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

DIYD: Do-It-Yourself Disaster

diy vaders 34.JPG

[Editor’s Note: Today we have an excellent guest entry by Ryan Connelly, who tells the tale of a DIY project gone horribly awry. — PL]

By Ryan Connelly

My buddies and I started an ice hockey team and named it the Invaders. Just a low-C, high-B level team that plays other local adult/beer league teams. So of course this gave me the opportunity to design a uniform.

I was playing in a tournament in Mississauga, Ontario, when I saw one of the players wearing this jersey and immediately fell in love with it, for obvious reasons. When I found the blank jersey online, I thought it was black/yellow, but when I got it in the mail I was surprised to find it was brown/yellow.

Before I go on, I should explain that I’m color-deficient, so one of the things you’ll notice is the jersey and socks being brown/yellow and the logo being black/yellow. It just adds to the “charm” of the uniform, trust me. But really, it kind of works out nicely with our black pants, gloves, and skates.

Next step — my favorite step — design a logo or two in AutoCAD. We decided on a “space invaders” theme. Here’s the game play that most of us remember, and I found this helpful image online too.

Then I started to goof around in AutoCAD. I traced the game’s wordmark, teamed it up with an invader guy, and resized the wordmark. Then I prettied it up a bit and put a spaceship-like boarder around it, to create the finished logo.

The next task: uni numbers. I played the game online for a bit until I could get to the “High Scores” screen at the end of the game because I knew it would rank at least 10 names. That way I would have every numeral to work with.

Then I did my CAD thing, outlined the numerals, and finished them.

With the logos and numbers now designed, it was time to create physical versions of them for the jerseys. I printed four or five copies of the logo outline on a plotter to scale. Then I
cut out the spaceship-like border, invader (body, arms, antennae separate), and each letter, pasted all of that onto cheap yellow construction paper you can buy anywhere, traced each element, and then cut again. Now I had logo templates to trace onto fabric.

As for the numbers: For this step I printed all the numbers to scale then cut. I wanted to use two-tone numbers (yellow with a black border), so this had to be done in two steps. The first set of cut-outs was the black outline of the number; when cut, it was obvious which number was which. But the second set was the yellow inner part of the number, and they were just basically blocks. so I assigned a letter to each shape.

Take the number 8 for example: The number 8 uses blocks “i” and “H” to make up the yellow parts. The yellow “i” block is also used in the numbers 6, 9, and 0, so no sense cutting out nine different stencils. I just cut one block and reused it for tracing. I also printed out a smaller version of the stencils and used them as a key when putting together the fabric.

After doing all of that, I had this group of stencils for the black part of the numbers, and this group of stencils for the yellow part of the numbers.

With the stencils made, it was time to trace everything onto fabric, beginning with the logo. First I traced the logo outline and cut out the logo shapes. Then I traced the invader guy, cut the invader guy into little rectangles, cut all of them out into their finished shapes (with a little “B” on one side for “back”), and organized them for gluing.

I used a template guide to line up all the yellow invaders with the black outline and glued. I followed basically the same steps for the letters. After gluing. I later stitched. When the logos were done, I followed basically the same steps for the numbers.

Now it was time to put everything onto the jerseys. I lined and centered the stitched-up logos and numbers on the jerseys, then glued them onto the jerseys, and then stitched. The front looked like this, and you can see a bunch of the backs here.

The first five were finished and look great! Then I washed one of them and … DISASTER.

I had used a heavy twill-like fabric called duck cloth — the same kind of cloth used for bean bags in games like cornhole. And to hold the numbers, logos, and letters in place (both to themselves and to the jersey), I’d used a glue that, unbeknownst to me, pretty much dissolves when washed. As the glue wore off in the wash, the stitching cut right through the material.

What a mess. And we had a game coming up real soon! So after all that time, money, and energy, I gave in. I sent the logo and the jerseys out to a local screen-printing business, picked out some old-school block numbers, and ta-da. Here’s a close-up of the front, and here’s how they looked from the back.

I think the block numbers add a certain charm to the whole jersey. Also, I’ve told the team that I’m going to make logos the correct way over the winter. It really wont take much to place the sewn logos over top of the screened logos.

This project was started around mid-April and finished up in mid-July. Looking back, I can be 110% honest when I say that I was NEVER mad when the material got destroyed in the wash. A touch let down, but never pissed off at all. Also, I had an absolute blast working on this project from start to finish! Working on the logo, finding the materials, working with the team. Nothing was ever a burden on this project, and I loved every minute of it.

