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

Seeing Red, in All Its Wide Variety

Screen shot 2009-10-09 at 10.15.54 AM.png

As most of you know, I’ve been trying to compile a visual catalog of hockey red line designs. It’s an interesting project, because the blue lines are always solid blue, but red line styles are all over the map. It’s sort of a stealth design element on the sports landscape.

How did we end up with such a multiplicity of red line designs? A hint comes from reader Matthew Clement, who recently sent me the following note:

The red lines were originally broken up with white in order to differentiate the red line from the blue line on black and white TVs. Perhaps this is common knowledge, but I only figured it out last year when Montreal played in Colorado and the local sports station broadcast the second period in black-and-white as a tribute to the old days of hockey.

I had never thought about that, but it makes perfect sense. Interestingly, now that we live in a color TV world, some red lines have gone back to solid red. You can see that in some of the photos linked in the following alphabetical list of arenas, which features all of the current NHL rinks along with some minor league and college facilities. I’ve tried to show current designs as much as possible, although I probably missed the mark in a few cases. And that’s fine — I’m mostly interested in showing the range of red line possibilities, past and present.

So:

Air Canada Centre (Toronto): Checked.

American Airlines Center (Dallas): Red stars on a white background. A few years ago it was checked.

BankAtlantic Center (Sunrise, Florida): The home of the Panthers uses white panther pawprints on a red background (here’s another view), which is a reverse-field version of their previous design.

Bell Centre (Montreal): Checked.

General Motors Place (Vancouver): A diagonal check.

Giant Center (Hershey, Pennsylvania): The home of the Hershey Bears is using little white Calder Cup outlines on a red background. You can see the arena’s crew actually creating the red line in this video clip.

Gwinett Center (Duluth, Georgia): This is the home of the ECHL’s Gwinett Gladiators, so the red line features little white gladiator swords.

Honda Center (Anaheim): This season they’re going with large, inward-pointing white arrows. But in the past they’ve had smaller outward-pointing arrows (or are those supposed to be duck footprints?), interlocking triangles (additional views here and here), and solid red.

HP Pavilion (San Jose): Checked.

HSBC Arena (Buffalo): Checked.

Jobing.com Arena (Phoenix): Worst arena name ever, but I really like their northwestern-striped red line.

Joe Louis Arena (Detroit): Checked>

Kohl Center (Madison, Wisconsin): This year it’s white diamonds on a red backgound. Last year it was target circles.

Madison Square Garden (New York City): Checked.

Mellon Arena (Pittsburgh): White diamonds on a red background.

Nassau Coliseum (Uniondale, New York): Checked.

Nationwide Center (Columbus): Lots and lots of little white stars. A few years back it was a simple checked treatment.

Olympic Center (Lake Placid): When the Miracle on Ice took place in 1980, the red line featured red diamonds on a white background>

OSU Ice Rink (Columbus): White stars on a red background. That’s the fourth design in as many years, because the past three seasons have featured white parallelograms (2008-09), block “O” logos (2007-08), and solid red (2006-07).

Pengrowth Saddledome (Calgary): Diagonal checks. Used to be standard rectangular checks.

Pepsi Center (Denver): White diamonds on a red background.

Philips Arena (Atlanta): Remember that row of arrowheads that used to run along the bottom of the Thrashers’ jerseys? They’re not on the jerseys anymore, but they’re still on the red line.

Prudential Center (Newark, New Jersey): Checked.

RBC Center (Raleigh, North Carolina): Black dots on the red background, just like their lower-jersey pattern. Used to be solid red.

Rexall Place (Edmonton): Red diamonds on a white background.

St. Pete Times Forum (Tampa): White lightning bolts on a red background.

Scotiabank Place (Ottawa): Checked. Used to have a different design, although I can’t make out what it was.

Scottrade Center (St. Louis): Solid red.

Sommet Center (Nashville): Looks like it’s diagonally checked. Used to be solid red. And I’m not sure what was going on here — are those diamonds?

Staples Center (Los Angeles): Checked, but it used to be solid red.

Tate Rink (West Point, N.Y.): The home rink of the Army hockey team uses white stars on a red background.

TD Garden (Boston): This year they’re going with lots of small white diamonds on a red background. Other designs in recent years have included solid red, checked, and a modified checked pattern in which the white checks alternated with spoke-B logos. I’m not positive, but I think the white checks have also been shaped like the NHL shield.

United Center (Chicago): Last year solid red, this year long rectangular checks.

Verizon Center (Washington, DC): When the Caps play, it’s white stars on a red background. But they apparently use a more conventional treatment for non-Caps games.

Wachovia Center (Philadelphia): Three parallel red lines.

Winnipeg Arena (Winnipeg): Back when the Jets were still playing, the red line was more white than red.

World Arena (Colorado Springs): Three red parallel lines.

Xcel Energy Center (St. Paul): Long, rectangular checks.

And that’s it for now. Do you know of other designs floating around out there? Let’s have ’em.

And it seems to me that we have a few questions worth answering:

1) Is Matthew Clement’s info about white-checked red lines being a response to black-and-white TV accurate? If so, were red lines routinely solid red in the pre-TV era?

2) And if that turns out to be true, which was the first team to go with a non-solid red line?

3) Were there any solid-red holdouts, even in the black-and-white TV era?

4) Which team was the first to use a non-checked design?

I love this — more than 10 years’ after Uni Watch’s debut, we’re just now exploring a whole new branch on the athletics aesthetics tree.

(Big thanks to everyone who contributed photos and info, including Daron Jones, Rob Leavell, Kyle Speicher, Jeff Emhuff, J.D. Vercett, Mike Vanne, Ryan Yanoshak, Rich Canulli, Jon Strauss, David Kendrick, Philip Krawec, Matt Hiett, Mike Bielen, Zak Kapotes, Michael Kearney, Vincent Vignola, Kevin Zdancewicz, Nicole Haase, and Bryan Grupp.)

Screen shot 2009-10-04 at 10.07.15 PM.png

Culinary Corner: I don’t drink coffee — never learned to like the taste. But I love the smell of coffee, I love coffee ice cream, I love coffee shakes and malts, I love coffee milk (the official state drink of Rhode Island, don’tcha know), I even like making coffee for Kirsten in the morning. Basically, I like everything about coffee except coffee.

Maybe that explains why I like instant espresso powder so much. I’m told it makes crappy espresso, but that doesn’t matter because that’s not what I use it for. Here’s what I do with it:

• I put about a 1/4-cup of it in my brownie batter, thereby transforming my brownies into mochies. (This pretty much works with any chocolate-based baking recipe — cupcakes, cookies, frostings, whatever.)

• I dust it on ice cream, where it provides a nice bitter counterpoint and a hint of micro-granular texture. (Kirsten actually keeps some in a salt shaker for this purpose.)

• I put a few tablespoons of it into the spice rub I use for steak, pork, and chicken. Adds a complex undercurrent to the proceedings.

I’ve read that espresso powder is also good in stews, but I haven’t tried that yet (maybe this weekend). Anyway, just get some and mess around with it — it’s surprisingly versatile, sort of like Joe McEwing.

Uni Watch News Ticker: As a few thousand of you informed me yesterday, Maryland and South Carolina will be wearing camouflage-accented uniforms (and cleats!) for their games on Nov. 14th (not against each other), as a post-Veterans Day gesture. Lots of additional info and photos here, here, here, and here. … Packers kicker Mason Crosby went to high school in Georgetown, Texas — which, as it happens, uses the same helmet logo as the Pack (good spot by Ken Singer). … What’s worse than a lacrosse team dressed in pink? An opposing team dressed in lime green plaid (blame Jim Atherton). … Latest step in Nike’s nefarious world-domination scheme: a robot that graffitis the roadway (thanks, Kirsten). … Yesterday I said that the Broncos’ yellow striping looked like the lone color element in an otherwise black-and-white photo. Nathan Haas decided to take that concept literally. … Best Halloween costume ever? (As submitted by my ESPN colleague Dave Schoenfield.) … Remember this photo of Boomer Esiason with a No. 63 helmet? Steve King says it was a tribute to veteran Bengals tackle Joe Walter, who was waived during that season. Esiason also wrote the number on his helmet with a marker. … Who’s that in the helmet hat? It’s Doug Keklak‘s brother, with a young Kek himself in the background, circa early 1980s. … Expect to see lots of Kinesio tape in Boston this season (with thanks to AJ Chalifour). … “While at the farmers’ market in Los Angeles, I happened upon a small exhibit in a glass case about Gilmore Field (home of the Hollywood Stars) and Gilmore Stadium,” writes Patrick Woody. “Both buildings were located adjacent to the Market, and Gilmore Stadium sat on the site of what is currently CBS Television City. Anyway, there were some cool items in the case. Sadly, there were no Stars shorts.” … Mark Maxwell says this poster has been appearing on campus at Ohio University — looks like an upgrade from last year’s road uni. … “Not sure what this is, but it was on the camera in the dugout during Yanks/Halos,” says Matt Harris. … “Meet the Raiders of Rider High School in Wichita Falls, Texas,” writes Andy McNeel. “You’ll notice the gorgeously simple and strong ‘ROHO’ logo on their helmets, which stands for ‘Ride On, Honorable Ones.'” … Andy also sent along this photo — note the unusual NOB. “It makes my brain hurt to try to think about what ‘P.R.I.D.E.’ stands for, or why it deserves NOB status,” he says. “I swear, all of these high schools are within about a 70-mile radius of Wichita Falls. Fans of uniform oddity-watching (much like bird watching) need only go to Wichita Falls on any given Friday night, point their wagons any which direction toward any given set of stadium lights on the horizon, and they will not be disappointed.” … The term “in perpetuity” is almost never a good thing, but it seems particularly depressing here. … Here’s another high school that uses Bucco Bruce — with one slight modification, as Matt Lanzoff explains: “I attended that school in the late ’90s and was a junior the year of Columbine massacre. In the wake of that incident, the school chose to remove the sword from the logo (in order to fight school violence) but keep Bruce.” … And here’s a college that uses Bucco Bruce. Background, from Ben Teaford: “In fact, they got into trouble with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers over the use of the logo. Tampa Bay told them they couldn’t use it anymore, so the school’s president challenged Tampa to a game to decide who got to use the logo. Tampa refused the challenge and soon after changed their logo. I remember reading about it in Sports Illustrated at the time (just one of those small blurbs towards the front).” This account is confirmed in the fifth graf here.

You ignored it before, you can ignore it again: I’ve put another big batch of old indie and punk singles up on eBay, including some serious rarities. You know what to do.

 

266 comments to Seeing Red, in All Its Wide Variety

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 8:35 am |

    [quote]In the wake of that incident, the school chose to remove the sword from the logo (in order to fight school violence) but keep Bruce.[/quote]

    That has to be one of the most pointless stupid knee-jerk reactions I’ve ever seen.

    Yes, because a sword in a sports logo was going to incite school violence. Really? Idiots.

  • Mark K | October 21, 2009 at 8:47 am |

    I always thought HSBC Arena’s center line should be a series of HSBC logos, which is an arrangement of red triangles.

    http://www.thelighti...

  • mmwatkin | October 21, 2009 at 8:48 am |

    I think the long rectangular checks look the best. They have a bit of an “old-school” feel to them even though teams may not have used that design back in the day (how does that work?)

    Also, the Red Wings need to get rid of the black “Hockeytown” logo from center (sorry…centre. We are talking hockey here) ice. Their classic logo does not need any adjustments.

  • CK | October 21, 2009 at 8:48 am |

    I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.

  • MPowers1634 | October 21, 2009 at 8:50 am |

    I love that Beloit challenged Tampa bay for the use of Bucco Bruce!

  • Mark K | October 21, 2009 at 8:51 am |

    Oh and I also seem to remember that Edmonton had the coolest red line design back in the day- when it was Northlands Coliseum.

  • Shaftman | October 21, 2009 at 8:56 am |

    The term “in perpetuity” is almost never a good thing, but it seems particularly depressing here. …

    While I still don’t despise all corporate branding on arenas, I have to say that I really support the “in perpetuity” clause of this agreement.

    The reason I have had so much hatred for this type of branding can be summed up in describing the continued renaming of the stadiums below (although it’s certainly not limited to these 4):

    PacBell SBC AT&T Park
    MCI Verizon Center
    Enron Minute Maid Park
    Brendan Byrne Arena Continental Airlines Arena Izod Center.

    At least with this agreement for the Staples Center, the arena will have a chance to reach the path of some other stadiums/teams that have gone beyond their corporate moniker.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 8:57 am |

    [quote comment=”355544″]I love that Beloit challenged Tampa bay for the use of Bucco Bruce![/quote]

    Yeah that is rather awesome. But then it’s also really sad that their football team isn’t using the logo on their helmets now, if they ever actually did.

  • mmwatkin | October 21, 2009 at 8:58 am |

    [quote comment=”355546″]The term “in perpetuity” is almost never a good thing, but it seems particularly depressing here. …

    While I still don’t despise all corporate branding on arenas, I have to say that I really support the “in perpetuity” clause of this agreement.

    The reason I have had so much hatred for this type of branding can be summed up in describing the continued renaming of the stadiums below (although it’s certainly not limited to these 4):

    PacBell SBC AT&T Park
    MCI Verizon Center
    Enron Minute Maid Park
    Brendan Byrne Arena Continental Airlines Arena Izod Center.

    At least with this agreement for the Staples Center, the arena will have a chance to reach the path of some other stadiums/teams that have gone beyond their corporate moniker.[/quote]

    It is a good thing that the Astros didn’t strike up a similar deal!

  • dwight | October 21, 2009 at 9:06 am |

    Fabulous (and likely mostly unnoticed) reference to Joe McEwing – a hero to hard-working,scrappy, slow-footed, ex-middle infielders everywhere! Thanks Paul!

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 21, 2009 at 9:08 am |

    [quote comment=”355543″]I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.[/quote]
    It also looks like it could be the 1932 arena, right next door to the 1980 arena.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 9:09 am |

    In the interest of obsessive accuracy, the black marks within red squares at the RBC Center are not dots, but rather squares, indicative of the hurricane warning flag. Also used by Tulsa and Miami (Fl).

    http://www.united-st...
    (slight scrolldown required)

    While I agree that the constant renaming of arenas and stadiums is annoying, the circumstances involving the Verizon Center seem unavoidable:

    By January 6, 2006, MCI was incorporated into Verizon with the name Verizon Business. With this merger, Verizon also acquired the naming rights to the Washington, D.C. home of the Washington Wizards and the Washington Capitals, the Verizon Center (formerly known as the MCI Center).

  • Chris M | October 21, 2009 at 9:11 am |

    http://farm4.static....

    If you look at this center line long enough, you start to see two facing white triangles on a red solid line rather than red diamonds on a white background :p

  • Dane | October 21, 2009 at 9:17 am |

    A couple of great pictures from the bowels of Mellon Arena last night, courtesy of Empty Netters.

    The Blues bring their own sewing machine on the road:
    http://farm3.static....

    The Penguins blade-measurement tool still has the 1990’s-era logo:
    http://farm3.static....

    The full write-up from last night, including an Esa Tikkanen jersey, can be found here:
    http://community.pos...

  • MPowers1634 | October 21, 2009 at 9:17 am |

    [quote comment=”355552″]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3488/3993461717_0057178baf_o.png

    If you look at this center line long enough, you start to see two facing white triangles on a red solid line rather than red diamonds on a white background :p[/quote]

    Welcome to the wonderful world of geometry.
    When I am introducing m ystudents to drawing, I often use images like this to explain “drawing what you see”.

  • Dane | October 21, 2009 at 9:19 am |

    [quote comment=”355551″]By January 6, 2006, MCI was incorporated into Verizon with the name Verizon Business. With this merger, Verizon also acquired the naming rights to the Washington, D.C. home of the Washington Wizards and the Washington Capitals, the Verizon Center (formerly known as the MCI Center).[/quote]

    I’m still calling it “The Phone Booth”.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 9:21 am |

    [quote comment=”355554″][quote comment=”355552″]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3488/3993461717_0057178baf_o.png

    If you look at this center line long enough, you start to see two facing white triangles on a red solid line rather than red diamonds on a white background :p[/quote]

    Welcome to the wonderful world of geometry.
    When I am introducing m ystudents to drawing, I often use images like this to explain “drawing what you see”.[/quote]

    Drawing? You and your archaic terms… I assume you mean the paintbrush in Photoshop, right? :P

  • Carl | October 21, 2009 at 9:21 am |

    Wow! Who knew the red line could be so interesting. Great work.

    With the news (depressing or wonderful)that the Staples Center will remain named as-is, I can’t help but think of how many people are turned off from sports (or at least attending games, etc.) as a result of the constant name-changing of venues. Examples like 3com/PacBell/whatever park in San Fran have got to have a negative impact and thus, less value to a corporate sponsor (and community fan base too). There’s been much disdain over the HHH Metrodome being named Mall of America Field in Minneapolis recently and I can’t wonder if name changes are good, bad or somewhere in between for teams. For example Candlestick Park, Comiskey Park, & Mile High Stadium are examples of venues with long-standing historical names that cashed in on the naming rights, but at what cost?

    I wonder that since the Staples Center opened with the corporate what perception people would have if it changed to another corporate name? Consistency may be beneficial in this case. I can’t fathom how people would respond if they changed the Xcel Center (almost universally known as the ‘X’ up here on the tundra) to 3M/Target/Land ‘o Lakes Arena or something like that.

    By the way, what is “Jobbing.com? (kidding, please)

    Hmmm.

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 9:28 am |

    [quote comment=”355551″]In the interest of obsessive accuracy, the black marks within red squares at the RBC Center are not dots, but rather squares, indicative of the hurricane warning flag. Also used by Tulsa and Miami (Fl).[/quote]
    Yep… There are actually very thin black lines that create individual flags for the Center Ice redline. The Canes started this last year, I believe.

  • Mark K | October 21, 2009 at 9:28 am |

    Based on the various videos on youtube, the 1980 Olympic ice almost certainly had a solid red line.

  • JSS | October 21, 2009 at 9:30 am |

    Check out what a Cincinnati radio station has done:

    Listen to these…and check out the bUCkeye State logo…pretty clever.

    http://www.700wlw.co...

  • jason urick | October 21, 2009 at 9:30 am |

    Oh man, you had to go and list a bunch of New Zeland 7″‘s…. my Achilles Heel :(

  • Shaun | October 21, 2009 at 9:30 am |

    Couple things…

    Re camo Scarolina uniforms…. are they going with… um “attributes” on back? ie courage, duty, honor etc? didnt read anything about it. overall there have been MUCH worse uses of camo on a uniform, needless to say.

    Re high schools using pro logos…. my old HS, the Brookwood Broncos, uses a modified version of the Denver logo http://www.brookwood... notice the two ‘b’s strategically thrown in there.

    Re hockey redlines… paul id love to have helped, but you already got the two arenas near me. props to whoever grabbed the arena gwinnett center!

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 9:31 am |

    Looks like the Mets season keeps getting worse and worse…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    Appears the Wilpon family actually made money off the Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme. They deposited $522.8 million and withdrew $570.6 million, and it appears the Fed might go in and try to recover funds from them to disburse to the ‘losers’ in the scheme.

  • Shaun | October 21, 2009 at 9:33 am |

    [quote comment=”355563″]Looks like the Mets season keeps getting worse and worse…

    http://sports.espn.g...

    Appears the Wilpon family actually made money off the Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme. They deposited $522.8 million and withdrew $570.6 million, and it appears the Fed might go in and try to recover funds from them to disburse to the ‘losers’ in the scheme.[/quote]

    was going to bring that up… guess while the rest of america wants to know where the bailout went, mets fans want to know where their madoff money went

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 9:34 am |

    American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

  • Seth H | October 21, 2009 at 9:35 am |

    NHL Rule 1.5 says that the red line is not allowed to be solid, in order to differentiate it from the blue lines:

    “There shall also be a line, twelve inches (12”) in width and red in color, drawn completely across the rink in center ice, parallel with the goal lines and continued vertically up the side of the boards, known as the “CENTER LINE.” This line shall contain regular interval markings of a uniform distinctive design, which will readily distinguish it from the two blue lines, the outer edges of which must be continuous. (Paint code PMS 186.)”

  • Elena | October 21, 2009 at 9:38 am |

    You don’t like coffee, but like coffee flavored sweets? That is so weird. The only thing good about coffee is the smell. I hate anything mocha–such a waste of perfectly good chocolate.
    But whaddya expect from someone who won’t eat vegetables.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 9:39 am |

    The Blues bring their own sewing machine on the road:
    http://farm3.static….

    Presumably not used for facial cuts.

  • EddieAtari | October 21, 2009 at 9:39 am |

    Rachel Maddow discussed Mariano’s Loogie Incident on MSNBC last night.

