin hit in the ALCS.

    *Angel fan vent over*

  • DenverGregg | October 20, 2009 at 7:41 am |

    [quote comment=”355293″]I know I’m late to the party on the shoulder loops, but as a Colts fan I don’t like them going that much around. There isn’t enough fabric on today’s jerseys and it just clutters the whole front of the jersey, especially with the captain patches. I think that the half loops are actually a good compromise.[/quote]
    It’s funny how these things work out. As a kid, I associated shoulder loops with the Boston Patriots, so I naturally came to dislike the loops intensely. Even though the bad guys got rid of loops before loops got truncated, I dislike the new style of shoulder stripes even more.

  • Greg | October 20, 2009 at 1:58 pm |

    Terps and Gamecocks to wear camo jerseys on Nov. 14th to benefit the Wounded Warrior Project.

    http://voices.washin...

  • ugg boots sale | October 22, 2009 at 3:55 am |

    I received my classic cardy boots today, very impressed.
    uggs on sale is nothing that touches these for just lazing around at home.
    cardy ugg boots are like sort of a massive slipper, soft, easy to wear and light.
    Because of the very popular,ugg boots sale are very well.