Last but certainly not least, I got this completely awesome DIY of my DIY by the great artist himself, Mr. Robert Marshall. You can see it bobbling [along with some trenchant Uni Watch commentary and a perfect example of the conflicting urges to create and destroy — PL] here.

knit.jpg

And speaking of DIY: Paul here. Wouldn’t you like to own one of these sweaters? You can, if you have a knitting machine, because Rick Fleck recently mailed me this officially licensed 1990 knitting guide, which provides sweater patterns for all 14 NFC teams at the time. I’ve scanned the entire guide and put the page scans here. I know exactly zero about intarsia knitting, but I would love it if someone could make a sweater based on one of these patterns.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say most of you reading this probably don’t know how to knit. But maybe your significant other does, hmmm? Get crackin’, guys.

College Hoops Reminder: I’m continuing to work on my college hoops season-preview column for ESPN. So if you know of teams with new uniforms, new patches, new court designs, etc., let’s have ’em. Thanks.

Uni Watch News Ticker: Really interesting article about a new skate sharpening method here. … Dozens of tremendous old Iowa football pics available in this gallery (with thanks to Rob Leavell). … Rob Nanovic notes that Maine’s football team is wearing Adidas jerseys and Nike pants. … Hmmm, White Sox hockey jerseys — interesting (with thanks to Zach Nesler). … Fascinating info from George Tvardy, who writes: “Very interesting story that has been on the sports shows here in Knoxville: Although Adidas is Tennessee’s supplier, the black alternates worn Saturday night were not actually Adidas jerseys. Story is that Mike Hamilton, UT athletic director, only agreed to the wearing of the black jerseys late Friday afternoon and UT then got a local printer to make the alternate jerseys. Since UT has the Adidas contract, they had to put Adidas logos on these jerseys so that they would not be in violation of their contract.” … Stop what you’re doing and read this absolutely essential article about flannel jersey fabric. Highly recommended reading (great find by Dave Grob). … Brian Brown has made himself a coffee table based on the old Mecca Arena court design. … Oopsie. … Latest reason to hate jersey sponsorships: If two soccer teams show up wearing the same sponsor, one of them has to change (with thanks to Terence Kearns). … Paul Wiederecht sent along a great SI spread from the 1963 Army/Navy game, with Navy wearing SOB (slogan on back). The story behind the slogan is explained here. … Speaking of old SI material, Ricko pointed me toward this great 1954 item about heavyweight sweaters. Here’s the second page of the spread, and a close-up of the short text. … The London Daily Telegraph is the latest media outlet to publish a rundown of history’s worst uniforms, except their survey consists primarily of soccer and rugby kits (with thanks to Craig Ackers). … Totally awesome vintage Chinese Taipei warm-up jacket available here. … Late-breaking Halloween submission from Mike Miller, who got a photo of a friend dressed up as Dave Dravecky. … Even better, Joe Rosenbaum dressed up as Billy Ripken. … Cleveland textiles maven Steven Tatar tipped me wise to this letterman jacket operation. “They’re the real deal,” he says. “Leather sleeves, melton wool bodies, chenille hooked tip-on letters, and chain-stitching to boot.” … A French soccer player wore the wrong jersey the other day (with thanks to Jeremy Brahm). … Anyone know why the Coyotes wore white at home last night? … Mark Windle notes that Coy Wire appears to be missing some jersey piping. Yes, the nameplate could be covering up some of it, but not all of it. Hmmmm. … Steve Garvey + Dwight Gooden + and Super Dave + a blindfold = a really cheesy old video clip (big thanks to Steve Mandich). … Aaron Stilley has been doing some Negro Leagues research and came across an interesting item in the Chicago Defender. “I can’t tell if there was something specifically humorous about the Chicago American Giants numbers on backs, or if it was just strange that they had numbers at all,” he writes. “Would numbers on backs have been a unique sight in 1938?” I don’t think so, but I know very little about Negro Leagues uni history. Anyone..? … Kobe appears to have put on just a bit of weight (with thanks to Dwayne White).

 

119 comments to DIYD: Do-It-Yourself Disaster

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 7:28 am |

    That Invaders logo rocks.

    That’s all I have to say today.

  • glen | November 3, 2009 at 8:05 am |

    One of my early attempts at colorizing was this 1940’s Notre Dame vs Army color on color game

    http://img.photobuck...

    Another photo from that game…
    http://assets.nydail...

    —Ricko

    What’s up with the stripes on #35’s sleeve?

  • glen | November 3, 2009 at 8:06 am |

    [quote comment=”357862″]One of my early attempts at colorizing was this 1940’s Notre Dame vs Army color on color game

    http://img.photobuck...

    Another photo from that game…
    http://assets.nydail...