  • Korch | October 21, 2009 at 9:41 am |

    Derek Jeter’s new cleats:

    http://sports.yahoo....

    Old cleats:

    http://sports.yahoo....

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 9:42 am |

    [quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 9:44 am |

    If you look at this center line long enough, you start to see two facing white triangles on a red solid line rather than red diamonds on a white background :p

    Been eating “espresso” brownies?

  • Chris | October 21, 2009 at 9:47 am |

    The red line in the Herb Brooks Arena, as it is now known, is solid red

  • Kevin C | October 21, 2009 at 9:48 am |

    The flag on Maryland and S. Carolina’s right sleeve is incorrect. It should be facing the other way, like this.

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    [quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]
    You know, except for the fact that it would essentially eliminate the idea of free agency (You’d be signing a contract with the league, not a team, and the league can restrict where you go), eliminate the idea of multiple franchises competing against each other (goodbye guaranteed local television rights to games) and eliminate many other ideals that make the leagues what they are…

    If the NFL wins this case, it’ll be a major blow to everyone other than the owners. You’ll be paying a higher price for an inferior product because market competition will all but be eliminated.

  • anthony | October 21, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    found: 10 ugliest uniform quirks in sports

    http://bleacherrepor...

  • Dawn | October 21, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    The link to the Georgetown Texas page shows them playing Leadner High School from Leander Texas.

    http://leanderfootba...

    That logo looks a lot like The College of New Jersey’s athletic logo. TCNJ is D III and it’s my alma mater and current employer.

    http://www.tcnjathle...

    I didn’t think anyone had ever heard of TCNJ, so I doubt Leader, TX copied the logo. I wonder if we both copied something else??

  • Jon | October 21, 2009 at 10:00 am |

    pretty common to see high schools using NFL and NCAA logos…even sometimes logos from other sports. take a look at how many helmets in CA use falcons, eagles, and cardinals logos alone – I think that those are the most common offenders as birds are the most common mascots

    http://cahelmets.awa...

    (as per the CA helmet project’s statistics page – “Eagles” is the most common mascot in california by far)

    http://cahelmets.awa...

  • Paul W | October 21, 2009 at 10:06 am |

    [quote]Latest step in Nike’s nefarious world-domination scheme…[/quote]

    Interesting picture to use for the bot. Really shows off its impeccable grammar.

  • Aram | October 21, 2009 at 10:08 am |

    Yost Ice Arena (Ann Arbor, MI) has diamonds on the red line:

    http://mvictors.com/...

  • DJ | October 21, 2009 at 10:09 am |

    At the Joyce Center Fieldhouse at Notre Dame, they have a red and white checked center line, with white shamrocks inside the checks.

  • Andy11 | October 21, 2009 at 10:14 am |

    The stars on the red line at Tate Rink are all painted upside down. I wonder if this was done intentionally, and if so, what is the reason?
    http://farm3.static....

  • We Got Ns In The Backfield | October 21, 2009 at 10:17 am |

    Of course, with the Carolina red line who knows what the design is supposed to be considering they are called the Hurricanes but have the tropical storm symbol on their uniform.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 10:20 am |

    [quote comment=”355575″][quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]
    You know, except for the fact that it would essentially eliminate the idea of free agency (You’d be signing a contract with the league, not a team, and the league can restrict where you go), eliminate the idea of multiple franchises competing against each other (goodbye guaranteed local television rights to games) and eliminate many other ideals that make the leagues what they are…

    If the NFL wins this case, it’ll be a major blow to everyone other than the owners. You’ll be paying a higher price for an inferior product because market competition will all but be eliminated.[/quote]

    Somehow I don’t think that the NFL would be stupid enough to actually limit which team a player could sign with.

    What market competition? The league already has a salary cap so the larger market teams don’t have an advantage over smaller ones. What would change? TV stations would have to negotiate deals with the NFL instead of specific teams. Big deal. If a station has the rights to air NFL games, why on earth would they not air the local team? Nevermind of course, that there’s 32 cities with local teams and everyone else already dealing with whatever random game the broadcast networks throw at them. I live in Ohio, so I usually get either a Browns or Bengals game early on CBS. The other early game on Fox is any random teams they want. For the late game, again it’s pretty much random.

    What would really change?

  • Taha | October 21, 2009 at 10:20 am |

    OSU’s hockey team plays in the Schottenstein Center. For consistency, you may want to put the venue name as you have with the others. In the time a lived in Columbus, I never heard anyone refer to it as “OSU Ice Rink”.

  • Hank | October 21, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    The various red-line designs got me thinking about center ice team logos. Seems to me only the Flyers and Canadiens use double logos on either side of the red-line. Been trying to figure out why, other than they don’t want to despoil their logos with the red-line bisecting it? Any other NHL teams use the double logo?

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    [quote comment=”355575″][quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]
    You know, except for the fact that it would essentially eliminate the idea of free agency (You’d be signing a contract with the league, not a team, and the league can restrict where you go), eliminate the idea of multiple franchises competing against each other (goodbye guaranteed local television rights to games) and eliminate many other ideals that make the leagues what they are…

    If the NFL wins this case, it’ll be a major blow to everyone other than the owners. You’ll be paying a higher price for an inferior product because market competition will all but be eliminated.[/quote]
    And not just the NFL – all sports leagues will suddenly gain the same antitrust exemption. And, as the article notes, the precedent would then apply to other industries.

    It would promote a new kind of monopoly, kill competition and damage the free market. That’s the problem.

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 10:24 am |

    [quote comment=”355541″]I think the long rectangular checks look the best. They have a bit of an “old-school” feel to them even though teams may not have used that design back in the day (how does that work?)

    Also, the Red Wings need to get rid of the black “Hockeytown” logo from center (sorry…centre. We are talking hockey here) ice. Their classic logo does not need any adjustments.[/quote]
    I hate that, too. It just looks bad on so many levels. The font is huge and ugly and it’s off-center. It really screws up a perfectly good logo. It’s completely bushleague and it does not belong at center ice in an NHL arena.

    If they insist on using the “Hockeytown” wordmark at center ice, why can’t it go underneath the winged wheel logo (centered and in a better font)? There’s plenty of room inside the circle to do it that way. It would still be stupid, but at least it’d be an improvement.

  • Jamie | October 21, 2009 at 10:24 am |

    I don’t know what kind of feedback you’ve been getting on the new Culinary Corner feature, but I really enjoy it. I’m in college and know absolutely nothing about cooking, so I, for one, appreciate seeing nice, simple, clever recipes without having to go to sift through Food Network’s website for the ones not by Guy Fieri. Keep it up, Paul.

  • timmy b | October 21, 2009 at 10:25 am |

    Some other center ice/red line oddities:

    Chicago Stadium in the 60’s simply had like red squares. No red outline. And I think the blue face off marking was a diamond. Their ice markings for some reason was always very faded.

    Boston Garden in the 60’s and 70’s had the Bruin logo right at center ice and the middle part of the “B” had a white rectangle in it for the faceoff spot.

    Maple Leaf Gardens until just a few years at the end had a blue 11 point blue maple leaf facing west (as the TV camera went) inside a thin red circle with a white circle inside the leaf for the faceoff spot. The red line was diagonally striped. And in the 60’s and 70’s their ice markings were super sharp.

    Winnipeg Arena was the first to feature the three thin parallel stripes that Wachovia Arena now employs. Most of the time they had a solid red line with a huge blue spot for the faceoffs.

    Madison Square Garden normally had long strips of red interrupted by white squares for their red line.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    [quote comment=”355584″][quote comment=”355575″][quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]
    You know, except for the fact that it would essentially eliminate the idea of free agency (You’d be signing a contract with the league, not a team, and the league can restrict where you go), eliminate the idea of multiple franchises competing against each other (goodbye guaranteed local television rights to games) and eliminate many other ideals that make the leagues what they are…

    If the NFL wins this case, it’ll be a major blow to everyone other than the owners. You’ll be paying a higher price for an inferior product because market competition will all but be eliminated.[/quote]

    Somehow I don’t think that the NFL would be stupid enough to actually limit which team a player could sign with.
    [/quote]
    You don’t think so? That’s the way sports used to be.

    One team would own a player’s rights in perpetuity. He could only play for that team, or whatever team they sold the rights to.

    Why would “the NFL” allow teams to do this? Because the NFL is really a group of owners who would it would protect their own right to control the roster, and keep salary costs down. Why wouldn’t they do it, if they legally could?

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    [quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]

    the problem is based upon this and previous court rulings, the nfl could actually have it’s cake and eat it too — being treated as a “single entity” for certain things while being considered as 32 separate ones for the purposes of avoiding anti-trust prohibitions…very bad

    if donald trump ever did one good thing for the usfl and the world, and that’s debatable, it was winning the anti-trust lawsuit (albeit for a buck)…

    go reread the article… but two of the most important possible outcomes for the NFL are thus:

    [quote]With a blanket antitrust exemption, the leagues could transfer all television and radio broadcasts of their games — including local rights — to their own, wholly owned subscription cable and satellite networks, bypassing independent networks and distributors.

    Without antitrust restraint, the leagues would finally be able to kill free agency and restrain the competitive bidding among teams for the best players and coaches.[/quote]

    all the complaints we hear about MLB (and why the yankees have such an unfair advantage, or the sawks) and why the NFL is so great might be undone by this, if the NFL wins this case

    while im not a lawyer, it seems that the courts would basically grant the nfl the same type of anti-trust exemption baseball has enjoyed all these years…it’s basically achieved de facto monopoly status as it is…this would codify it, imho

    and that’s not a good thing

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 10:33 am |

    If a station has the rights to air NFL games, why on earth would they not air the local team?

    Ask fans in Jacksonville or Detroit.

  • Dave Mac | October 21, 2009 at 10:37 am |

    As much as I love uniforms as our primary focus, I am glad we are branching out to other areas of athletics aesthetics. Hockey red lines is a great start. I’ve always been intrigued by how they paint the rink in general.

    I’m also a buff on stadiums as well as field designs. Perhaps this is an area we should explore more in the future.

  • Paul Lukas | October 21, 2009 at 10:40 am |

    All you people who are describing various red line designs — let’s see some photos!

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    [quote comment=”355576″]found: 10 ugliest uniform quirks in sports

    http://bleacherrepor...
    Gee, what a shock. Another terrible “worst uni” list. Sure, some of them were on the mark, but “Any Orange Uniforms” is just lazy. And wrong.

  • Seth H | October 21, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    “The various red-line designs got me thinking about center ice team logos. Seems to me only the Flyers and Canadiens use double logos on either side of the red-line. Been trying to figure out why, other than they don’t want to despoil their logos with the red-line bisecting it? Any other NHL teams use the double logo?”

    The Rangers used to do this. 94 Champs: http://rangers.nhl.c...

    Gretzky’s last game: http://www.gretzky.c...

    Note that the orientation of “Madison Square Garden” changed between the two pictures.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 10:43 am |

    [quote comment=”355592″][quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]

    the problem is based upon this and previous court rulings, the nfl could actually have it’s cake and eat it too — being treated as a “single entity” for certain things while being considered as 32 separate ones for the purposes of avoiding anti-trust prohibitions…very bad

    if donald trump ever did one good thing for the usfl and the world, and that’s debatable, it was winning the anti-trust lawsuit (albeit for a buck)…

    go reread the article… but two of the most important possible outcomes for the NFL are thus:

    [quote]With a blanket antitrust exemption, the leagues could transfer all television and radio broadcasts of their games — including local rights — to their own, wholly owned subscription cable and satellite networks, bypassing independent networks and distributors.

    Without antitrust restraint, the leagues would finally be able to kill free agency and restrain the competitive bidding among teams for the best players and coaches.[/quote]

    all the complaints we hear about MLB (and why the yankees have such an unfair advantage, or the sawks) and why the NFL is so great might be undone by this, if the NFL wins this case

    while im not a lawyer, it seems that the courts would basically grant the nfl the same type of anti-trust exemption baseball has enjoyed all these years…it’s basically achieved de facto monopoly status as it is…this would codify it, imho

    and that’s not a good thing[/quote]

    As I understand it, short of abusing its employees and failing to pay taxes, a monster business/organization with an anti-trust exception pretty much has all the power, virtually complete latitude to control everything about its product in every situation without fear of government involvement or legal action from individuals or groups of individuals.

    That about the size of it? In the proverbial nutshell?

    —Ricko

  • Brian Erni | October 21, 2009 at 10:45 am |

    My cousin plays at Beloit! Number 7, Chris Juels. Standout safety! I never knew the story about the Buccaneers though. That’s amazing. I might have to pick up a Beloit shirt now with Bruce on it.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”355592″][quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]

    the problem is based upon this and previous court rulings, the nfl could actually have it’s cake and eat it too — being treated as a “single entity” for certain things while being considered as 32 separate ones for the purposes of avoiding anti-trust prohibitions…very bad

    if donald trump ever did one good thing for the usfl and the world, and that’s debatable, it was winning the anti-trust lawsuit (albeit for a buck)…

    go reread the article… but two of the most important possible outcomes for the NFL are thus:

    [quote]With a blanket antitrust exemption, the leagues could transfer all television and radio broadcasts of their games — including local rights — to their own, wholly owned subscription cable and satellite networks, bypassing independent networks and distributors.

    Without antitrust restraint, the leagues would finally be able to kill free agency and restrain the competitive bidding among teams for the best players and coaches.[/quote]

    all the complaints we hear about MLB (and why the yankees have such an unfair advantage, or the sawks) and why the NFL is so great might be undone by this, if the NFL wins this case

    while im not a lawyer, it seems that the courts would basically grant the nfl the same type of anti-trust exemption baseball has enjoyed all these years…it’s basically achieved de facto monopoly status as it is…this would codify it, imho

    and that’s not a good thing[/quote]

    Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?

    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?

  • KF | October 21, 2009 at 10:50 am |

    [quote comment=”355588″][quote comment=”355541″]I think the long rectangular checks look the best. They have a bit of an “old-school” feel to them even though teams may not have used that design back in the day (how does that work?)

    Also, the Red Wings need to get rid of the black “Hockeytown” logo from center (sorry…centre. We are talking hockey here) ice. Their classic logo does not need any adjustments.[/quote]
    I hate that, too. It just looks bad on so many levels. The font is huge and ugly and it’s off-center. It really screws up a perfectly good logo. It’s completely bushleague and it does not belong at center ice in an NHL arena.

    If they insist on using the “Hockeytown” wordmark at center ice, why can’t it go underneath the winged wheel logo (centered and in a better font)? There’s plenty of room inside the circle to do it that way. It would still be stupid, but at least it’d be an improvement.[/quote]

    Agreed. While they are at it, they can change the font and spacing for “Detroit Red Wings” and “Joe Louis Arena” so it is centered at the top and bottom of the circle. Right now both are shifted in different directions. This bugs me more than the Hockeytown logo.

  • Hank | October 21, 2009 at 10:52 am |

    [quote comment=”355597″]”The various red-line designs got me thinking about center ice team logos. Seems to me only the Flyers and Canadiens use double logos on either side of the red-line. Been trying to figure out why, other than they don’t want to despoil their logos with the red-line bisecting it? Any other NHL teams use the double logo?”

    The Rangers used to do this. 94 Champs: http://rangers.nhl.c...

    Gretzky’s last game: http://www.gretzky.c...

    Note that the orientation of “Madison Square Garden” changed between the two pictures.[/quote]

    MSG has the full Rangers shield at center ice.

  • NASTYKJN | October 21, 2009 at 10:53 am |

    Totally off topic but did anyone watch 30 for 30 last night? I’m too young to remember the USFL so that was great to watch. I LOVED the Generals’ helmets.

  • M.Princip | October 21, 2009 at 10:54 am |

    On a similar(sort of) note, to the hockey red lines, has anyone noticed that MNF, or, SNF(sunday night football) have been using yellow/orange for the line of scrimmage TV line, as opposed to the blue line? This is VERY annoying. It should be blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.

  • mmwatkin | October 21, 2009 at 10:55 am |

    The game that set off the outdoor hockey craze used a solid red line

    http://education.msu...

    “Biggie” Munn Ice Arena in East Lansing is checked

    http://upload.wikime...

    But it used to be two thin lines a few years ago.

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

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 10:56 am |

    [quote comment=”355604″]On a similar(sort of) note, to the hockey red lines, has anyone noticed that MNF, or, SNF(sunday night football) have been using yellow/orange for the line of scrimmage TV line, as opposed to the blue line? This is VERY annoying. It should be blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.[/quote]

    Shouldn’t be a line at all. Damn kids and their fancy technology. I grew up watching the game without no namby pamby digital lines…

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:00 am |

    [quote comment=”355598″]As I understand it, short of abusing its employees and failing to pay taxes, a monster business/organization with an anti-trust exception pretty much has all the power, virtually complete latitude to control everything about its product in every situation without fear of government involvement or legal action from individuals or groups of individuals.

    That about the size of it? In the proverbial nutshell?

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Yeah, thats pretty much it. They’ll be free to do whatever they want without fear of government regulation. You can’t collude if you’re only 1 entity. They’ll be able to pick and choose what they want to do and who they want to do business with.

    Its the difference between the leagues setting a flat rate ticket price across all franchises that would maximize their profitability as opposed to franchises setting their own ticket prices to compete against each other. And thats just a basic simple example, it would get a lot messier (and more expensive to the fans) if this were to pass.

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 11:01 am |

    [quote comment=”355597″]”The various red-line designs got me thinking about center ice team logos. Seems to me only the Flyers and Canadiens use double logos on either side of the red-line. Been trying to figure out why, other than they don’t want to despoil their logos with the red-line bisecting it? Any other NHL teams use the double logo?”

    The Rangers used to do this. 94 Champs: http://rangers.nhl.c...

    Gretzky’s last game: http://www.gretzky.c...

    Note that the orientation of “Madison Square Garden” changed between the two pictures.[/quote]
    Chicago Stadium had the double logos.

    (If you rewind that clip all the way to the beginning, there’s some good footage of the anthem.)

  • Seth H | October 21, 2009 at 11:02 am |

    “MSG has the full Rangers shield at center ice.”

    Which is why I said “used to”

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”355606″][quote comment=”355604″]On a similar(sort of) note, to the hockey red lines, has anyone noticed that MNF, or, SNF(sunday night football) have been using yellow/orange for the line of scrimmage TV line, as opposed to the blue line? This is VERY annoying. It should be blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.[/quote]

    Shouldn’t be a line at all. Damn kids and their fancy technology. I grew up watching the game without no namby pamby digital lines…[/quote]
    They’re doing the line of scrimmage in the color of the team on offense. So for example, when the Dolphins had the ball last Monday, the line was orange but when the Jets had it, it was dark green.

  • Geeman | October 21, 2009 at 11:04 am |

    [quote comment=”355606″][quote comment=”355604″]On a similar(sort of) note, to the hockey red lines, has anyone noticed that MNF, or, SNF(sunday night football) have been using yellow/orange for the line of scrimmage TV line, as opposed to the blue line? This is VERY annoying. It should be blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.[/quote]

    Shouldn’t be a line at all. Damn kids and their fancy technology. I grew up watching the game without no namby pamby digital lines…[/quote]

    Absolutely. And get rid of that “NEW YORK LIFE” logo on CBS’ SEC games and the “3rd and 7” gizmo that pops up every once in a while on all games (including Notre Dame’s on NBC). It’s becoming a video game, not a ball game.

    With the fake grass, domed stadiums, electronic gizmo graphics, pre-determined cookie-cutter blaring rock music, and superhero uniforms, why not just get rid of the fans and put the games on in a TV studio?

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:05 am |

    [quote comment=”355600″]Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?

    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?[/quote]
    The salary cap could essentially be eliminated if this were to pass. Also, free agency was a government regulated process that only came about because MLB was taken to court over it. If this anti-trust exemption passes, that regulation is suddenly inconsequential because the players would now be owned by the single entity (NFL) and not the individual franchises. You essentially go to wherever you are claimed initially and thats that.

  • SoCalDrew | October 21, 2009 at 11:05 am |

    [quote comment=”355539″][quote]In the wake of that incident, the school chose to remove the sword from the logo (in order to fight school violence) but keep Bruce.[/quote]

    That has to be one of the most pointless stupid knee-jerk reactions I’ve ever seen.

    Yes, because a sword in a sports logo was going to incite school violence. Really? Idiots.[/quote]

    No doubt the same “logic” that brought us the Washington…Wizards.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 11:08 am |

    [quote comment=”355600″][quote comment=”355592″][quote comment=”355571″][quote comment=”355565″]American Needle V. National Football League

    http://www.washingto...

    That case seems like a bunch of garbage to me. I really fail to see a problem with the idea of the NFL being one entity rather than 32 separate ones.[/quote]

    the problem is based upon this and previous court rulings, the nfl could actually have it’s cake and eat it too — being treated as a “single entity” for certain things while being considered as 32 separate ones for the purposes of avoiding anti-trust prohibitions…very bad

    if donald trump ever did one good thing for the usfl and the world, and that’s debatable, it was winning the anti-trust lawsuit (albeit for a buck)…

    go reread the article… but two of the most important possible outcomes for the NFL are thus:

    [quote]With a blanket antitrust exemption, the leagues could transfer all television and radio broadcasts of their games — including local rights — to their own, wholly owned subscription cable and satellite networks, bypassing independent networks and distributors.

    Without antitrust restraint, the leagues would finally be able to kill free agency and restrain the competitive bidding among teams for the best players and coaches.[/quote]

    all the complaints we hear about MLB (and why the yankees have such an unfair advantage, or the sawks) and why the NFL is so great might be undone by this, if the NFL wins this case

    while im not a lawyer, it seems that the courts would basically grant the nfl the same type of anti-trust exemption baseball has enjoyed all these years…it’s basically achieved de facto monopoly status as it is…this would codify it, imho

    and that’s not a good thing[/quote]

    Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?

    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?[/quote]

    You don’t remember pro sports before free agency, do you.

    What you’re describing is almost exactly how it was. Teams could be held together (Steel Curtain Steelers for example).

    I’m not against free agency, just saying that running a successful league without it is entirely possible. But possibly not legal, as courts have ruled previously.

    Players “in perpetuity”? That wasn’t really the case, strictly speaking. But there WAS something called the Reserve Clause. Basically, in just about every pro contract in every league, it said that if you couldn’t agree on a new contract with your team, the old contract automatically renewed for one year. And that would happen year after year after year. Forever.

    So the RESULT was that it kept a player under contract to one team in perpetuity. But is was never worded that way. That was one of the things lawyers in such cases as Curt Flood’s, or when the WHA sued so that Bobby Hull would be allowed to play for Winnipeg.

    As I understand it, there is no such thing as a legal contract “in perpetuity”. Among the things any contract must have to be legal and binding is a Term of Contract, a start and end date. The Reserve Clause was ruled to be an illegal way around that, because it created de facto “in perpetuity” contracts. A legal no-no.

    Any lawyers here? That even close?

    —Ricko

  • mmwatkin | October 21, 2009 at 11:08 am |

    [quote comment=”355612″][quote comment=”355600″]Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?

    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?[/quote]
    The salary cap could essentially be eliminated if this were to pass. Also, free agency was a government regulated process that only came about because MLB was taken to court over it. If this anti-trust exemption passes, that regulation is suddenly inconsequential because the players would now be owned by the single entity (NFL) and not the individual franchises. You essentially go to wherever you are claimed initially and thats that.[/quote]

    Getting rid of the salary cap in the NFL would be awesome. Maybe the same teams wouldn’t win the Super Bowl all the time…

    :)

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:08 am |

    [quote comment=”355611″][quote comment=”355606″][quote comment=”355604″]On a similar(sort of) note, to the hockey red lines, has anyone noticed that MNF, or, SNF(sunday night football) have been using yellow/orange for the line of scrimmage TV line, as opposed to the blue line? This is VERY annoying. It should be blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.[/quote]

    Shouldn’t be a line at all. Damn kids and their fancy technology. I grew up watching the game without no namby pamby digital lines…[/quote]

    Absolutely. And get rid of that “NEW YORK LIFE” logo on CBS’ SEC games and the “3rd and 7” gizmo that pops up every once in a while on all games (including Notre Dame’s on NBC). It’s becoming a video game, not a ball game.

    With the fake grass, domed stadiums, electronic gizmo graphics, pre-determined cookie-cutter blaring rock music, and superhero uniforms, why not just get rid of the fans and put the games on in a TV studio?[/quote]
    I agree that the line of scrimmage lines should be a standard color (ESPN is now using black for college games… wtf) but I LOVE the down and distance marker the broadcasts put on the field. I’m sorry, but if I’m at the bar with friends or alumni watching the game, I can’t necessarily always see the D&D at the top of the screen, so seeing it on the LOS makes it very easy to keep up with the flow and the situation. Of all the things the digitalization of sports has done badly, this is one of the good ones.

  • Hank | October 21, 2009 at 11:09 am |

    [quote comment=”355609″]”MSG has the full Rangers shield at center ice.”

    Which is why I said “used to”[/quote]

    And so you did. Hate it when I have to skim through posts at the office. Dang this work thing.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 11:13 am |

    [quote comment=”355600″]
    Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?[/quote]
    Yes, the salary cap limits the bidding wars because not all teams will have the same amount of cash free to pay a particular player.

    But if free agency is tossed out, then there won’t be any bidding wars at all.

    [quote comment=”355600″]
    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?[/quote]
    Sure, it would be. But I don’t see any reason why the owners would institute such a system. Why would they?

    It’s not “you’ll play where we want,” it’s “you’ll play for whoever holds your contract.” Far from being controlled by the league office, it would be controlled by the clubs. But that’s not any better – once a team acquires the contract of a player, either through the draft, an undrafted signing or a trade, that team would control the player.

    I don’t see any reason to believe that fans would respond poorly to football’s version of the reserve clause. We gripe far more about millionaire players than we do the billionaire owners. Unions get a bad rap in this country, far worse than the monopolies which inspired them. Locking in players would give the teams power to keep popular players in town forever. Sounds more like a way to win fans.

  • M.Princip | October 21, 2009 at 11:17 am |

    [quote comment=”355616″][quote comment=”355611″][quote comment=”355606″][quote comment=”355604″]On a similar(sort of) note, to the hockey red lines, has anyone noticed that MNF, or, SNF(sunday night football) have been using yellow/orange for the line of scrimmage TV line, as opposed to the blue line? This is VERY annoying. It should be blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.[/quote]

    Shouldn’t be a line at all. Damn kids and their fancy technology. I grew up watching the game without no namby pamby digital lines…[/quote]

    Absolutely. And get rid of that “NEW YORK LIFE” logo on CBS’ SEC games and the “3rd and 7” gizmo that pops up every once in a while on all games (including Notre Dame’s on NBC). It’s becoming a video game, not a ball game.

    With the fake grass, domed stadiums, electronic gizmo graphics, pre-determined cookie-cutter blaring rock music, and superhero uniforms, why not just get rid of the fans and put the games on in a TV studio?[/quote]
    I agree that the line of scrimmage lines should be a standard color (ESPN is now using black for college games… wtf) but I LOVE the down and distance marker the broadcasts put on the field. I’m sorry, but if I’m at the bar with friends or alumni watching the game, I can’t necessarily always see the D&D at the top of the screen, so seeing it on the LOS makes it very easy to keep up with the flow and the situation. Of all the things the digitalization of sports has done badly, this is one of the good ones.[/quote]

    I agree! However, they need to standardize all these digital lines now. I suggest, blue for the line of scrimmage and yellow for the first down marker.

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

    [quote comment=”355601″][quote comment=”355588″][quote comment=”355541″]I think the long rectangular checks look the best. They have a bit of an “old-school” feel to them even though teams may not have used that design back in the day (how does that work?)

    Also, the Red Wings need to get rid of the black “Hockeytown” logo from center (sorry…centre. We are talking hockey here) ice. Their classic logo does not need any adjustments.[/quote]
    I hate that, too. It just looks bad on so many levels. The font is huge and ugly and it’s off-center. It really screws up a perfectly good logo. It’s completely bushleague and it does not belong at center ice in an NHL arena.

    If they insist on using the “Hockeytown” wordmark at center ice, why can’t it go underneath the winged wheel logo (centered and in a better font)? There’s plenty of room inside the circle to do it that way. It would still be stupid, but at least it’d be an improvement.[/quote]

    Agreed. While they are at it, they can change the font and spacing for “Detroit Red Wings” and “Joe Louis Arena” so it is centered at the top and bottom of the circle. Right now both are shifted in different directions. This bugs me more than the Hockeytown logo.[/quote]
    I never even thought about that because all I can see is that stupid Hockeytown any time I watch a game played there. But now that you point it out, I hate their center ice design even more.

    The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. This is like the Packers putting a big block of cheese over the G at the 50. Or the Bears superimposing “Da Bears” over their C. How ’bout if the Yankees had “The House that Taxpayers Built” over the NY logo behind home plate?

    Or if the Celtics put their leprechaun logo at center court

  • MPowers1634 | October 21, 2009 at 11:19 am |

    [quote comment=”355577″]The link to the Georgetown Texas page shows them playing Leadner High School from Leander Texas.

    http://leanderfootba...

    That logo looks a lot like The College of New Jersey’s athletic logo. TCNJ is D III and it’s my alma mater and current employer.

    http://www.tcnjathle...

    I didn’t think anyone had ever heard of TCNJ, so I doubt Leader, TX copied the logo. I wonder if we both copied something else??[/quote]

    That’s becuase it was once Trenton State College.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    With the fake grass, domed stadiums, electronic gizmo graphics, pre-determined cookie-cutter blaring rock music, and superhero uniforms, why not just get rid of the fans and put the games on in a TV studio?

    About the time artificial turf was being developed, I remember reading one of those “look into the future” articles that this was, in fact, the direction football was heading;it also posited that the artificial turf would make it easier to cover the playing surface with adverts. Of course, video technology wasn’t what it is today.

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    [quote comment=”355618″][quote comment=”355600″]
    Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?[/quote]
    Yes, the salary cap limits the bidding wars because not all teams will have the same amount of cash free to pay a particular player.

    But if free agency is tossed out, then there won’t be any bidding wars at all.

    [quote comment=”355600″]
    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?[/quote]
    Sure, it would be. But I don’t see any reason why the owners would institute such a system. Why would they?

    It’s not “you’ll play where we want,” it’s “you’ll play for whoever holds your contract.” Far from being controlled by the league office, it would be controlled by the clubs. But that’s not any better – once a team acquires the contract of a player, either through the draft, an undrafted signing or a trade, that team would control the player.

    I don’t see any reason to believe that fans would respond poorly to football’s version of the reserve clause. We gripe far more about millionaire players than we do the billionaire owners. Unions get a bad rap in this country, far worse than the monopolies which inspired them. Locking in players would give the teams power to keep popular players in town forever. Sounds more like a way to win fans.[/quote]
    The part about this whole thing that is slightly disturbing is that it not only would affect the NFL, but it would affect ALL the major sports. So many people prefer the NFL over baseball because of the system they have in place. Well thats fine, but going forward, there essentially would be no differences. None of the leagues would have free agency, the players unions would be rendered meaningless, salary caps would be abolished (players salaries would be slotted against a pre-determined league-wide standard), the leagues would set their own television networks and only allow their games to be broadcasted on them, they would have their own exclusive merchandising companies where they would set their own prices, etc etc etc.

    Yeah, it sounds like this article is about the worst-case scenario, but without ANY government regulation, its extremely likely the situation I just described above happens and happens quickly.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 11:24 am |

    I suggest, blue for the line of scrimmage

    Or have both teams line up at the line of scrimmage, one on either side.

  • JohnnyO | October 21, 2009 at 11:24 am |

    The Green Bay Packers have just signed Ahman Green. He played from 2000-2006 with the Pack and wore #30. (He wore #30 at Nebraska too). However, John Kuhn wears #30 now, so Green will wear #34.

    http://www.packers.c...

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    [quote comment=”355624″]I suggest, blue for the line of scrimmage

    Or have both teams line up at the line of scrimmage, one on either side.[/quote]
    Because that helps so much after the ball is snapped

  • Joe Drennan | October 21, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    In both high school and college, I worked at the arenas I played in. I played my high school hockey in Chicago and the Blackhawks ice guy would come help us paint the ice. This was more than 10 years ago, but I remember him saying he liked to change things up every so often, but his favorite was the checkerboard pattern. In college, our ice maintenance guy told me every years is something new. Of the 4 years I was there we had diamonds (not fun cutting out all those diamonds) checkerboard, solid and the 3 line-red line like the Fliers.

    To me, the interesting part was the different ways to add the lines, logos to the ice. In high school we used the Jet Ice powder based paint. I was told that whatever I do, do not stop moving the paintbrush until after I lift it off the ice as it would freeze to the ice very quickly and the brush would be standing up like a stick in the ground. The building manager even demonstrated this so that I believed him. After the paint was down, we had to come by with misters and build up a nice layer of ice over the lines/marking before we could flood, otherwise the paint (a powder and water mix) would wash away.

    In college the only thing we painted was the goal crease. For the lines, circles, and face-off dots, we used a very thin tissue-paper like paper and again misted over it to build up the ice. Our giant center ice logo was made of the same material. The lines would form air bubbles and wed have to come back with razor blades and slice open the air bubbles, other wise where the bubble was, it would be a lighter color. The giant center ice logo had holes pre-punched though.

    After college I helped prepare ice at a local arena and they were using a newer material that is almost like a fiberglass screen and is laid out even easier. The goal crease was a once piece mat that simply unfolded, and boom, there was the blue and red markings.

    The first sheet of ice I helped put in with paint took 2 days of paint and then the standard flooding time, The last sheet with the fiberglass like material took 3 hours plus flooding.

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 11:29 am |

    [quote comment=”355625″]The Green Bay Packers have just signed Ahman Green. He played from 2000-2006 with the Pack and wore #30. (He wore #30 at Nebraska too). However, John Kuhn wears #30 now, so Green will wear #34.

    http://www.packers.c...
    That makes sense, considering that he grew up idolizing Walter Payton.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    [quote comment=”355626″][quote comment=”355624″]I suggest, blue for the line of scrimmage

    Or have both teams line up at the line of scrimmage, one on either side.[/quote]
    Because that helps so much after the ball is snapped[/quote]
    I guess they could put lines on the field then, say every five yards, with numbered markers on the sidelines. Of course, the viewer would have to employ elementary school level addition and subtraction. Perhaps too difficult for some.

  • mmwatkin | October 21, 2009 at 11:32 am |

    Maybe a stupid question…

    Could an arena ever put ice down that was crystal clear? I know they paint under the ice white, but what if they distilled and boiled the water before flooding? Could that yield a very clear looking ice?

    The only reason I ask is that I have this:

    http://www.slipperyb...

    and in order to get a really clear ice to form, you have to used distilled water and boil it.

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 11:40 am |

    [quote comment=”355623″]
    The part about this whole thing that is slightly disturbing is that it not only would affect the NFL, but it would affect ALL the major sports. So many people prefer the NFL over baseball because of the system they have in place. Well thats fine, but going forward, there essentially would be no differences. None of the leagues would have free agency, the players unions would be rendered meaningless, salary caps would be abolished (players salaries would be slotted against a pre-determined league-wide standard), the leagues would set their own television networks and only allow their games to be broadcasted on them, they would have their own exclusive merchandising companies where they would set their own prices, etc etc etc.

    Yeah, it sounds like this article is about the worst-case scenario, but without ANY government regulation, its extremely likely the situation I just described above happens and happens quickly.[/quote]

    Maybe I’ve had a beer too many today or something, but I’m not really seeing what’s so horribly bad about the situation you just described. The leagues can’t raise prices too much or people stop buying, and I can’t say I have a problem with players NOT switching teams every season. It would be nice to buy a jersey for a rookie and know I’ll be able to keep wearing it for more than one season without looking silly. I don’t particularly like the league specific TV channels, but I guess even that would depend on the price.

    Worst case scenario, they destroy themselves by trying to charge the fans too much and new leagues would form.

  • Namhob | October 21, 2009 at 11:41 am |

    [quote comment=”355615″][quote comment=”355612″][quote comment=”355600″]Doesn’t the NFL’s salary cap already limit the bidding wars between teams? Am I missing something here?

    I think the author of that story is going for worst case scenarios here. Just because the league *could* do something, doesn’t mean they would, does it? If the league were to eliminate free agency and start with a “you’ll play where we want” policy, they’ll lose fans. On the other hand, if it were to end up with hard limits on salaries per position, then you’d have players that would play where they want to play, instead of just going where the money is. I’m not sure if that would be a bad thing. Every team having an equal shot at skilled players and coaches, as long as it’s not directly controlled by the league front office, is a good thing, isn’t it?[/quote]
    The salary cap could essentially be eliminated if this were to pass. Also, free agency was a government regulated process that only came about because MLB was taken to court over it. If this anti-trust exemption passes, that regulation is suddenly inconsequential because the players would now be owned by the single entity (NFL) and not the individual franchises. You essentially go to wherever you are claimed initially and thats that.[/quote]

    Getting rid of the salary cap in the NFL would be awesome. Maybe the same teams wouldn’t win the Super Bowl all the time…

    :)[/quote]
    All kidding aside, getting rid of the salary cap will hurt a lot of fans of teams. No salary cap means no salary floor and thus frugal owners (I’m looking at you, Mike Brown) could spend even LESS money on players.

  • Joe Drennan | October 21, 2009 at 11:41 am |

    [quote comment=”355630″]Maybe a stupid question…

    Could an arena ever put ice down that was crystal clear? I know they paint under the ice white, but what if they distilled and boiled the water before flooding? Could that yield a very clear looking ice?

    The only reason I ask is that I have this:

    http://www.slipperyb...

    and in order to get a really clear ice to form, you have to used distilled water and boil it.

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.[/quote]
    I’m going to say no as under the ice you have either a sand base with the cooling pipes embedded in the sand, or concrete, so even if it was clear, it wouldn’t appear that way.

  • mmwatkin | October 21, 2009 at 11:43 am |

    [quote comment=”355633″][quote comment=”355630″]Maybe a stupid question…

    Could an arena ever put ice down that was crystal clear? I know they paint under the ice white, but what if they distilled and boiled the water before flooding? Could that yield a very clear looking ice?

    The only reason I ask is that I have this:

    http://www.slipperyb...

    and in order to get a really clear ice to form, you have to used distilled water and boil it.

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.[/quote]
    I’m going to say no as under the ice you have either a sand base with the cooling pipes embedded in the sand, or concrete, so even if it was clear, it wouldn’t appear that way.[/quote]

    No doubt, but could you make the appearance that the logos and lines were floating in the glass ice?

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”355629″][quote comment=”355626″][quote comment=”355624″]I suggest, blue for the line of scrimmage

    Or have both teams line up at the line of scrimmage, one on either side.[/quote]
    Because that helps so much after the ball is snapped[/quote]
    I guess they could put lines on the field then, say every five yards, with numbered markers on the sidelines. Of course, the viewer would have to employ elementary school level addition and subtraction. Perhaps too difficult for some.[/quote]
    Yes, because those 5 yard markers really help to see where the original LOS was, especially when the camera pans to an angle where the 1st down markers are off-screen.

    I appreciate what you’re doing with the whole smart-ass comments thing… really… I mean, totally making yourself look reasonable and accepting of others opinions… completely…

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.

    It’s never a bad day to ask about a bar product.
    BTW, according to Gen. Jack D. Ripper, one uses distilled water so he is not robbed of his essence.

  • Joe Drennan | October 21, 2009 at 11:49 am |

    [quote comment=”355634″][quote comment=”355633″][quote comment=”355630″]Maybe a stupid question…

    Could an arena ever put ice down that was crystal clear? I know they paint under the ice white, but what if they distilled and boiled the water before flooding? Could that yield a very clear looking ice?

    The only reason I ask is that I have this:

    http://www.slipperyb...

    and in order to get a really clear ice to form, you have to used distilled water and boil it.

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.[/quote]
    I’m going to say no as under the ice you have either a sand base with the cooling pipes embedded in the sand, or concrete, so even if it was clear, it wouldn’t appear that way.[/quote]

    No doubt, but could you make the appearance that the logos and lines were floating in the glass ice?[/quote]

    On a freshly laid sheet of ice, when you get close to it, that is exactly how it looks, even with the white.

  • Shane | October 21, 2009 at 11:52 am |

    Why are you ditching all those Mountain Goats 7″s, Paul? =(

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 11:54 am |

    I appreciate what you’re doing with the whole smart-ass comments thing… really… I mean, totally making yourself look reasonable and accepting of others opinions… completely…

    No, you don’t.
    I’m not trying to be reasonable and my opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on the tv screen is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch a game.
    I accept your opinion; I don’t agree with it.

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:56 am |

    [quote comment=”355631″]Worst case scenario, they destroy themselves by trying to charge the fans too much and new leagues would form.[/quote]
    In a free-market economy, that would be the case. They’d most certainly price themselves out and drive the fans away. But in this case, where would they go? All the other leagues would be doing the same thing. So either you suck it up and spend more money on the same product (or even a lesser of a product, depending on the location of the team) or you stop following sports altogether. I don’t believe the culture of the United States is that which would completely turn its back on sports, regardless of what they do. The fans would eventually adapt.

    I mean, 25 years ago, baseball tickets cost $10 for reasonably located tickets. Nowadays, in most stadiums those tickets go anywhere betwen 10 and 20 times as much money. Can you honestly say the product on the field is that much better than it was back in the 80s? Of course not. However, the fans have backed the league the whole time and the owners are now raking in money the likes of which have never been seen before. As fans, we sucked it up and adapted and paid the higher prices and the owners got ridiculously wealthy. You’ll see a similar result if this passes.

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 11:57 am |

    [quote] It would be nice to buy a jersey for a rookie and know I’ll be able to keep wearing it for more than one season without looking silly.[/quote]

    because, really, in a nutshell, that’s what this lawsuit is about isn’t it…

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 11:59 am |

    [quote comment=”355639″]I appreciate what you’re doing with the whole smart-ass comments thing… really… I mean, totally making yourself look reasonable and accepting of others opinions… completely…

    No, you don’t.
    I’m not trying to be reasonable and my opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on the tv screen is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch a game.
    I accept your opinion; I don’t agree with it.[/quote]
    Because everyone is able to stay completely focused on the tv during the game. Heaven forbid you have to turn away from the screen and miss the snap or are at a bar trying to follow multiple games at once. Yeah, those LOS lines on the screen really don’t serve a purpose to anyone in those situations. Nope, not at all.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 21, 2009 at 11:59 am |

    [quote comment=”355634″][quote comment=”355633″][quote comment=”355630″]Maybe a stupid question…

    Could an arena ever put ice down that was crystal clear? I know they paint under the ice white, but what if they distilled and boiled the water before flooding? Could that yield a very clear looking ice?

    The only reason I ask is that I have this:

    http://www.slipperyb...

    and in order to get a really clear ice to form, you have to used distilled water and boil it.

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.[/quote]
    I’m going to say no as under the ice you have either a sand base with the cooling pipes embedded in the sand, or concrete, so even if it was clear, it wouldn’t appear that way.[/quote]

    No doubt, but could you make the appearance that the logos and lines were floating in the glass ice?[/quote]
    It varies with each rink but the ice never gets more than an inch or so thick so making the lines ‘float’ would be tough to do.

  • Henry Grossmann | October 21, 2009 at 12:00 pm |

    My question about hockey uniforms is: Has there been any hockey team
    whether in the NHL, College, or International that have wore white
    jerseys with white pants.?

  • Paul Lukas | October 21, 2009 at 12:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355638″]Why are you ditching all those Mountain Goats 7″s, Paul? =([/quote]

    Because (a) the songs have all been compiled on those three Ajax CDs, (b) I rarely play my singles anymore, and (c) it’s always nice to purge some stuff out of the collection to make room for new stuff.

  • Jeff P(udlo) | October 21, 2009 at 12:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”355550″][quote comment=”355543″]I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.[/quote]
    It also looks like it could be the 1932 arena, right next door to the 1980 arena.[/quote]

    I’m going to go with no way in hell on that one.

    Jack Shea arena is actually quite tiny, only a thousand or two at most. Even the 1980 arena isn’t that large- around 8,000 people fit in there.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 12:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”355642″][quote comment=”355639″]I appreciate what you’re doing with the whole smart-ass comments thing… really… I mean, totally making yourself look reasonable and accepting of others opinions… completely…

    No, you don’t.
    I’m not trying to be reasonable and my opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on the tv screen is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch a game.
    I accept your opinion; I don’t agree with it.[/quote]
    Because everyone is able to stay completely focused on the tv during the game. Heaven forbid you have to turn away from the screen and miss the snap or are at a bar trying to follow multiple games at once. Yeah, those LOS lines on the screen really don’t serve a purpose to anyone in those situations. Nope, not at all.[/quote]

    My opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on multiple tv screens is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch multiple games.

  • EddieAtari | October 21, 2009 at 12:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”355596″][quote comment=”355576″]found: 10 ugliest uniform quirks in sports

    http://bleacherrepor...
    Gee, what a shock. Another terrible “worst uni” list. Sure, some of them were on the mark, but “Any Orange Uniforms” is just lazy. And wrong.[/quote]

    You took the snarky words right out of my mouth! Uniwacth should circulate a memo to the sports press and bloggers out there that the ‘ugly uni’ piece is totally played out…

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 12:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”355647″][quote comment=”355642″][quote comment=”355639″]I appreciate what you’re doing with the whole smart-ass comments thing… really… I mean, totally making yourself look reasonable and accepting of others opinions… completely…

    No, you don’t.
    I’m not trying to be reasonable and my opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on the tv screen is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch a game.
    I accept your opinion; I don’t agree with it.[/quote]
    Because everyone is able to stay completely focused on the tv during the game. Heaven forbid you have to turn away from the screen and miss the snap or are at a bar trying to follow multiple games at once. Yeah, those LOS lines on the screen really don’t serve a purpose to anyone in those situations. Nope, not at all.[/quote]

    My opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on multiple tv screens is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch multiple games.[/quote]
    Well aren’t you cool.

    Gosh, must be awesome to be you, being able to multi-task like that. Man, what a life you must have….

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 12:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”355641″][quote] It would be nice to buy a jersey for a rookie and know I’ll be able to keep wearing it for more than one season without looking silly.[/quote]

    because, really, in a nutshell, that’s what this lawsuit is about isn’t it…[/quote]

    Other than concern for the players’ earning power and their right to work where they choose, why is players changing teams helter-skelter a good thing? For fans, I mean.

    I suppose if you’re fan of bad team you believe your team will get better.

    But I think maybe much of the appeal of it in today’s world is that it makes Fantasy Football more interesting. Who’s where? Will he catch more passes with that new QB? Will they use him in the Wildcat; so he’ll maybe both score AND throw TD passes?

    If players stay with teams, so what? Since when are “dynasties” or “powerhouses” a bad thing? As much as people do hate them, they make leagues better. Who can beat the Steelers Steel Curtain? Damn Yankees! What, are the Celtics in the finals EVERY year?

    Without teams to shoot at, it becomes homogenized and sort of meaningless. Ever reviewed the teams in the Grey Cup every year? Looks like they might as well just pull the names out of a hat. And the NFL is getting that way. A good part of what draws us to NCAA football is that there ARE teams that stay in the Top Ten most every year. Someone to chase, to knock down a peg or two.

    Or, put it this way, the villain almost always makes the story. Take Darth Vader and the Imperial Empire out of STAR WARS and what you’ve got left is a kid repairing droids all day long.

    —Ricko

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 12:19 pm |

    Joe Drennan:
    Thanks for your post (#88). That story may have been old news to many, but as someone who didn’t grow up around hockey, I appreciated it.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 12:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”355650″][quote comment=”355647″][quote comment=”355642″][quote comment=”355639″]I appreciate what you’re doing with the whole smart-ass comments thing… really… I mean, totally making yourself look reasonable and accepting of others opinions… completely…

    No, you don’t.
    I’m not trying to be reasonable and my opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on the tv screen is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch a game.
    I accept your opinion; I don’t agree with it.[/quote]
    Because everyone is able to stay completely focused on the tv during the game. Heaven forbid you have to turn away from the screen and miss the snap or are at a bar trying to follow multiple games at once. Yeah, those LOS lines on the screen really don’t serve a purpose to anyone in those situations. Nope, not at all.[/quote]

    My opinion is that a line of scrimmage mark on multiple tv screens is a redundant crutch for people who don’t know how to watch multiple games.[/quote]
    Well aren’t you cool.

    Gosh, must be awesome to be you, being able to multi-task like that. Man, what a life you must have….[/quote]

    I am.
    It is.
    I do.

  • Kenny Jacobson | October 21, 2009 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”355646″][quote comment=”355550″][quote comment=”355543″]I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.[/quote]
    It also looks like it could be the 1932 arena, right next door to the 1980 arena.[/quote]

    I’m going to go with no way in hell on that one.

    Jack Shea arena is actually quite tiny, only a thousand or two at most. Even the 1980 arena isn’t that large- around 8,000 people fit in there.[/quote]
    I didn’t think it was. I’ve shot in both rinks many times and my only thought was that perhaps it’d been configured a bit differently 29 years ago.

  • Jeff P(udlo) | October 21, 2009 at 12:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”355644″]My question about hockey uniforms is: Has there been any hockey team
    whether in the NHL, College, or International that have wore white
    jerseys with white pants.?[/quote]
    In the early years of the NHL, that was the default pant color before they moved to plain leather.

    The washington capitols also wore white pants for a while their first year, but ditched them because of sweat issues.

    And since hockey teams typically only have one pair of pants, with the only exceptions being the rare alternate uniform pant, yes, teams have worn them with whites.

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”355649″][quote comment=”355596″][quote comment=”355576″]found: 10 ugliest uniform quirks in sports

    http://bleacherrepor...
    Gee, what a shock. Another terrible “worst uni” list. Sure, some of them were on the mark, but “Any Orange Uniforms” is just lazy. And wrong.[/quote]

    You took the snarky words right out of my mouth! Uniwacth should circulate a memo to the sports press and bloggers out there that the ‘ugly uni’ piece is totally played out…[/quote]

    or…we could establish THE definitive list and then call it a day

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 12:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”355653″]
    Well aren’t you cool.

    Gosh, must be awesome to be you, being able to multi-task like that. Man, what a life you must have….[/quote]

    I am.
    It is.
    I do.[/quote]
    Are you two about done?

    I enjoy a good fight in the comments as much as the next guy, but this is just tiresome.

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 12:31 pm |

    Damn. I fucked up the quote tags on that one.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 12:32 pm |

    For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko

  • mike 2 | October 21, 2009 at 12:37 pm |

    I cannot find photos of this online (sorry) but in their last season the Winnipeg Jets started using a new centreline design after Christmas that consisted of the outlines of little jets.

    I remember that because the move to Phoenix for the next season was already a done deal and one commentator suggested it was a tie-in to their new home for the next year, the US Airways Arena.

    Maybe someone with better search skills could come up with an image?

    On the other hot topic today, I am a lawyer but all I’ll contribute is that the law can be flexible, just because the league might be a single entity for one purpose doesn’t mean it will be for all purposes. Treating it as a cartel for merchandise doesn’t necessarily mean its also a single employer for labour relations or any other purpose.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 12:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”355654″][quote comment=”355646″][quote comment=”355550″][quote comment=”355543″]I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.[/quote]
    It also looks like it could be the 1932 arena, right next door to the 1980 arena.[/quote]

    I’m going to go with no way in hell on that one.

    Jack Shea arena is actually quite tiny, only a thousand or two at most. Even the 1980 arena isn’t that large- around 8,000 people fit in there.[/quote]
    I didn’t think it was. I’ve shot in both rinks many times and my only thought was that perhaps it’d been configured a bit differently 29 years ago.[/quote]

    St. Paul Auditorium didn’t have clear boards. That place was ancient. Clear boards came with the St. Paul Civic Center, since demolished and the Xcel Center built on the site.

    —Ricko

  • jsdryden | October 21, 2009 at 12:38 pm |

    TSN is doing a poll on the “best” mask ever to celebrate 50 years of the mask.

    Gallery is here:
    http://www.tsn.ca/wi...

  • Bryan | October 21, 2009 at 12:40 pm |

    Not that it really matters but Ohio State plays men’s hockey at the Jerome Schottenstein Center. OSU ice rink is much smaller and hosts women’s hockey

  • jsdryden | October 21, 2009 at 12:41 pm |

    Follow up to previous post, apparently I didn’t read it close enough, it is best mask in today’s NHL.

    My bad.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 12:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”355657″][quote comment=”355653″]
    Well aren’t you cool.

    Gosh, must be awesome to be you, being able to multi-task like that. Man, what a life you must have….[/quote]

    I am.
    It is.
    I do.[/quote]
    Are you two about done?

    I enjoy a good fight in the comments as much as the next guy, but this is just tiresome.[/quote]

    I was done about 3 comments back, but felt compelled to respond to personal comments. Okay, Ref?

  • Namhob | October 21, 2009 at 12:41 pm |

    Interesting to see a coach in the NFL put on another team’s jersey during the season…even if it was all in fun.

    http://profootballta...

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”355659″]For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    It may not always be as easy as it sounds, but it’s always possible. That’s the distinction, and it’s a significant one.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 12:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”355659″]For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Assuming of course that the contracts continue to be as high paying as they are, I’d think the players would rather have the NFL contract instead of the current system. If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years. Right now, you might sign a 5 year deal with the Patriots, then in year 3 get traded, without warning to the Raiders. I know I personally would rather have the stability.

  • EddieAtari | October 21, 2009 at 12:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”355656″][quote comment=”355649″][quote comment=”355596″][quote comment=”355576″]found: 10 ugliest uniform quirks in sports

    http://bleacherrepor...
    Gee, what a shock. Another terrible “worst uni” list. Sure, some of them were on the mark, but “Any Orange Uniforms” is just lazy. And wrong.[/quote]

    You took the snarky words right out of my mouth! Uniwacth should circulate a memo to the sports press and bloggers out there that the ‘ugly uni’ piece is totally played out…[/quote]

    or…we could establish THE definitive list and then call it a day[/quote]

    I think you do that here every day, and bravo for that! How about put an awards show on the YouTubes? “The 2009 Uni’s!”

  • Joe Drennan | October 21, 2009 at 12:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”355655″][quote comment=”355644″]My question about hockey uniforms is: Has there been any hockey team
    whether in the NHL, College, or International that have wore white
    jerseys with white pants.?[/quote]
    In the early years of the NHL, that was the default pant color before they moved to plain leather.

    The washington capitols also wore white pants for a while their first year, but ditched them because of sweat issues.

    And since hockey teams typically only have one pair of pants, with the only exceptions being the rare alternate uniform pant, yes, teams have worn them with whites.[/quote]

    Teams that wear alternate pants these days simply use a cover-up shell. They’re wearing their normal pants underneath.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 12:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”355667″][quote comment=”355659″]For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    It may not always be as easy as it sounds, but it’s always possible. That’s the distinction, and it’s a significant one.[/quote]

    Of course it is, and I acknowledged that. And I said that. I get that.

    It’s just sometimes it’s tiresome listening to people being paid millions a year complain about their workplace.

    And of course we often get to hear how they “risk career-ending injuries every day.”

    Uh-huh. So does a punch-press operator.

    —Ricko

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 12:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”355670″][quote comment=”355655″][quote comment=”355644″]My question about hockey uniforms is: Has there been any hockey team
    whether in the NHL, College, or International that have wore white
    jerseys with white pants.?[/quote]
    In the early years of the NHL, that was the default pant color before they moved to plain leather.

    The washington capitols also wore white pants for a while their first year, but ditched them because of sweat issues.

    And since hockey teams typically only have one pair of pants, with the only exceptions being the rare alternate uniform pant, yes, teams have worn them with whites.[/quote]

    Teams that wear alternate pants these days simply use a cover-up shell. They’re wearing their normal pants underneath.[/quote]
    Hockeytown Cougars, circa 1926.

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 12:59 pm |

    An opposing team dressed in lime green plaid?
    http://farm3.static....
    Yeah, Phil, I’d wear that…if they got rid of the goofy stripe down the side.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 1:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”355668″][quote comment=”355659″]For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Assuming of course that the contracts continue to be as high paying as they are, I’d think the players would rather have the NFL contract instead of the current system. If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years. Right now, you might sign a 5 year deal with the Patriots, then in year 3 get traded, without warning to the Raiders. I know I personally would rather have the stability.[/quote]
    Stability? They wouldn’t have any stability. The players could still be traded to any team at any time. The only difference is that, instead of waiting out their contract in the new place and becoming a free agent, they’d be stuck there until they retired or were traded again.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 1:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355671″][quote comment=”355667″][quote comment=”355659″]For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    It may not always be as easy as it sounds, but it’s always possible. That’s the distinction, and it’s a significant one.[/quote]

    Of course it is, and I acknowledged that. And I said that. I get that.

    It’s just sometimes it’s tiresome listening to people being paid millions a year complain about their workplace.

    And of course we often get to hear how they “risk career-ending injuries every day.”

    Uh-huh. So does a punch-press operator.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Yeah, that’s kind of what I was talking about when I said we complain more about millionaire players than we do billionaire owners. :P

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 1:02 pm |

    “If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years.”

    But if they’re LEAGUE contracts that wouldn’t be the case, not legally speaking. That’s the point. A contract with a team would be a de facto contract with the league, the court ruling would have declared that to be so.

    They’d have the right to move you around…with a priori permission from the courts.

    –Ricko
    ===Ricko

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 1:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355676″]”If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years.”

    But if they’re LEAGUE contracts that wouldn’t be the case, not legally speaking. That’s the point. A contract with a team would be a de facto contract with the league, the court ruling would have declared that to be so.

    They’d have the right to move you around…with a priori permission from the courts.

    –Ricko
    ===Ricko[/quote]

    Whoops. Chance already made that point whilst I was typing. Sorry.

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 1:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”355603″]Totally off topic but did anyone watch 30 for 30 last night? I’m too young to remember the USFL so that was great to watch. I LOVED the Generals’ helmets.[/quote]

    I had it taped, and I got to see some of it – can’t wait to see the whole thing!

    Makes me wonder if the American Needle V. National Football League suit will go down this way: American Needle will win, but only receive three dollars and the NFL will continue to do what they want…

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 1:10 pm |

    [quote] we often get to hear how they “risk career-ending injuries every day.”

    Uh-huh. So does a punch-press operator.[/quote]

    yes, but nobody gives a shit about a punch-press operator

    /i remember back — maybe it was 1999 — whenever it was that vinny testaverde blew out his knee on the meadowlands astroturf (he was a jet at the time)…and the next monday, one of the jets fans in my office was literally weeping “MY SEASON IS OVER”…and “WHAT AM I GONNA DO NOW?” (as if someone had killed his mother)

    you know what…the sun still comes up in the morning…jesus people, sports are important, but our priorities are getting so fucking whacked that when we so live and die with these multi-millionaires playing games for billionaires…i think we need to take a big step back…and to the left

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 1:11 pm |

    From the ticker item concerning Kinesio tape:

    “Some wondered if (Olympic beach volleyballer Kerri) Walsh was covering up a tattoo or adding some sort of flare to the typically bland volleyball uniforms. Turns out she was utilizing some of the 50,000 rolls of tape donated by Kinesio USA.”

    What uniforms?

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 1:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”355676″]”If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years.”

    But if they’re LEAGUE contracts that wouldn’t be the case, not legally speaking. That’s the point. A contract with a team would be a de facto contract with the league, the court ruling would have declared that to be so.

    They’d have the right to move you around…with a priori permission from the courts.

    –Ricko
    ===Ricko[/quote]

    So…essentially the difference is…um…

    What are we arguing about again?

    Oh, right.. some hat company is all pissed off at the NFL because of the exclusive deal with Reebok.

  • Skycat | October 21, 2009 at 1:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”355669″][quote comment=”355656″][quote comment=”355649″][quote comment=”355596″][quote comment=”355576″]found: 10 ugliest uniform quirks in sports

    http://bleacherrepor...
    Gee, what a shock. Another terrible “worst uni” list. Sure, some of them were on the mark, but “Any Orange Uniforms” is just lazy. And wrong.[/quote]

    You took the snarky words right out of my mouth! Uniwacth should circulate a memo to the sports press and bloggers out there that the ‘ugly uni’ piece is totally played out…[/quote]

    or…we could establish THE definitive list and then call it a day[/quote]

    I think you do that here every day, and bravo for that! How about put an awards show on the YouTubes? “The 2009 Uni’s!”[/quote]
    Orange can be a great color for unis (e.g., Texas Longhorns or the Bronco’s old Orange Crush). If he was going to pick on a color to avoid, I think he might find more agreement with purple or teal.

  • Teebz | October 21, 2009 at 1:22 pm |

    I just sent Paul a gallery of about 15 arenas. I have more that I need to link up, but it seems that the solid red lines are a European mainstay. All of the Champions League games, the Premiere NHL games, and the Olympics have a solid red line.

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 1:25 pm |

    [quote]So…essentially the difference is…um…

    What are we arguing about again?

    Oh, right.. some hat company is all pissed off at the NFL because of the exclusive deal with Reebok.[/quote]

    outstanding!

    you should be nominated for a darwin award

  • Tick | October 21, 2009 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”355679″][quote] we often get to hear how they “risk career-ending injuries every day.”

    Uh-huh. So does a punch-press operator.[/quote]

    yes, but nobody gives a shit about a punch-press operator

    /i remember back — maybe it was 1999 — whenever it was that vinny testaverde blew out his knee on the meadowlands astroturf (he was a jet at the time)…and the next monday, one of the jets fans in my office was literally weeping “MY SEASON IS OVER”…and “WHAT AM I GONNA DO NOW?” (as if someone had killed his mother)

    you know what…the sun still comes up in the morning…jesus people, sports are important, but our priorities are getting so fucking whacked that when we so live and die with these multi-millionaires playing games for billionaires…i think we need to take a big step back…and to the left[/quote]

    Or we obsess for days about some kook sending up a balloon and duping all of us. Definitely need different priorities.

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 1:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”355681″][quote comment=”355676″]”If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years.”

    But if they’re LEAGUE contracts that wouldn’t be the case, not legally speaking. That’s the point. A contract with a team would be a de facto contract with the league, the court ruling would have declared that to be so.

    They’d have the right to move you around…with a priori permission from the courts.

    –Ricko
    ===Ricko[/quote]

    So…essentially the difference is…um…

    What are we arguing about again?

    Oh, right.. some hat company is all pissed off at the NFL because of the exclusive deal with Reebok.[/quote]
    Originally, yes.

    But then the NFL urged the US Supreme Court to take the case so they can justify them doing this kind of practice BECAUSE they are a single entity and thus immune to any anti-trust litigation. Then, all the other leagues joined in, and this became a whole lot more than just some hat making company wanting to make Bills hats.

    Oh, and as for the difference. Nowadays, you sign a 5 year contract with a team and you’re with that team for those 5 years. After that, its up to you to decide where to go. If this passes, you can sign a 5 year deal with the NFL and the NFL decides where you go. After that, you re-sign with the NFL, and once again, the NFL decides where you go.

    It takes all the power out of the hands of the players and agents and gives it to the league itself. The players become pawns in their little game. Their salaries are slotted at a league-standard, which, because its decided upon by the league will eventually cause salaries to decline in value. However, these declines will not be passed on to the fans, who will pay a higher premium for the price of tickets, merchandise, etc. All television and media coverage will be on league-mandated and league controlled outlets and venues, for which the cable providers will need to pay a premium for (which will be passed to the customers in your monthly bill), but the quality will not improve, and may in fact fall because its only coming from one source. The players lose because they lose control of their contracts, where they play, etc. Fans lose because the quality stays the same or even falls, but we pay a much higher price for what is provided. However, the owners become richer than you can imagine.

    Is that really what you want? And before you tell me that this won’t happen, be aware that this same scenario is in effect through OPEC, an oil cartel that has created its own monopoly on the oil market. If pro-leagues become antitrust-proof, its only a matter of time before they become as corrupt.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 1:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”355681″][quote comment=”355676″]”If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years.”

    But if they’re LEAGUE contracts that wouldn’t be the case, not legally speaking. That’s the point. A contract with a team would be a de facto contract with the league, the court ruling would have declared that to be so.

    They’d have the right to move you around…with a priori permission from the courts.

    –Ricko
    ===Ricko[/quote]

    So…essentially the difference is…um…

    What are we arguing about again?

    Oh, right.. some hat company is all pissed off at the NFL because of the exclusive deal with Reebok.[/quote]

    Not arguing, just pointing out why such a ruling would be so good for the owners. They’d have it like it was up until the mid-’70s or so.

    They’d much prefer a world where Eli would have…
    a) been a Charger
    b) sat
    c) learned to live life with loonies in his pocket.

    And all I said was, Yeah, it screws with players’ mobility, but considering what they make should we really weep for them? Legally, sure. But in a practical sense, no.

    My concern is more about control of TV, and whether anyone would ever again be able to watch an NFL game in his living room without having to pay for the privilege.

    —Ricko

  • Jeff P(udlo) | October 21, 2009 at 1:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”355668″][quote comment=”355659″]For discussion purposes (re: NFL league contracts vs. ind. team contracts)…

    Ponder this, and discuss.

    Let’s say you sign a three-year contract with Vikings, and for the third year you get assigned/sent (whatever) to the Saints.

    Now, how it that different from you taking a job with 3M and, after two years, you get transferred to New Orleans?

    (Yes, I know, you can change employers. But that isn’t always as easy as it sounds. Plus, what happened to the notion that, “It’s where my chosen career takes me”?)

    I’m not talking about the legal points. I understand them. I’m taking about the philosophical ones, the attitude you have toward your job.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Assuming of course that the contracts continue to be as high paying as they are, I’d think the players would rather have the NFL contract instead of the current system. If you sign with the NFL to play for the Bengals for 5 years, you’re playing with the Bengals for 5 years. Right now, you might sign a 5 year deal with the Patriots, then in year 3 get traded, without warning to the Raiders. I know I personally would rather have the stability.[/quote]

    That’s the thing though- neither of those points would necessarily be true. The NFL might decide to arbitrarily move players from team to team- You might sign with the Bengals, but the NFL might decide they want you in a big market to promote you, so you get ‘traded’ for a bag of pucks to the giants. It doesn’t matter who you sign to play for, the league has ultimate control over your contract.

    Also, this would put the framework in place for the NFL to crush the players union, if that would even be allowed to exist. Salaries would decrease drastically. Don’t want to take half of what you were making? Fine, have fun in the UFL.

    If the NFL gets antitrust exemptions like they want, it would be a very, very bad thing for players.

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 1:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”355651″]If players stay with teams, so what? Since when are “dynasties” or “powerhouses” a bad thing? As much as people do hate them, they make leagues better. Who can beat the Steelers Steel Curtain? Damn Yankees! What, are the Celtics in the finals EVERY year?

    Without teams to shoot at, it becomes homogenized and sort of meaningless. Ever reviewed the teams in the Grey Cup every year? Looks like they might as well just pull the names out of a hat. And the NFL is getting that way. A good part of what draws us to NCAA football is that there ARE teams that stay in the Top Ten most every year. Someone to chase, to knock down a peg or two.[/quote]

    I don’t know, I like the unpredictableness of the CFL. It’s one of the few places where you can still go from worst to first, and vice versa. It gives hope to everyone…and it means more when the good teams manage to stay on top. I hope the NFL continues to go down this path.

    The other extreme is European soccer. I liked watching the English Premier League, but these days it’s always Man U., Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool fighting for the title. If you’re not a fan of those teams, the only drama is whether or not your team gets relegated. I don’t get to see the games now, but when I look up the standings on the web I tell myself, “Well, same old results…I’m not missing that much.”

    The NCAA is another story, thanks to the goofy polling system.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 1:47 pm |

    With an anti-trust exemption, the NFL’s TV model probably would be WWE.

    We’d likely get free highlights shows, free pre-game shows and a “Game of the Week” in each conference (something like Titans-Raiders and Lions-Bucs every week).

    Anything else we’d have to order from our cable company or have purchased a “package” in advance.

    And the Super Bowl?
    Let’s see, for WrestleMania or a UFC title bout what can the market bear?

    —Ricko

  • Beardface | October 21, 2009 at 1:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”355690″]With an anti-trust exemption, the NFL’s TV model probably would be WWE.

    We’d likely get free highlights shows, free pre-game shows and a “Game of the Week” in each conference (something like Titans-Raiders and Lions-Bucs every week).

    Anything else we’d have to order from our cable company or have purchased a “package” in advance.

    And the Super Bowl?
    Let’s see, for WrestleMania or a UFC title bout what can the market bear?

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Yep.

    They would have their own set of channels, similar to NFL Sunday Ticket, but there would be one channel per team and you’d have to buy a subscription to watch their games. You could either buy a full season for a small discount or buy on a game-by-game basis. You would have a further discount for buying a subscription for your local team, but you’d still be paying.

    Playoff games would be a drastic mark-up in price, and a drasic mark-up per round. And the Super Bowl would be the worst. I could easily see the NFL selling the rights to watch the Super Bowl at $100 or more per household. Oh, and don’t think this would cut back on commercials, because they’d likely be worse than ever.

    And the thing is, there would be absolutely nothing out there to stop the NFL from doing this.

  • =bg= | October 21, 2009 at 2:00 pm |

    Fisher wears a Manning jersey.
    http://sports.yahoo....

    PS- just got back from Oregon, looked three places for an Oregon O t…couldn’t find one. Amazing. Didnt even have one at the Portland airport Nike shop. Uh..what?

    I came thiiiiiis close to buying Lukas a pair of knee-high kelly green “Duck Feet Socks” @ the Portland airport, but couldn’t decide if he’d wear them or burn them.

  • The Jeff | October 21, 2009 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355686″]

    Oh, and as for the difference. Nowadays, you sign a 5 year contract with a team and you’re with that team for those 5 years. After that, its up to you to decide where to go. If this passes, you can sign a 5 year deal with the NFL and the NFL decides where you go. After that, you re-sign with the NFL, and once again, the NFL decides where you go.

    It takes all the power out of the hands of the players and agents and gives it to the league itself. The players become pawns in their little game. Their salaries are slotted at a league-standard, which, because its decided upon by the league will eventually cause salaries to decline in value. However, these declines will not be passed on to the fans, who will pay a higher premium for the price of tickets, merchandise, etc. All television and media coverage will be on league-mandated and league controlled outlets and venues, for which the cable providers will need to pay a premium for (which will be passed to the customers in your monthly bill), but the quality will not improve, and may in fact fall because its only coming from one source. The players lose because they lose control of their contracts, where they play, etc. Fans lose because the quality stays the same or even falls, but we pay a much higher price for what is provided. However, the owners become richer than you can imagine.

    Is that really what you want? And before you tell me that this won’t happen, be aware that this same scenario is in effect through OPEC, an oil cartel that has created its own monopoly on the oil market. If pro-leagues become antitrust-proof, its only a matter of time before they become as corrupt.[/quote]

    How much control do players have over where they play now? You get drafted by Team A, you either sign with them, or hold out and refuse to sign and hope they trade you… or you don’t play that season.

    Assuming you do sign your 5 year deal with Team X, when that’s over you’re a free agent and teams make you an offer. Picking from 2 or 3 offers out of a 32 team league is hardly what I’d call choosing where to play.

    You’re probably right about the price fixing and the fans suffering from it.

    Of course, this all assumes that the NFL takes the evil corrupt route.

    Or they could continue to let the 32 teams operate independently while all being under the NFL blanket.

    But I’m done discussing this now. I have other things to do and places to be that’ll keep me offline for the rest of the day.

  • Mike Rose | October 21, 2009 at 2:05 pm |

    Question: Why did the Jets and Bills not wear throwbacks this past Sunday?

  • Chris in Nashville | October 21, 2009 at 2:16 pm |

    Well, look what Jeff Fisher did yesterday. This is a big deal, right?

    http://cdn1.sbnation...

  • Teebz | October 21, 2009 at 2:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”355692″]Fisher wears a Manning jersey.
    http://sports.yahoo....

    PS- just got back from Oregon, looked three places for an Oregon O t…couldn’t find one. Amazing. Didnt even have one at the Portland airport Nike shop. Uh..what?

    I came thiiiiiis close to buying Lukas a pair of knee-high kelly green “Duck Feet Socks” @ the Portland airport, but couldn’t decide if he’d wear them or burn them.[/quote]

    They have the Duck Store right near the riverfront. You can’t miss it at night. There’s more green neon there than there is in Seattle on Sundays. LOL

    And I specifically skipped over that store when I was there because all you can see are green O shirts from the street.

  • Teebz | October 21, 2009 at 2:21 pm |

    Here’s one for you, Paul.

    Hershey Bears from 1937. No red line whatsoever. That pre-dates TV telecasts.

  • =bg= | October 21, 2009 at 2:22 pm |

    Well, we didn’t see the Duck Store..but did go to Powell’s bookstore. “The world’s largest new and used bookstore.” And I believe it- immense.

  • Teebz | October 21, 2009 at 2:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”355698″]Well, we didn’t see the Duck Store..but did go to Powell’s bookstore. “The world’s largest new and used bookstore.” And I believe it- immense.[/quote]

    I picked up eight books for $60 there. Retail new? Over $200. Powell’s is awesome!

  • Brendon | October 21, 2009 at 2:27 pm |

    Long time reader, first time poster.

    2 things that are being overlooked when predicting doom and gloom if the NFL wins this case.

    First, The NFL may consider itself one entity, but it is still one entity controlled by 32 different people. Do we really think the owners of the winless teams are going to vote for a system that eliminates the possibility of them signing Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Peyton Manning, etc, etc. No free agency sounds good when you have Tom Brady, not so much when you have Brady Quinn.

    Second, and most important, there is still the players union. If the NFL decides that there will be no more free agency, what they are really deciding is that there is going to be a strike and a bunch of games played with replacement players. The NFL union might not be as stubborn as the MLB union, but it ain’t stupid. No way the union ever lets go of free agency (or allows many of the other ideas being suggested if the NFL wins the case).

    Remember, free agency is something negotiate with the union. You only get it after 4 years in the league (soon to be 6 years if a new CBA isn’t negotiated).

    Bottom line, even if the NFL wins and becomes “one entity,” it will be one entity with and awful lot of people that have to placated before any course of action is taken.

  • Anotherdouche | October 21, 2009 at 2:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”355693″]
    But I’m done discussing this now. I have other things to do and places to be that’ll keep me offline for the rest of the day.[/quote]

    MENSA meeting?

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 2:38 pm |

    Yet another reason to find something else to do on a nice fall weekend: http://sports.espn.g...
    Now some NFL teams (and Central Michigan University?) are cracking down on the time-homored tradition of tailgaiting.

    Hey, I have an idea – I have an acre and a half of land. Y’all should drive to my place and tailgate in the back. The more grass your cars kill, the less I have to mow. We could have a UW party while listening to some game on the radio and consuming various meat products. I won’t even charge you to park.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 2:41 pm |

    Brendon, I don’t think we’re overlooking those points, so much as not giving them much credence.

    The Titans and Rams don’t think they’re going to sign Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. I would venture a guess that the winless teams are more concerned that any talent they are able to develop would be poached by the more successful clubs. Not to mention that free agency inflates salaries, and perpetual contracts keep them lower. So yes, I do think that NFL owners would be likely to vote in some form of the reserve clause – it’s in all the teams’ interests, for various reasons.

    And the union? Give the NFL a blanket exemption and see how interested they are in negotiating with the union. Seems to me that they’d gladly play a few games with replacement players to break the union in half. Without any governmental oversight, the union loses one of its major bargaining chips.

    You’re right that the NFL would still have to deal with many other interests. But in this potential scenario, the NFL has a distinct advantage in the bargaining. So much so that negotiations may well be a little one-sided.

  • u2-horn | October 21, 2009 at 3:00 pm |

    Hey all, u2-horn here.

    I had been tracking the Rangers unis this year and sent in many a pic concerning Rangers’ uni items this season, but decided that I didn’t really want to contribute anything more here after one too many slams against those on the conservative side of the political spectrum. Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.

    And with that I will take the advice given here and stop visiting if I don’t like the things Paul posts, since it is indeed his site.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 3:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”355703″]Brendon, I don’t think we’re overlooking those points, so much as not giving them much credence.

    The Titans and Rams don’t think they’re going to sign Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. I would venture a guess that the winless teams are more concerned that any talent they are able to develop would be poached by the more successful clubs. Not to mention that free agency inflates salaries, and perpetual contracts keep them lower. So yes, I do think that NFL owners would be likely to vote in some form of the reserve clause – it’s in all the teams’ interests, for various reasons.

    And the union? Give the NFL a blanket exemption and see how interested they are in negotiating with the union. Seems to me that they’d gladly play a few games with replacement players to break the union in half. Without any governmental oversight, the union loses one of its major bargaining chips.

    You’re right that the NFL would still have to deal with many other interests. But in this potential scenario, the NFL has a distinct advantage in the bargaining. So much so that negotiations may well be a little one-sided.[/quote]

    Zactly.

  • JTH | October 21, 2009 at 3:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”355704″]Hey all, u2-horn here.

    I had been tracking the Rangers unis this year and sent in many a pic concerning Rangers’ uni items this season, but decided that I didn’t really want to contribute anything more here after one too many slams against those on the conservative side of the political spectrum. Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.

    And with that I will take the advice given here and stop visiting if I don’t like the things Paul posts, since it is indeed his site.[/quote]
    “Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.” Really? Couldn’t that have been accomplished via e-mail?

  • PyroMessiah | October 21, 2009 at 3:32 pm |

    Not sure how many of you watched the USFL documentary on ESPN last night, but it inspired me to waste my free time in a fun excercise. The idea: What if a new spring league came into existence made up completely of defunct teams from defunct leagues (with one exception in my final version)? So here is mine.

    The International Football League!

    This is an OUTDOOR football league, despite the use of a few Arena teams. 3 Divisions of ten teams. In a nod to how the MLB leagues used to be each division only plays it’s divisional opponents in the regular season. So, an 18 game schedule followed by a 2 game playoff. The three division winners and one wild card face off for the championship.

    In a couple cases I moved franchises that were previously in Europe. The rest stayed put. Here it is, what do you think?

    http://i37.tinypic.c...

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 3:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”355706″][quote comment=”355704″]Hey all, u2-horn here.

    I had been tracking the Rangers unis this year and sent in many a pic concerning Rangers’ uni items this season, but decided that I didn’t really want to contribute anything more here after one too many slams against those on the conservative side of the political spectrum. Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.

    And with that I will take the advice given here and stop visiting if I don’t like the things Paul posts, since it is indeed his site.[/quote]
    “Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.” Really? Couldn’t that have been accomplished via e-mail?[/quote]
    Not if he wished to make some grand public gesture, it couldn’t.

  • Teebz | October 21, 2009 at 3:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”355708″][quote comment=”355706″][quote comment=”355704″]Hey all, u2-horn here.

    I had been tracking the Rangers unis this year and sent in many a pic concerning Rangers’ uni items this season, but decided that I didn’t really want to contribute anything more here after one too many slams against those on the conservative side of the political spectrum. Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.

    And with that I will take the advice given here and stop visiting if I don’t like the things Paul posts, since it is indeed his site.[/quote]
    “Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.” Really? Couldn’t that have been accomplished via e-mail?[/quote]
    Not if he wished to make some grand public gesture, it couldn’t.[/quote]

    Are you saying that this was some sort of UW retirement press conference, Chance? LOL

  • EricRomain | October 21, 2009 at 3:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”355541″]the Red Wings need to get rid of the black “Hockeytown” logo from center (sorry…centre. We are talking hockey here) ice. Their classic logo does not need any adjustments.[/quote]

    I was at the wings/avs game saturday night, and i had a lengthy discussion with my brother about how long the hockeytown logo has been at center ice. We came to the conclusion that it’s kind of become a tradition that’s come out of the current ‘dynasty’. But it’s a rare lapse of a traditional appearance in a very tradition based franchise. I would do anything to see the wings go back to the transposed dual red wing logos at center ice.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 3:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”355709″][quote comment=”355708″][quote comment=”355706″][quote comment=”355704″]Hey all, u2-horn here.

    I had been tracking the Rangers unis this year and sent in many a pic concerning Rangers’ uni items this season, but decided that I didn’t really want to contribute anything more here after one too many slams against those on the conservative side of the political spectrum. Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.

    And with that I will take the advice given here and stop visiting if I don’t like the things Paul posts, since it is indeed his site.[/quote]
    “Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.” Really? Couldn’t that have been accomplished via e-mail?[/quote]
    Not if he wished to make some grand public gesture, it couldn’t.[/quote]

    Are you saying that this was some sort of UW retirement press conference, Chance? LOL[/quote]
    Well, minus the tears.

    But yes, I suspect he’ll be back soon.

    Wearing purple. ;)

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 3:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”355608″]
    Chicago Stadium had the double logos.[/quote]
    Hawkvision!! I hadn’t thought about that in ages. :-)

    Not hockey, but the Bulls have done the same thing at times.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 3:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”355709″][quote comment=”355708″][quote comment=”355706″][quote comment=”355704″]Hey all, u2-horn here.

    I had been tracking the Rangers unis this year and sent in many a pic concerning Rangers’ uni items this season, but decided that I didn’t really want to contribute anything more here after one too many slams against those on the conservative side of the political spectrum. Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.

    And with that I will take the advice given here and stop visiting if I don’t like the things Paul posts, since it is indeed his site.[/quote]
    “Just mainly wanted LI Phil to know not to expect my report.” Really? Couldn’t that have been accomplished via e-mail?[/quote]
    Not if he wished to make some grand public gesture, it couldn’t.[/quote]

    Are you saying that this was some sort of UW retirement press conference, Chance? LOL[/quote]

    Damn, hold space on page 32!

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355671″]And of course we often get to hear how they “risk career-ending injuries every day.”

    Uh-huh. So does a punch-press operator.[/quote]
    And a truck driver, and a farmer, and damn near everyone else on this earth.

    If it’s too great a risk for you, then choose a different career. No law says you must be a football player. The world needs a lot of workers: its just that most of them are paid a lot less than you.

    (Needless to say, those “we need big paychecks because we have a ten-year career” basswholes chap my beehind.)

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 4:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355707″]Not sure how many of you watched the USFL documentary on ESPN last night, but it inspired me to waste my free time in a fun excercise. The idea: What if a new spring league came into existence made up completely of defunct teams from defunct leagues (with one exception in my final version)? So here is mine.

    The International Football League!

    This is an OUTDOOR football league, despite the use of a few Arena teams. 3 Divisions of ten teams. In a nod to how the MLB leagues used to be each division only plays it’s divisional opponents in the regular season. So, an 18 game schedule followed by a 2 game playoff. The three division winners and one wild card face off for the championship.

    In a couple cases I moved franchises that were previously in Europe. The rest stayed put. Here it is, what do you think?

    http://i37.tinypic.c...

    With the exception of the San Francisco Demons, you got yourself a winner there! Perhaps the San Jose SaberCats instead? http://www.mghelmets...

    Oh, and you may want to switch Chicago and Michigan in the divisions, as well.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”355713″]Damn, hold space on page 32![/quote]Does any paper print 32-page sections anymore??

    Oh wait, maybe that’s the point here…

    Never mind.

    :-))

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 4:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”355715″][quote comment=”355707″]Not sure how many of you watched the USFL documentary on ESPN last night, but it inspired me to waste my free time in a fun excercise. The idea: What if a new spring league came into existence made up completely of defunct teams from defunct leagues (with one exception in my final version)? So here is mine.

    The International Football League!

    This is an OUTDOOR football league, despite the use of a few Arena teams. 3 Divisions of ten teams. In a nod to how the MLB leagues used to be each division only plays it’s divisional opponents in the regular season. So, an 18 game schedule followed by a 2 game playoff. The three division winners and one wild card face off for the championship.

    In a couple cases I moved franchises that were previously in Europe. The rest stayed put. Here it is, what do you think?

    http://i37.tinypic.c...

    With the exception of the San Francisco Demons, you got yourself a winner there! Perhaps the San Jose SaberCats instead? http://www.mghelmets...

    Oh, and you may want to switch Chicago and Michigan in the divisions, as well.[/quote]

    Is there room for the Minnesota Fighting Pike?
    http://www.oursports...

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 4:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”355714″][quote comment=”355671″]And of course we often get to hear how they “risk career-ending injuries every day.”

    Uh-huh. So does a punch-press operator.[/quote]
    And a truck driver, and a farmer, and damn near everyone else on this earth.

    If it’s too great a risk for you, then choose a different career. No law says you must be a football player. The world needs a lot of workers: its just that most of them are paid a lot less than you.

    (Needless to say, those “we need big paychecks because we have a ten-year career” basswholes chap my beehind.)[/quote]
    Again, I called it back in post #79.

    You don’t have to feel pity for the players to worry what the NFL might do if freed from regulation.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”355703″]And the union? Give the NFL a blanket exemption and see how interested they are in negotiating with the union. Seems to me that they’d gladly play a few games with replacement players to break the union in half. Without any governmental oversight, the union loses one of its major bargaining chips.

    You’re right that the NFL would still have to deal with many other interests. But in this potential scenario, the NFL has a distinct advantage in the bargaining. So much so that negotiations may well be a little one-sided.[/quote]This certainly seems to be the latest position of the owners: “you don’t want a new CBO? Fine, neither do we.”

    The owners seem to be viewing an “uncapped year” (or years) as a good thing these days. Ought to be interesting.

    Again, I’ll disclose I’m no big fan of the concept of a players union. Like most things, it has corrupted absolutely.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”355718″]
    Again, I called it back in post #79.

    You don’t have to feel pity for the players to worry what the NFL might do if freed from regulation.[/quote]
    Chance I tend to work my way up from the bottom of the comments list so I didn’t get to #79.

  • AZSteve | October 21, 2009 at 4:14 pm |

    chance michaels said:
    “And the union? Give the NFL a blanket exemption and see how interested they are in negotiating with the union. Seems to me that they’d gladly play a few games with replacement players to break the union in half. Without any governmental oversight, the union loses one of its major bargaining chips.”

    Sure, the NFL might try to go with replacements, again. What happened last time they tried that? Ratings stunk, fans hated it, etc. And that was before people had the myriad of other things to occupy their time with, that we have now. Not to mention that all of that occured over negotiating issues MUCH smaller than what you’re hypothetically considering here. If the NFL tried such a complete and total rewriting of everything fans have come to expect about the operation of sports I just can’t imagine fan support not being on the side of the players. (In previous negotiations the perception has been about which rich side gets ‘more’ and which rich side gets ‘less’. The scenario you envision would be more akin to ‘all-or nothing’, which just HAS TO play into how everyone perceives the issues.)

    I see absolutely NO WAY that the NFL would ‘win’ in such a hardline attempt to eliminate free agency and all of the other bad things being discussed. The NFL players union may have ‘broken’ during previous negotiations, but if the situation is anywhere near as dire as you and others are discussing, don’t you think that might have some bearing on how likely it is that the union would break?

    In all the talk about not being able to watch NFL for free if this were to happen am I missing something (I’m not a lawyer) that *requires* the NFL to broadcast games on the ‘free’ networks (CBS, FOX, NBC)? Hasn’t there been talk for awhile about the NFL wanting to, eventually, put the Super Bowl (and regular season games) onto pay stations, without the court ruling being talked about? Hasn’t it been the likelyhood of fan outrage, rather than legal issues, that has prevented that from already happening?

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”355618″] Unions get a bad rap in this country, far worse than the monopolies which inspired them. Locking in players would give the teams power to keep popular players in town forever. Sounds more like a way to win fans.[/quote]
    Don’t know if unions get a bad rap in this country or not. And I’m the son of a Teamster, BTW. I make no argument that I would be anywhere close to who/what I am today without the union movement.

    But a union of millionaires is ridiculous. The concept of a “union” is primarily protection. Protection from firing the 40-50 year old worker to replace him (or her) with a 20 year old at half the pay. That argues that these workers need protection because they are essentially fungible goods.

    I can’t see Tom Brady and JaMarcus Russell as “fungible”. Or (going back a few years) Tom Boerwinkle and Kareem.

    In short, no matter what you may or may not think about the concept of a Union, the NFLPA, NBAPA, etc. are hardly unions.

    Remember when the football players were on strike and the Philadelphia truck drivers refused to deliever beer to the Vet?? Yeah guys, let’s see if the NFLPA goes out in sympathy the next time the truck drivers are on strike.

  • PaulS | October 21, 2009 at 4:18 pm |

    [quote comment=”355590″]Some other center ice/red line oddities:

    Chicago Stadium in the 60’s simply had like red squares. No red outline. And I think the blue face off marking was a diamond. Their ice markings for some reason was always very faded.

    Boston Garden in the 60’s and 70’s had the Bruin logo right at center ice and the middle part of the “B” had a white rectangle in it for the faceoff spot.

    Maple Leaf Gardens until just a few years at the end had a blue 11 point blue maple leaf facing west (as the TV camera went) inside a thin red circle with a white circle inside the leaf for the faceoff spot. The red line was diagonally striped. And in the 60’s and 70’s their ice markings were super sharp.

    Winnipeg Arena was the first to feature the three thin parallel stripes that Wachovia Arena now employs. Most of the time they had a solid red line with a huge blue spot for the faceoffs.

    Madison Square Garden normally had long strips of red interrupted by white squares for their red line.[/quote]
    The markings on the ice will look faded or not depending on how they do it and how often. Before the days of better chemistry allowed paint to be applied to the ice, all of the markings were painted directly to the concrete floor. Wouldn’t look bad at first, but turned cloudy from snow and air trapped in the skate paths. Most rinks (not arenas) still do this, and if it’s a sheet in constant use for a couple years, some lines (whether painted on the ice or the floor) disappear altogether.

    By the way, I seem to remember that Madison Square Garden at one time used a red-white-blue pattern of rectangles, roughly 18″ long, running across the ice, although I don’t have a picture of it.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”355611″]
    Absolutely. And get rid of that “NEW YORK LIFE” logo on CBS’ SEC games and the “3rd and 7” gizmo that pops up every once in a while on all games (including Notre Dame’s on NBC). It’s becoming a video game, not a ball game.[/quote]

    JMHO, but when the ball is in play (in football) I’d prefer no graphics on the live shot. Replays, yes. In between plays or when time is out, yes. Once the snap occurs? No. JMHO.

  • DenverGregg | October 21, 2009 at 4:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”355717″][quote comment=”355715″][quote comment=”355707″]Not sure how many of you watched the USFL documentary on ESPN last night, but it inspired me to waste my free time in a fun excercise. The idea: What if a new spring league came into existence made up completely of defunct teams from defunct leagues (with one exception in my final version)? So here is mine.

    The International Football League!

    This is an OUTDOOR football league, despite the use of a few Arena teams. 3 Divisions of ten teams. In a nod to how the MLB leagues used to be each division only plays it’s divisional opponents in the regular season. So, an 18 game schedule followed by a 2 game playoff. The three division winners and one wild card face off for the championship.

    In a couple cases I moved franchises that were previously in Europe. The rest stayed put. Here it is, what do you think?

    http://i37.tinypic.c...

    With the exception of the San Francisco Demons, you got yourself a winner there! Perhaps the San Jose SaberCats instead? http://www.mghelmets...

    Oh, and you may want to switch Chicago and Michigan in the divisions, as well.[/quote]

    Is there room for the Minnesota Fighting Pike?
    http://www.oursports...
    Great idea with two quibbles:
    ten-teams per division is too many;
    probably couldn’t really get support for viable teams in Corpus or Jacksonvillage.

    Partial solution: delete Jacksonvillage, move Washington to the south and add Minny. Not sure what to do ’bout Corpus or divisional alignment.

  • Big Al | October 21, 2009 at 4:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”355577″]The link to the Georgetown Texas page shows them playing Leadner High School from Leander Texas.

    http://leanderfootba...

    That logo looks a lot like The College of New Jersey’s athletic logo. TCNJ is D III and it’s my alma mater and current employer.

    http://www.tcnjathle...

    I didn’t think anyone had ever heard of TCNJ, so I doubt Leader, TX copied the logo. I wonder if we both copied something else??[/quote]
    I still call it Trenton State College.

    (My alma mater as well.)

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”355721″]
    Hasn’t there been talk for awhile about the NFL wanting to, eventually, put the Super Bowl (and regular season games) onto pay stations, without the court ruling being talked about? Hasn’t it been the likelyhood of fan outrage, rather than legal issues, that has prevented that from already happening?[/quote]
    Fan outrage; but more importantly, Congressional outrage.

  • Big Al | October 21, 2009 at 4:26 pm |

    Big fan of the “Culinary Corner,” Paul. Completely random yet equally enjoyable. Keep’em coming.

  • Big Al | October 21, 2009 at 4:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”355722″][quote comment=”355618″] Unions get a bad rap in this country, far worse than the monopolies which inspired them. Locking in players would give the teams power to keep popular players in town forever. Sounds more like a way to win fans.[/quote]
    Don’t know if unions get a bad rap in this country or not. And I’m the son of a Teamster, BTW. I make no argument that I would be anywhere close to who/what I am today without the union movement.

    But a union of millionaires is ridiculous. The concept of a “union” is primarily protection. Protection from firing the 40-50 year old worker to replace him (or her) with a 20 year old at half the pay. That argues that these workers need protection because they are essentially fungible goods.

    I can’t see Tom Brady and JaMarcus Russell as “fungible”. Or (going back a few years) Tom Boerwinkle and Kareem.

    In short, no matter what you may or may not think about the concept of a Union, the NFLPA, NBAPA, etc. are hardly unions.

    Remember when the football players were on strike and the Philadelphia truck drivers refused to deliever beer to the Vet?? Yeah guys, let’s see if the NFLPA goes out in sympathy the next time the truck drivers are on strike.[/quote]
    VERY well written.

    As someone who works in human resources and corporate finance and deals with them everyday, I can’t stand unions. As the son of an IBEW representative and a CWA member, like you, I am what I am was b/c of them.

  • PyroMessiah | October 21, 2009 at 4:41 pm |

    “With the exception of the San Francisco Demons, you got yourself a winner there! Perhaps the San Jose SaberCats instead? http://www.mghelmets

    Oh, and you may want to switch Chicago and Michigan in the divisions, as well.”

    I chose who I chose because I liked the helmets basically and secondarily it was where I wanted teams. Sorry, I don’t like San Jose’s helmets.

    You’re right about Chicago / Michigan. I shall change that.

    “Is there room for the Minnesota Fighting Pike?”

    I did want a team in Minnesota (Milwaukee too) but didn’t care for the designs of any teams that played there.

    “Great idea with two quibbles:
    ten-teams per division is too many;
    probably couldn’t really get support for viable teams in Corpus or Jacksonvillage.

    Partial solution: delete Jacksonvillage, move Washington to the south and add Minny. Not sure what to do ’bout Corpus or divisional alignment. ”

    One thing I liked about the way baseball used to be was that the World Series was a battle between two teams you would otherwise never see play eachother. It made it extra special. With interleague play it has lost something I think. The NFL has the same problem.

    With respect to Jacksonville, I just liked there unis. Perhaps I could move them elsewhere. Same with Corpus Christi, though football is so huge in Texas I think that an affordable spring team could be succesful there.

    Also, I should have noted that the helmets came from the awesome MG’s helmets site. I did not create any of them, though I did create the league logo.

  • PyroMessiah | October 21, 2009 at 4:48 pm |

    Updated regional fix:

    http://i33.tinypic.c...

    Also, I’ve never liked the way Washington gets lumped in with the south in the NHL. Having lived there for half my life, it’s a northern city, despite being below the mason-dixon line.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 4:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”355721″]chance michaels said:
    “And the union? Give the NFL a blanket exemption and see how interested they are in negotiating with the union. Seems to me that they’d gladly play a few games with replacement players to break the union in half. Without any governmental oversight, the union loses one of its major bargaining chips.”

    Sure, the NFL might try to go with replacements, again. What happened last time they tried that? Ratings stunk, fans hated it, etc.[/quote]
    People might have said that they hated it, but ratings weren’t that bad. Not as bad as the networks thought they would be.

    Besides, I think the NFL might be willing to weather a few weeks of decreased viewership in order to break the union. And why not? By the time the next television contracts are to be negotiated in a couple years, the ratings will be back up and the downward blip will be explained away as the fault of those replacement players. So the NFL’s risk is small compared to the reward.

    [quote comment=”355721″]In all the talk about not being able to watch NFL for free if this were to happen am I missing something (I’m not a lawyer) that *requires* the NFL to broadcast games on the ‘free’ networks (CBS, FOX, NBC)?

    Hasn’t there been talk for awhile about the NFL wanting to, eventually, put the Super Bowl (and regular season games) onto pay stations, without the court ruling being talked about? Hasn’t it been the likelyhood of fan outrage, rather than legal issues, that has prevented that from already happening?[/quote]
    In my opinion, the major factor preventing the league from moving to a pay-per-view or cable-network model isn’t fan outrage but Congress. Fans will gripe but evenatully get over it. They certainly aren’t going to stop being fans. But the can complain to their representatives, who (always looking to be populist), can lean on the League. The threat of increased regulation from Congress keeps the NFL somewhat in check.

    If the Supreme Court tells Congress to keep its collective hands off the NFL, then the major obstacle is gone.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 4:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”355729″]
    As someone who works in human resources and corporate finance and deals with them everyday, I can’t stand unions. As the son of an IBEW representative and a CWA member, like you, I am what I am was b/c of them.[/quote]
    As noted, Unions (capital U) aren’t necessarily bad. But absolute power corrupts absolutely, and I cannot feel badly about the auto workers and people like that. They made their own bed.

    Another union that chaps me: public workers. Are you kidding me? You’re both labor and management you pinheads!

    We’re far afield of a UniWatchBlog subject, aren’t we? That happens so rarely around here…

  • JL | October 21, 2009 at 5:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355585″]OSU’s hockey team plays in the Schottenstein Center. For consistency, you may want to put the venue name as you have with the others. In the time a lived in Columbus, I never heard anyone refer to it as “OSU Ice Rink”.[/quote]

    [quote comment=”355663″]Not that it really matters but Ohio State plays men’s hockey at the Jerome Schottenstein Center. OSU ice rink is much smaller and hosts women’s hockey[/quote]

    Yes, Ohio State men’s hockey has shared “The Schott” with OSU men’s and women’s basketball for 9-10 years now. The OSU Ice Rink has become the home of OSU women’s hockey since 1999.

    The OSU men’s hockey photos from today’s article are all from games played in the Schottenstein Center. However, it is kind of too dark to tell but the background of this photo makes me wonder if it is actually in the OSU Ice Rink and not in The Schott. Are those stars in this photo??

    Enough about that, and I won’t add that the Blue Jackets play in Nationwide Arena, not Nationwide Center…oh wait ;)

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 5:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355733″]Another union that chaps me: public workers. Are you kidding me? You’re both labor and management you pinheads!
    [/quote]

    Well, not really. Some may be, but sanitation workers aren’t management. Neither are librarians, mailmen, cops, firefighters, public school teachers, nurses, baggage handlers or millions of other people who work in the public sector. They’re labor, just ones whose checks come from a government instead of a private entity.

    Which public workers were you thinking of?

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 5:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”355735″]
    Well, not really. Some may be, but sanitation workers aren’t management. Neither are librarians, mailmen, cops, firefighters, public school teachers, nurses, baggage handlers or millions of other people who work in the public sector. They’re labor, just ones whose checks come from a government instead of a private entity.

    Which public workers were you thinking of?[/quote]
    The ones who both pay taxes and collect wages from the taxpayers.

  • chance michaels | October 21, 2009 at 5:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”355736″][quote comment=”355735″]
    Well, not really. Some may be, but sanitation workers aren’t management. Neither are librarians, mailmen, cops, firefighters, public school teachers, nurses, baggage handlers or millions of other people who work in the public sector. They’re labor, just ones whose checks come from a government instead of a private entity.

    Which public workers were you thinking of?[/quote]
    The ones who both pay taxes and collect wages from the taxpayers.[/quote]
    That doesn’t make them labor and management, only labor and client. Like the guy who both works and takes classes at the gym.

  • Big Al | October 21, 2009 at 5:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”355724″]Here’s another high school that uses Bucco Bruce — with one slight modification, as Matt Lanzoff explains: “I attended that school in the late ’90s and was a junior the year of Columbine massacre. In the wake of that incident, the school chose to remove the sword from the logo (in order to fight school violence) but keep Bruce.”[/quote]
    I posted the Belleville link in the comments yesterday (#118). Very good anecdote, Matt. Never noticed that little difference before.

  • tburkeTCNJ | October 21, 2009 at 5:15 pm |

    With all this anti-trust exemption discussion (and its possible effects), I think we can all look to baseball (and its exemption from 1922) and see how free agency was forced to exist even with the exemption and franchises are still able to set ticket prices and make their own television deals.

    http://www.nytimes.c...

  • =bg= | October 21, 2009 at 5:22 pm |

    Jordan’s kid vs. Adidas, Round II:

    http://rivals.yahoo....

  • Brendan | October 21, 2009 at 5:46 pm |

    Hulu has four NHL telecasts from the black-and-white era. Screenshots:

    Maple Leaf Gardens in 1959 (diagonal checks)
    The Detroit Olympia in 1964 (wide checks)
    Maple Leafs Gardens in 1967 (diagonal checks)
    Madison Square Garden in 1971 (hard to see in just that one shot, but the red line looks like it has alternating diamonds of white and some other color)

    The blue lines are also visible in the MSG link. Watching the games in black and white, especially with the camera techniques they used (lots of zoom), really makes you appreciate the patterned center line. And big, high-contrast jersey numbers, for that matter.

  • DenverGregg | October 21, 2009 at 5:46 pm |

    “One thing I liked about the way baseball used to be was that the World Series was a battle between two teams you would otherwise never see play eachother. It made it extra special. With interleague play it has lost something I think. The NFL has the same problem.”

    How’s about 32 teams, four divisions of 8, 14 regular season games, no wildcard? Move J’ville to Minny and Corpus to New Orelans. Maybe add in an Orange County CA team (So Cal Sun?) and a team in Oklahoma City.

    Divisions:

    Pacific:
    Vancouver, Portland, Oakland, SFO, LA, SoCal, Sac’to, Phoenix.

    Southwest:
    Vegas, Denver, Dallas, Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Houston, New Orleans.

    East:
    Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Memphis, B’ham, Tampa.

    Atlantic:
    Toronto, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Durham, Boston.

  • SWC Susan (aka Tex) | October 21, 2009 at 6:02 pm |

    Nike Chalkbot is very cool… It’s about inspiration! I sent it a text message during the Tour de France and it printed this on the roads of France in honor of my dad!

  • jesse | October 21, 2009 at 6:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355731″]Updated regional fix:

    http://i33.tinypic.c...

    Also, I’ve never liked the way Washington gets lumped in with the south in the NHL. Having lived there for half my life, it’s a northern city, despite being below the mason-dixon line.[/quote]
    Ummmm…no. Being from the New England area growing up and now living in NoVA (Northern Virginia)if you live south of Jersey, you are from the South.

  • PyroMessiah | October 21, 2009 at 6:06 pm |

    [quote comment=”355742″]How’s about 32 teams, four divisions of 8, 14 regular season games, no wildcard? Move J’ville to Minny and Corpus to New Orelans. Maybe add in an Orange County CA team (So Cal Sun?) and a team in Oklahoma City.

    Divisions:

    Pacific:
    Vancouver, Portland, Oakland, SFO, LA, SoCal, Sac’to, Phoenix.

    Southwest:
    Vegas, Denver, Dallas, Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Houston, New Orleans.

    East:
    Minneapolis, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Memphis, B’ham, Tampa.

    Atlantic:
    Toronto, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Durham, Boston.[/quote]

    Not a bad idea at all. I wanted to use the Oklahoma Outlaws, but I liked Vegas’s helmet more and didn’t want two teams named Outlaws.

    If anyone wants to make up this version or any other, it’d be fun to see other ideas!

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 6:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”355737″]That doesn’t make them labor and management, only labor and client. Like the guy who both works and takes classes at the gym.[/quote]No, the guy who works at the gym has a choice of taking or not taking classes at the gym; plenty of other gyms offer classes.

    If you’re a Chicago fireman, you pay property taxes to Chicago: period. You’re required to live in the city. You can’t work in the city and live in the suburbs. Teachers too AFAIK; probably many other city workers. They vote for the people who set their pay rates; and most of the people who set their pay rates are HEAVILY dependent on their votes.

    I know a city resident who lives on a block that’s heavily populated by city workers. His joke is that he’s supporting all of his neighbors: the rest of them were just trading money back and forth among themselves.

    That’s one reason privitzation is resisted by both management and labor here. The story came out twenty years ago about people who were pulling down six figures to literally sweep out busses at the end of the day. Last year the story came out about garbagemen who averaged four hours a day of work, and got somewhere around 80k per year. Daley is calling for 24 furlough days. Think you could get by on 90% salary? These people know they’re not earning their keep and they know that they need Daley in power. He knows that too.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 6:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”355740″]Jordan’s kid vs. Adidas, Round II:

    http://rivals.yahoo....
    You’d think the simple solution would be for Nike to go ahead and buy out the addidas contract with that school.

  • ck | October 21, 2009 at 6:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”355661″][quote comment=”355654″][quote comment=”355646″][quote comment=”355550″][quote comment=”355543″]I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.[/quote]
    It also looks like it could be the 1932 arena, right next door to the 1980 arena.[/quote]

    I’m going to go with no way in hell on that one.

    Jack Shea arena is actually quite tiny, only a thousand or two at most. Even the 1980 arena isn’t that large- around 8,000 people fit in there.[/quote]
    I didn’t think it was. I’ve shot in both rinks many times and my only thought was that perhaps it’d been configured a bit differently 29 years ago.[/quote]

    St. Paul Auditorium didn’t have clear boards. That place was ancient. Clear boards came with the St. Paul Civic Center, since demolished and the Xcel Center built on the site.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    You’re certainly right about the Auditorium in the old days, back when it hosted the state hockey tournament, but I think it may have had glass boards right before they took the ice out – I believe I remember seeing footage of Phil Housley in a sectional playoff game at the Auditorium with clear boards.

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 6:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”355731″]Updated regional fix:

    http://i33.tinypic.c...

    Also, I’ve never liked the way Washington gets lumped in with the south in the NHL. Having lived there for half my life, it’s a northern city, despite being below the mason-dixon line.[/quote]

    Having previously lived in NoVa for over 50 years, I agree with you about the NHL, but Washington a northern city? Hardly. In the words of Leadbelly: “It’s a bourgeois town”.

    bourgeois town

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 6:21 pm |

    I sometimes say words twice.

    twice

  • PyroMessiah | October 21, 2009 at 6:26 pm |

    People who think D.C. is a southern town have obviously never lived in the south, like I do now (sadly).

    Sadly.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 6:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”355747″][quote comment=”355740″]Jordan’s kid vs. Adidas, Round II:

    http://rivals.yahoo....
    You’d think the simple solution would be for Nike to go ahead and buy out the addidas contract with that school.[/quote]

    I’m confused.
    Is Marcus Jordan under contract to Nike?
    (Of course not; he wouldn’t be able to play college basketball.)
    Is he no longer a minor?
    (He is an adult.)
    Should he be treated any differently than any other UCF basketball player?
    (Ummm…no.)

    Then wouldn’t the “simple solution” be for him to knock it off and wear the shoes his school in under contract to wear?

    If any family would understand the sanctity of such contracts, you’d think it would be the Jordans.

    What am I missing?

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 6:38 pm |

    [quote]Then wouldn’t the “simple solution” be for him to knock it off and wear the shoes his school in under contract to wear have gone to a nike school in the first place?[/quote]

    (fixed)

    seriously, though

    obviously, UCF knew this was coming

    obviously, marcus & michael knew this was coming

    and we’re suddenly shocked (pause) SHOCKED…to find this situation?

    seems just a little too convenient

    and as a legacy, of the greatest player in the history of the planet and the world’s first billion dollar athlete (and likely one of the school’s greatest benefactors), marcus wouldn’t have been accepted to UNC, where this wouldn’t be an issue?

    of course not

    smells like this was a ‘test case’ hatched long ago

    /but that’s just my opinion, i could be wrong

  • diz | October 21, 2009 at 6:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”355689″][quote comment=”355651″]If players stay with teams, so what? Since when are “dynasties” or “powerhouses” a bad thing? As much as people do hate them, they make leagues better. Who can beat the Steelers Steel Curtain? Damn Yankees! What, are the Celtics in the finals EVERY year?

    Without teams to shoot at, it becomes homogenized and sort of meaningless. Ever reviewed the teams in the Grey Cup every year? Looks like they might as well just pull the names out of a hat. And the NFL is getting that way. A good part of what draws us to NCAA football is that there ARE teams that stay in the Top Ten most every year. Someone to chase, to knock down a peg or two.[/quote]

    I don’t know, I like the unpredictableness of the CFL. It’s one of the few places where you can still go from worst to first, and vice versa. It gives hope to everyone…and it means more when the good teams manage to stay on top. I hope the NFL continues to go down this path.

    The other extreme is European soccer. I liked watching the English Premier League, but these days it’s always Man U., Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool fighting for the title. If you’re not a fan of those teams, the only drama is whether or not your team gets relegated. I don’t get to see the games now, but when I look up the standings on the web I tell myself, “Well, same old results…I’m not missing that much.”

    The NCAA is another story, thanks to the goofy polling system.[/quote]

    You forgot Europe, European qualification and the cups. Oh and the occasional battles to stay in business (ie Portsmouth.)

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 6:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”355753″][quote]Then wouldn’t the “simple solution” be for him to knock it off and wear the shoes his school in under contract to wear have gone to a nike school in the first place?[/quote]

    (fixed)

    seriously, though

    obviously, UCF knew this was coming

    obviously, marcus & michael knew this was coming

    and we’re suddenly shocked (pause) SHOCKED…to find this situation?

    seems just a little too convenient

    and as a legacy, of the greatest player in the history of the planet and the world’s first billion dollar athlete (and likely one of the school’s greatest benefactors), marcus wouldn’t have been accepted to UNC, where this wouldn’t be an issue?

    of course not

    smells like this was a ‘test case’ hatched long ago

    /but that’s just my opinion, i could be wrong[/quote]

    Oh, I forgot. A college basketball player not being able to choose his own brand of shoe is depriving him of his civil rights.
    (smacks forehead)
    Who doesn’t see the injustice in that, right up there with suing a dry cleaner for $54 million over a pair slacks.

    —Ricko

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 7:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”355752″]
    Then wouldn’t the “simple solution” be for him to knock it off and wear the shoes his school in under contract to wear?

    If any family would understand the sanctity of such contracts, you’d think it would be the Jordans.

    What am I missing?[/quote]

    Nothing.

    You would think that most people (including Micheal) would know which brand their schools wear. Living in Chicago, I’ve heard all the rumors about kids being steered to a “Nike” school or an “addidas” school by advisors (who only have have the best interest of the kids at heart, of course). These contracts aren’t a secret.

    So if Marcus really, really REALLY wants to attend Central Florida (for the high quality education, of course) then he should have chatted with the coach before he signed the LOI. Failing that, he should either wear the shoes his teammates wear, or have Daddums pony (no pun intended) up the money to make addidas whole.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 7:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”355755″]Who doesn’t see the injustice in that, right up there with suing a dry cleaner for $54 million over a pair slacks.[/quote]
    C’mon Ricko, it wasn’t the slacks: we all know it was the “satisfaction guaranteed” or “same day service” sign that was the real heart of that issue. Suprised it hasn’t made it the the Supreme Court by now.

    (Actually, I’m suprised that the brainiac “judge” who started that whole mess is still on whatever bench he occupied before he got that lawsuit going. If that doesn’t prove that he’s unfit for power, nothing will.)

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 7:20 pm |

    [quote comment=”355755″]and as a legacy, of the greatest player in the history of the planet and the world’s first billion dollar athlete (and likely one of the school’s greatest benefactors), marcus wouldn’t have been accepted to UNC, where this wouldn’t be an issue?[/quote]Marcus Jordan could have dropped trou and crapped on the statue of John Harvard at high noon, announced “I’m not buying any books and I’m not going to class either” and he would have been welcomed with open arms at Cambridge. (Or anywhere else.) Harvard would have had a public bonfire of their old uniforms if Micheal had raised an eyebrow, with the University President lighting the match and screaming “burn baby burn!”

    (To be serious, North Carolina was apparently not serious option for either Jordan son, both of whom are adament about blazing their own trail. Expanding on that, Marcus was not going to attend the school that Jeffrey attends either.)

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 7:32 pm |

    [quote]A college basketball player not being able to choose his own brand of shoe is depriving him of his civil rights.[/quote]

    first off, rick, i’m neither defending marcus jordan nor his decision to pick UCF

    and i agree with you that a typical college basketball player shouldn’t be able to dictate to that school his preferance for sneaker brand

    but we’re talking about the son of the greatest basketball player in the history of the universe…im sure he had a normal life growing up, never had any favors/strings pulled, and is just like every other freshman from wilmette, IL…im sure he didn’t have his choice of schools, and probably wasn’t even recruited; he’s probably lucky he just got in where he did and should just STFU and toe the line

    like every other freshman

    right

    your point is excellent, valid and i agree with you…there’s just one problem

    we’re not talking about just any college freshman…and even if he wants to be treated like everyone else, be a normal 18 year old trying to make the hoops team (just like when prince william wanted to join the regular army)…

    he is still the son of michael jordan, and if he wants to wear the sneaker named for and likely developed by, his dad…

    well, im guessing it’s going to be an issue, and likely one the jordan’s knew about WELL BEFORE he selected UCF

    im sure, at some point during the recruiting process, the question may have come up: “hey coach speraw, if i play for you, can i wear my dad’s sneakers? — i know you’re an adidas school, but i kinda like these kicks, ya know? won’t be a problem right?”

    im pretty sure this may have been a thought that went through both coach and player’s minds at some point…in fact, id be willing to bet it played no small factor in marcus choosing UCF…

    now for most kids, i’d wager the coach would respond “no son. we’re an adidas school. you’ll wear adidas shoes”

    im kinda guessing the conversation didn’t go that way here

    im also kinda guessing that had coach speraw lost marcus jordan to another school, the AD, dean, provost and alumni would be looking for another coach: “YOU WHAT? DO YOU REALIZE THE PUBLICITY ALONE WE’LL GET FOR HAVING JORDAN’S SON ON THE TEAM? NOT TO MENTION TV TIME, ENDOWMENTS, AND OUR CHANCE TO MEET HIS DAD AT PARENTS WEEKEND??? EFF-IT, WE COULD PROBABLY DUMP adidas AND GET JORDAN TO BUY US A NEW FUCKIN’ ARENA! YOU’RE FIRED”

    please, if you believe marcus jordan is “just” a college basketball player and he’s going to be treated as such, i have a large bridge, located near paul, for sale … i’ll give you a good price

  • Graf Zeppelin | October 21, 2009 at 7:32 pm |

    [quote comment=”355603″]Totally off topic but did anyone watch 30 for 30 last night? I’m too young to remember the USFL so that was great to watch. I LOVED the Generals’ helmets.[/quote]

    I noticed something there that I’ve always suspected but wasn’t 100% sure, since I didn’t really start watching the Generals until ’84. Their original helmets had metallic-gold decals. There was a brief close-up of one and it was clear. Not sure when the logos became yellow, whether later in ’83 or in ’84; the metallic ones were probably hard to see against the red shell background.

    I always thought the Generals had lackluster uniforms, although the helmet was awesome. Needed more gold, I thought, maybe some sleeve stripes.

    Years ago on Madden 03 I created a team called the Brooklyn Generals, with the NJ Generals logo but a with a forest green, gold and silver color scheme.

  • PyroMessiah | October 21, 2009 at 7:44 pm |

    I was shocked there wasn’t a Uni Watch post about the show last night. It was a great documentary. I love those uniforms. Trump sure came off like a jerk though.

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 7:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”355759″][quote]A college basketball player not being able to choose his own brand of shoe is depriving him of his civil rights.[/quote]

    first off, rick, i’m neither defending marcus jordan nor his decision to pick UCF

    and i agree with you that a typical college basketball player shouldn’t be able to dictate to that school his preferance for sneaker brand

    but we’re talking about the son of the greatest basketball player in the history of the universe…im sure he had a normal life growing up, never had any favors/strings pulled, and is just like every other freshman from wilmette, IL…im sure he didn’t have his choice of schools, and probably wasn’t even recruited; he’s probably lucky he just got in where he did and should just STFU and toe the line

    like every other freshman

    right

    your point is excellent, valid and i agree with you…there’s just one problem

    we’re not talking about just any college freshman…and even if he wants to be treated like everyone else, be a normal 18 year old trying to make the hoops team (just like when prince william wanted to join the regular army)…

    he is still the son of michael jordan, and if he wants to wear the sneaker named for and likely developed by, his dad…

    well, im guessing it’s going to be an issue, and likely one the jordan’s knew about WELL BEFORE he selected UCF

    im sure, at some point during the recruiting process, the question may have come up: “hey coach speraw, if i play for you, can i wear my dad’s sneakers? — i know you’re an adidas school, but i kinda like these kicks, ya know? won’t be a problem right?”

    im pretty sure this may have been a thought that went through both coach and player’s minds at some point…in fact, id be willing to bet it played no small factor in marcus choosing UCF…

    now for most kids, i’d wager the coach would respond “no son. we’re an adidas school. you’ll wear adidas shoes”

    im kinda guessing the conversation didn’t go that way here

    im also kinda guessing that had coach speraw lost marcus jordan to another school, the AD, dean, provost and alumni would be looking for another coach: “YOU WHAT? DO YOU REALIZE THE PUBLICITY ALONE WE’LL GET FOR HAVING JORDAN’S SON ON THE TEAM? NOT TO MENTION TV TIME, ENDOWMENTS, AND OUR CHANCE TO MEET HIS DAD AT PARENTS WEEKEND??? EFF-IT, WE COULD PROBABLY DUMP adidas AND GET JORDAN TO BUY US A NEW FUCKIN’ ARENA! YOU’RE FIRED”

    please, if you believe marcus jordan is “just” a college basketball player and he’s going to be treated as such, i have a large bridge, located near paul, for sale … i’ll give you a good price[/quote]

    I was just agreeing you about smelling a test case. Hadn’t thought of that. Y’know, that maybe we were gonna hear about college players having “a right to choose their shoes”. Or something.

    —Ricko

  • SoCalDrew | October 21, 2009 at 7:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”355724″]JMHO, but when the ball is in play (in football) I’d prefer no graphics on the live shot. Replays, yes. In between plays or when time is out, yes. Once the snap occurs? No. JMHO.[/quote]

    Agreed 100%.

  • RedWing in Colorado | October 21, 2009 at 7:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”355746″][quote comment=”355737″]That doesn’t make them labor and management, only labor and client. Like the guy who both works and takes classes at the gym.[/quote]No, the guy who works at the gym has a choice of taking or not taking classes at the gym; plenty of other gyms offer classes.

    If you’re a Chicago fireman, you pay property taxes to Chicago: period. You’re required to live in the city. You can’t work in the city and live in the suburbs. Teachers too AFAIK; probably many other city workers. They vote for the people who set their pay rates; and most of the people who set their pay rates are HEAVILY dependent on their votes.

    I know a city resident who lives on a block that’s heavily populated by city workers. His joke is that he’s supporting all of his neighbors: the rest of them were just trading money back and forth among themselves.

    That’s one reason privitzation is resisted by both management and labor here. The story came out twenty years ago about people who were pulling down six figures to literally sweep out busses at the end of the day. Last year the story came out about garbagemen who averaged four hours a day of work, and got somewhere around 80k per year. Daley is calling for 24 furlough days. Think you could get by on 90% salary? These people know they’re not earning their keep and they know that they need Daley in power. He knows that too.[/quote]

    I think the brush gets a bit too broad when you simply go with “public employees”. I teach, and can live wherever the hell I want. Most firefighters can as well, as long as they don’t take a car home. That’s the rationale for living in the boundary arguments.

    Part of your problem is that you are working on what you know in Chicago. Most public employees unions don’t have the sway to get a guy elected, that’s why you don’t very often see a guy running on the “I’m going to raise teachers’ wages” plank. Chicago is a labor town, and thus they have managed to control politics. In most towns, public employees’ unions still exist to protect, that’s why I make less than 40k after 8 years in.

    I’m just saying…..

  • Seth H | October 21, 2009 at 7:58 pm |

    To anyone who says that DC is not a southern town, I say: Marian Anderson.

  • Seth H | October 21, 2009 at 8:00 pm |

    “Marcus Jordan could have dropped trou and crapped on the statue of John Harvard at high noon, announced “I’m not buying any books and I’m not going to class either” and he would have been welcomed with open arms at Cambridge. (Or anywhere else.) Harvard would have had a public bonfire of their old uniforms if Micheal had raised an eyebrow, with the University President lighting the match and screaming “burn baby burn!””

    Even with Amaker stretching the rules, this would never happen.

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 8:11 pm |

    come on cole…keep pounding the corner — get him to chase one outside

  • Greenie | October 21, 2009 at 8:26 pm |

    Worst Comments Ever.

    Hardly any discussion of jerseys at all. All union and hockey lines and a Jordan nobody cares about. Barely skimmed any of it before posting this.

    -Greenie

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 8:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”355768″]Worst Comments Ever.

    Hardly any discussion of jerseys at all. All union and hockey lines and a Jordan nobody cares about. Barely skimmed any of it before posting this.

    -Greenie[/quote]

    But we have some football fodder, finally!!!

    Okay, admit it. How many of us secretly wish Tulsa was wearing its all yellow-golds and royal helmets against UTEP tonight? (ESPN)

    Come on, be honest. Who wouldn’t want to see a collossal uni trainwreck like that.

    —Ricko

  • AZSteve | October 21, 2009 at 8:32 pm |

    #187 “Fan outrage; but more importantly, Congressional outrage.”

    #192 “In my opinion, the major factor preventing the league from moving to a pay-per-view or cable-network model isn’t fan outrage but Congress. Fans will gripe but evenatully get over it.”

    But if it’s Congressional outrage then any future court ruling doesn’t really matter does it? Also, I’m sure some of the congressional outrage only occurs because they’re responding to fan outrage in the first place.

    #192: “If the Supreme Court tells Congress to keep its collective hands off the NFL, then the major obstacle is gone.”

    Not necessarily. Congress can always re-write the laws if they don’t like the Supreme’s rulings. Absolutely nothing to prevent them from doing that, especially if fan outrage is great enough.

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 8:46 pm |

    [quote]How many of us secretly wish Tulsa was wearing its all yellow-golds and royal helmets against UTEP tonight? (ESPN)

    Come on, be honest. Who wouldn’t want to see a collossal uni trainwreck like that.[/quote]

    leon

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 8:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”355754″][quote comment=”355689″][quote comment=”355651″]If players stay with teams, so what? Since when are “dynasties” or “powerhouses” a bad thing? As much as people do hate them, they make leagues better. Who can beat the Steelers Steel Curtain? Damn Yankees! What, are the Celtics in the finals EVERY year?

    Without teams to shoot at, it becomes homogenized and sort of meaningless. Ever reviewed the teams in the Grey Cup every year? Looks like they might as well just pull the names out of a hat. And the NFL is getting that way. A good part of what draws us to NCAA football is that there ARE teams that stay in the Top Ten most every year. Someone to chase, to knock down a peg or two.[/quote]

    I don’t know, I like the unpredictableness of the CFL. It’s one of the few places where you can still go from worst to first, and vice versa. It gives hope to everyone…and it means more when the good teams manage to stay on top. I hope the NFL continues to go down this path.

    The other extreme is European soccer. I liked watching the English Premier League, but these days it’s always Man U., Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool fighting for the title. If you’re not a fan of those teams, the only drama is whether or not your team gets relegated. I don’t get to see the games now, but when I look up the standings on the web I tell myself, “Well, same old results…I’m not missing that much.”

    The NCAA is another story, thanks to the goofy polling system.[/quote]

    You forgot Europe, European qualification and the cups. Oh and the occasional battles to stay in business (ie Portsmouth.)[/quote]

    I did forget the FA Cup, which to me is the closest thing England has to March Madness. That’s more exciting to me. As for European qualification, you can add a few more teams to the list, but the majority of EPL clubs still have no hope…and they’re saddled with mostly awful-looking ads on jerseys as well (there, I turned it into a uni discussion now…).

  • Ricko | October 21, 2009 at 9:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”355748″][quote comment=”355661″][quote comment=”355654″][quote comment=”355646″][quote comment=”355550″][quote comment=”355543″]I’m pretty sure that’s not Lake Placid in the picture of the 1980 Olympic hockey team, because of the clear plexiglass boards. About the only arenas that had them were the St. Paul Civic Center, and the St. Paul Auditorium (an older arena adjacent to the Civic Center, which also had an ice sheet up until the early 1980s). The ’80 Olympic team was based in the Twin Cities during its training schedule, so I’m guessing the picture was taken at Auditorium, based on the seating that’s visible.[/quote]
    It also looks like it could be the 1932 arena, right next door to the 1980 arena.[/quote]

    I’m going to go with no way in hell on that one.

    Jack Shea arena is actually quite tiny, only a thousand or two at most. Even the 1980 arena isn’t that large- around 8,000 people fit in there.[/quote]
    I didn’t think it was. I’ve shot in both rinks many times and my only thought was that perhaps it’d been configured a bit differently 29 years ago.[/quote]

    St. Paul Auditorium didn’t have clear boards. That place was ancient. Clear boards came with the St. Paul Civic Center, since demolished and the Xcel Center built on the site.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    You’re certainly right about the Auditorium in the old days, back when it hosted the state hockey tournament, but I think it may have had glass boards right before they took the ice out – I believe I remember seeing footage of Phil Housley in a sectional playoff game at the Auditorium with clear boards.[/quote]

    Nope. I was working for the WHA at the time. Saw both the last game at the Auditorium and the first game at the Civic Center. The clear boards were big news, an “innovation”.

    Besides, knowing hockey’s days in the Auditorium were numbered as they did, there’s no way they’d have spent any more than absolutely necessary on the hockey configuration. Just wouldn’t have made sense.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | October 21, 2009 at 9:29 pm |

    Quick…name the only US city that has had professional soccer for 30 consecutive years…

    That’s right, it’s Baltimore, where the Blast will defend its National Indoor Soccer League title beginning next month. http://www.baltimore...

  • leon | October 21, 2009 at 9:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”355771″][quote]How many of us secretly wish Tulsa was wearing its all yellow-golds and royal helmets against UTEP tonight? (ESPN)

    Come on, be honest. Who wouldn’t want to see a collossal uni trainwreck like that.[/quote]

    leon[/quote]

    They call me mellow yellow.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 9:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”355764″]I think the brush gets a bit too broad when you simply go with “public employees”. I teach, and can live wherever the hell I want. Most firefighters can as well, as long as they don’t take a car home. That’s the rationale for living in the boundary arguments.[/quote]I don’t know about “car” rationales. They don’t work here. A lot of Chicago employees drive from one area of Chicago where they live, thru a suburb and then back into Chicago where they work. For that matter, they can live on one side of a street but not another in many areas (and frankly, many do go as far away from the center of the city as they can).

    I currently live on a block where three teachers live next door-to-next door-to-next door. And all three houses are just littered with political signs every two years. Far more than any other house around the block. But…whatever.

    [quote comment=”355764″]Part of your problem is that you are working on what you know in Chicago. Most public employees unions don’t have the sway to get a guy elected, that’s why you don’t very often see a guy running on the “I’m going to raise teachers’ wages” plank. Chicago is a labor town, and thus they have managed to control politics. In most towns, public employees’ unions still exist to protect, that’s why I make less than 40k after 8 years in.

    I’m just saying…..[/quote]
    I reject your statement that I have a problem.

    If you’re saying you need protection against the voters, the majority of people… well that’s quite an argument. Whatever rules you want/need should be so self-evident that they’re codifed by ordinance, law, whatever.

    Are you saying that the majority of people are unfair? They’d be robber barons without your union?

  • DJ | October 21, 2009 at 9:53 pm |

    I can’t see Tom Brady and JaMarcus Russell as “fungible”. Or (going back a few years) Tom Boerwinkle and Kareem.

    In short, no matter what you may or may not think about the concept of a Union, the NFLPA, NBAPA, etc. are hardly unions

    The pro football union is useful not so much for wage issues, but issues of workplace safety. Yes, I know, football is hardly a safe enterprise. But would the owners have gotten rid of the first generation of artificial turf were it not for the players complaining about the short- and long-term effects on player’s health (something that might also be cropping up with the current generation of turf); the long-term effects of concussive impact on the brain, etc.

    And as to that bullshit about the auto unions — the production line people always could make good cars; the low- and middle-level office people were always productive. It was upper management that stalled for too long in getting fuel-efficient gas, hybrids, and electrics off the drawing boards and on the production line, and gutted the American auto industry.

  • interlockingtc | October 21, 2009 at 9:55 pm |

    Great red line post today!

    Give coffee another try. Drink it slowly. Sip it. Savor it. Smell it. Cafe Americano. mmmmmmm

  • Jeff P | October 21, 2009 at 10:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355723″][quote comment=”355590″]Some other center ice/red line oddities:

    Chicago Stadium in the 60’s simply had like red squares. No red outline. And I think the blue face off marking was a diamond. Their ice markings for some reason was always very faded.

    Boston Garden in the 60’s and 70’s had the Bruin logo right at center ice and the middle part of the “B” had a white rectangle in it for the faceoff spot.

    Maple Leaf Gardens until just a few years at the end had a blue 11 point blue maple leaf facing west (as the TV camera went) inside a thin red circle with a white circle inside the leaf for the faceoff spot. The red line was diagonally striped. And in the 60’s and 70’s their ice markings were super sharp.

    Winnipeg Arena was the first to feature the three thin parallel stripes that Wachovia Arena now employs. Most of the time they had a solid red line with a huge blue spot for the faceoffs.

    Madison Square Garden normally had long strips of red interrupted by white squares for their red line.[/quote]
    The markings on the ice will look faded or not depending on how they do it and how often. Before the days of better chemistry allowed paint to be applied to the ice, all of the markings were painted directly to the concrete floor. Wouldn’t look bad at first, but turned cloudy from snow and air trapped in the skate paths. Most rinks (not arenas) still do this, and if it’s a sheet in constant use for a couple years, some lines (whether painted on the ice or the floor) disappear altogether.

    By the way, I seem to remember that Madison Square Garden at one time used a red-white-blue pattern of rectangles, roughly 18″ long, running across the ice, although I don’t have a picture of it.[/quote]

    No arenas do that. They put down a thin layer of ice first, then spray a white ‘paint’ that doesn’t dry, it just freezes. They spray a thin layer on top of that, then apply all the lines and logos.

    All the paint is biodegradable, so it just goes right down the drain when they melt it down.

    Plenty of videos on youtube. But nobody paints anything on the concrete. If they did you would know: every circus would perform on a hockey rink.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 10:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”355777″]And as to that bullshit about the auto unions — the production line people always could make good cars; the low- and middle-level office people were always productive.[/quote]

    Ohhhh, okay… Yeah, good luck with that.

    What was that job bank about again? You know, the place where people were paid to sit around and twiddle their thumbs??

    (This is where the rolleyes emoticon would go.)

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 10:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”355777″]And as to that bullshit about the auto unions — the production line people always could make good cars; the low- and middle-level office people were always productive.[/quote]

    Almost forgot the age 50 retirement scheme.

    Yeah, how could EVER I think those unions were bad?

  • dhrsko2 | October 21, 2009 at 10:17 pm |

    The “10 Worst Uniforms Quirks” slideshow posted above (too lazy to find and link to it) includes the Kentucky basketball jerseys from 95-96 and everywhere I’ve seen they are referred to as “the denim jerseys.” Where they actually made of denim, or just a denim colored mesh-like fabric? Real denim sounds like possibly the worst thing to play basketball in, but nowhere on the internets have I seen confirmation that they were made of anything else

  • =bg= | October 21, 2009 at 10:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”355764″][quote comment=”355746″][quote comment=”355737″]That doesn’t make them labor and management, only labor and client. Like the guy who both works and takes classes at the gym.[/quote]No, the guy who works at the gym has a choice of taking or not taking classes at the gym; plenty of other gyms offer classes.

    If you’re a Chicago fireman, you pay property taxes to Chicago: period. You’re required to live in the city. You can’t work in the city and live in the suburbs. Teachers too AFAIK; probably many other city workers. They vote for the people who set their pay rates; and most of the people who set their pay rates are HEAVILY dependent on their votes.

    I know a city resident who lives on a block that’s heavily populated by city workers. His joke is that he’s supporting all of his neighbors: the rest of them were just trading money back and forth among themselves.

    That’s one reason privitzation is resisted by both management and labor here. The story came out twenty years ago about people who were pulling down six figures to literally sweep out busses at the end of the day. Last year the story came out about garbagemen who averaged four hours a day of work, and got somewhere around 80k per year. Daley is calling for 24 furlough days. Think you could get by on 90% salary? These people know they’re not earning their keep and they know that they need Daley in power. He knows that too.[/quote]

    I think the brush gets a bit too broad when you simply go with “public employees”. I teach, and can live wherever the hell I want. Most firefighters can as well, as long as they don’t take a car home. That’s the rationale for living in the boundary arguments.

    Part of your problem is that you are working on what you know in Chicago. Most public employees unions don’t have the sway to get a guy elected, that’s why you don’t very often see a guy running on the “I’m going to raise teachers’ wages” plank. Chicago is a labor town, and thus they have managed to control politics. In most towns, public employees’ unions still exist to protect, that’s why I make less than 40k after 8 years in.

    I’m just saying…..[/quote]

    I know it’s the end of the day in the East Coast, but can we dispense with this comment thread? I still don’t see the uni-relevance.

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 10:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”355782″]The “10 Worst Uniforms Quirks” slideshow posted above (too lazy to find and link to it) includes the Kentucky basketball jerseys from 95-96 and everywhere I’ve seen they are referred to as “the denim jerseys.” Where they actually made of denim, or just a denim colored mesh-like fabric? Real denim sounds like possibly the worst thing to play basketball in, but nowhere on the internets have I seen confirmation that they were made of anything else[/quote]No, merely a denim-colored jersey: a departure from Kentucky’s traditional shade of blue.

    The material itself was no different than any other used by the major colleges at that time.

  • Casey (Davis, CA) | October 21, 2009 at 10:26 pm |

    Quebec Nordiques had Squares:

    http://media.photobu...

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 10:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”355783″]I know it’s the end of the day in the East Coast, but can we dispense with this comment thread? I still don’t see the uni-relevance.[/quote]
    I concur-with the proviso that we agree to dispense with all the comment threads that stray from uni-relevance.

  • JohnnyO | October 21, 2009 at 10:31 pm |

    Here is a good “one stop place” to view all the stocking caps for the NFL teams this year. I noticed that they are calling the pixelated hats as the “drift collection”. If I was a Bucs fan I would put that Bucco Brice knit cap on me Christmas list ASAP!

    http://www.espnshop....

  • anotherguy | October 21, 2009 at 10:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”355787″]Here is a good “one stop place” to view all the stocking caps for the NFL teams this year. I noticed that they are calling the pixelated hats as the “drift collection”. If I was a Bucs fan I would put that Bucco Brice knit cap on me Christmas list ASAP![/quote]
    Hey Johnny O, you might want to double check that link. Seems to be an dead-end.

    Bucco Brice? ;-)

    Of course, the knit cap probably doesn’t sell as well in Tampa as it does up here….

  • Stuby | October 21, 2009 at 11:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”355788″][quote comment=”355787″]Here is a good “one stop place” to view all the stocking caps for the NFL teams this year. I noticed that they are calling the pixelated hats as the “drift collection”. If I was a Bucs fan I would put that Bucco Brice knit cap on me Christmas list ASAP![/quote]
    Hey Johnny O, you might want to double check that link. Seems to be an dead-end.

    Bucco Brice? ;-)

    Of course, the knit cap probably doesn’t sell as well in Tampa as it does up here….[/quote]
    See if this works…
    http://www.espnshop....

    As far as I could tell, that’s the the only team available in that style of hat.

  • LI Phil | October 21, 2009 at 11:01 pm |

    oh…this is gonna be a fun world series…especially for a mets fan

    classy philly fans are already beginning their “Yankees Suck” chant

  • Lloyd Davis | October 21, 2009 at 11:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”355630″]Maybe a stupid question…

    Could an arena ever put ice down that was crystal clear? I know they paint under the ice white, but what if they distilled and boiled the water before flooding? Could that yield a very clear looking ice?

    The only reason I ask is that I have this:

    http://www.slipperyb...

    and in order to get a really clear ice to form, you have to used distilled water and boil it.

    I don’t know…today seemed like the topic to ask a dumb question.[/quote]

    Many NHL rinks use a reverse-osmosis system to de-mineralize the water used to make the ice. It does make for a very clear, uniform ice surface.

    But the reason the rinks are painted white is the same as the rationale for a distinctive centre red line: it looked better on 1950s black-and-white television. And from what I’ve heard, the contrast really suits HDTV.

    If not for the white paint, you’d be looking at ice that looks kind of grey, because you’d be seeing down to the concrete floor beneath the rink. (Or, at Maple Leaf Gardens for many years, a dirt floor.)

  • JohnnyO | October 21, 2009 at 11:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”355789″][quote comment=”355788″][quote comment=”355787″]Here is a good “one stop place” to view all the stocking caps for the NFL teams this year. I noticed that they are calling the pixelated hats as the “drift collection”. If I was a Bucs fan I would put that Bucco Brice knit cap on me Christmas list ASAP![/quote]
    Hey Johnny O, you might want to double check that link. Seems to be an dead-end.

    Bucco Brice? ;-)

    Of course, the knit cap probably doesn’t sell as well in Tampa as it does up here….[/quote]
    See if this works…
    http://www.espnshop....

    As far as I could tell, that’s the the only team available in that style of hat.[/quote]

    That links seems to work… thanks Stuby! And it looks like I was so excited about the Creamsicle knit cap, I called him “Brice” and not “Bruce”. My apologies to the few dozen Bucs fans.

  • JohnnyO | October 21, 2009 at 11:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”355792″][quote comment=”355789″][quote comment=”355788″][quote comment=”355787″]Here is a good “one stop place” to view all the stocking caps for the NFL teams this year. I noticed that they are calling the pixelated hats as the “drift collection”. If I was a Bucs fan I would put that Bucco Brice knit cap on me Christmas list ASAP![/quote]
    Hey Johnny O, you might want to double check that link. Seems to be an dead-end.

    Bucco Brice? ;-)

    Of course, the knit cap probably doesn’t sell as well in Tampa as it does up here….[/quote]
    See if this works…
    http://www.espnshop....

    As far as I could tell, that’s the the only team available in that style of hat.[/quote]

    That links seems to work… thanks Stuby! And it looks like I was so excited about the Creamsicle knit cap, I called him “Brice” and not “Bruce”. My apologies to the few dozen Bucs fans.[/quote]

    hmmm, maybe the link doesn’t work. When you get to that ESPN shop, just click on NFL, and then there should be a link for Knit caps right on the main page.

  • BF44 | October 21, 2009 at 11:20 pm |

    Just be alert — every time they take up the ice at Scottrade center, they come back with a different pattern. They won’t stay with one over the course of a whole season.

  • Jimmy | October 21, 2009 at 11:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”355672″][quote comment=”355670″][quote comment=”355655″][quote comment=”355644″]My question about hockey uniforms is: Has there been any hockey team
    whether in the NHL, College, or International that have wore white
    jerseys with white pants.?[/quote]
    In the early years of the NHL, that was the default pant color before they moved to plain leather.

    The washington capitols also wore white pants for a while their first year, but ditched them because of sweat issues.

    And since hockey teams typically only have one pair of pants, with the only exceptions being the rare alternate uniform pant, yes, teams have worn them with whites.[/quote]

    Teams that wear alternate pants these days simply use a cover-up shell. They’re wearing their normal pants underneath.[/quote]
    Hockeytown Cougars, circa 1926.[/quote]

    Canada’s national women hockey team, 1990, first IIHF World Women’s Championship — but the socks are not white. However, this team was more famous for the other colour they wore that year, which has not been worn since except to support breast cancer research.

  • BF44 | October 21, 2009 at 11:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”355545″]Oh and I also seem to remember that Edmonton had the coolest red line design back in the day- when it was Northlands Coliseum.[/quote]
    Weren’t they white showflake-lookin’ things?

  • STFU already | October 21, 2009 at 11:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”355788″]
    Bucco Brice? ;-)
    [/quote]
    …from the guy who can’t even spell “Michael” correctly.

    Oh, but then again, it is a really uncommon name (THIS is where the eyeroll emoticon goes).

  • JohnnyO | October 21, 2009 at 11:50 pm |

    Congrats Phils. Here are the NL Champ threads:

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

  • Ricko | October 22, 2009 at 12:11 am |

    Whoa. Like 1950. The Yankees and the Whiz Kids.

  • Ricko | October 22, 2009 at 12:13 am |

    And we won’t have to hear about Torre vs. Girardi ad nauseum.

    (Nothing against the Dodgers, honest)

  • BDZ | October 22, 2009 at 12:43 am |

    just thought i’d meniton that the lacrosse lime green, while ugly, is 99% of the time for HEADstrong, a benefit against lymphoma…lime green is its signature color

  • caknuck | October 22, 2009 at 3:01 am |

    It looks like the Wachovia Center inherited the triple line redline from the old Spectrum

  • uberVU - social comments | October 22, 2009 at 10:58 am |

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by 3thought: We now know why Hockey lines have different patterns: http://bit.ly/3aVYLo form and function strike again. #design #hockey…

  • anotherguy | October 22, 2009 at 3:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”355797″]
    …from the guy who can’t even spell “Michael” correctly.

    Oh, but then again, it is a really uncommon name (THIS is where the eyeroll emoticon goes).[/quote]
    Yeah, I’m really bothered by that.

  • ck | October 22, 2009 at 5:51 pm |

    Nope. I was working for the WHA at the time. Saw both the last game at the Auditorium and the first game at the Civic Center. The clear boards were big news, an “innovation”.

    Besides, knowing hockey’s days in the Auditorium were numbered as they did, there’s no way they’d have spent any more than absolutely necessary on the hockey configuration. Just wouldn’t have made sense.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I will certainly defer to your knowledge of the Auditorium – the only time I ever set foot in it it was set up to give the bar exam to aspiring lawyers – but it does raise an interesting question of exactly where that picture was taken. It’s clearly not the Civic Center, and I can’t think of another place that had clear boards. Could it be the case that they used the glass boards in the Auditorium when there was ice there but not in the Civic Center? Aftere the Fighting Saints folded there would rarely have been ice in the Civic Center, and possibly they used the same boards for both places rather than buying a new set for the Auditorium. According to this website maintained by a Hill Murray fanatic, there were high school playoff games in the Auditorium as late as 1982 (http://www.hmpioneer...)

  • Matt | October 22, 2009 at 8:56 pm |

    Love the blog but saw a few errors.

    Its Nationwide ARENA not center.

    And the Buckeyes play at Value City Arena. The womens hockey team plays at the OSU Ice Rink.