    —Ricko

    What’s up with the stripes on #35’s sleeve?[/quote]

    wow never mind. too early in the morning! I am losing it…

  • Mark in Shiga | November 3, 2009 at 8:15 am |

    Ryan, while you may consider your DIY effort to be a disaster, I have to say that I quite like the way the numbers looked after the washing machine pulled the outer yellow layer off — with the stiching still on there, it ends up with the same color scheme that the Bruins used to have.

  • Jon S. | November 3, 2009 at 8:27 am |

    I like the use of the word “blouse” to descibe the uniform top in the Negro League story.

    I’m going to start referring to Baseball Jerseys as blouses and see how many people look at me funny.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 8:28 am |

    Ryan, a suggestion if I may:

    If and when you replace the crest with the fabric version, could you also do something similar with the numbers? Maybe you could sew the numbers onto a piece of white fabric that would cover up the screened-on numbers. Of course, that would end up adding extra weight, so maybe it’s not plausible.

    Ooh, or maybe you could get someone to embroider a black outline around the yellow numbers so there’s still only two layers of fabric for the numbers.

  • Paul Lukas | November 3, 2009 at 8:33 am |

    [quote comment=”357865″]I like the use of the word “blouse” to descibe the uniform top in the Negro League story.

    I’m going to start referring to Baseball Jerseys as blouses and see how many people look at me funny.[/quote]

    I also like that the uni is described as a “suit.” That term is routinely used in old uniform catalogs, too. And that’s what a uniform is, after all: a formal matched set, a suit. I think most of us instictively understand this, even if we’ve never articulated it. That’s why the whole “untucked” thing offends so many of us — that’s no way to wear a suit.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 8:33 am |

    RE: those Sox hockey jerseys.

    There actually is a reason for those.

  • Bernard | November 3, 2009 at 8:43 am |

    Having seen the prototype Invaders jersey firsthand, I can tell you that they are truly a thing of beauty. Excellent work, Ry!

  • Dane | November 3, 2009 at 8:50 am |

    [quote comment=”357868″]RE: those Sox hockey jerseys.

    There actually is a reason for those.[/quote]

    Yeah, but there is no reason on that vendor’s site for this:
    http://brandjerseys....

    Or this:
    http://brandjerseys....

    Or ESPECIALLY this:
    http://brandjerseys....

  • War Damn Eagle | November 3, 2009 at 8:53 am |

    Really like those DIY hockey jerseys.

  • PLJ4 | November 3, 2009 at 8:54 am |

    Those Invaders jerseys were amazing. Great work even if the outcome was pretty bad…

  • Jeremy Brahm | November 3, 2009 at 8:57 am |

    [quote comment=”357865″]I like the use of the word “blouse” to descibe the uniform top in the Negro League story.

    I’m going to start referring to Baseball Jerseys as blouses and see how many people look at me funny.[/quote]

    Maybe Dave Chappelle, should have done his Prince basketball game as a baseball game based on this article. Prince with his limp wristed throws that give huge curveballs and strike outs Charlie Murphy. “Game blouses.”

  • Douglas Hirschman | November 3, 2009 at 8:57 am |

    “Would numbers on backs have been a unique sight in 1938?”

    I can’t speak with any expertise on the Negro Leagues, but in the majors and minors, jersey numbers came around in the late 20’s and early 30’s. It is my educated guess that they would have been adopted by a major black club like the American Giants well before 1938.

  • Frosty | November 3, 2009 at 9:00 am |

    Brian Brown: childhood memories from Milwaukee…thank you for sharing the effort, and enjoy!

    RyCo: my friend. Your wife must be the most patient woman in America. From now on – you’re all about the twill brother…phenominal effort! What was your source for the blank jerseys?

    Rob Marshall: Truly one of the more twisted individuals around…keep up the fantastic work.

    Frosty

  • Geeman | November 3, 2009 at 9:02 am |

    Not sure which is tackier — dressing up as Dravecky or running a photo of a guy who dressed up as him.

  • Traxel | November 3, 2009 at 9:12 am |

    Great DIY job Ryan! I would have been quite livid but apparently that’s not your style. That’s a lot of jerseys to make, obviously you were thinking ahead and starting early!

    RPM 3 is a God. My latest batch of stirrups were waiting in two packages when I got home late last night. I was so giddy I couldn’t fall asleep. Great thanks to Robert for taking the Rup by the horns and following through. Those things seriously rock. My DIY stirrup display (all from Uniwatch inspirations) is designed (AutoCAD) and will be my winter construction project. More to come…..

  • Joe | November 3, 2009 at 9:17 am |

    [quote comment=”357874″]“Would numbers on backs have been a unique sight in 1938?”

    I can’t speak with any expertise on the Negro Leagues, but in the majors and minors, jersey numbers came around in the late 20’s and early 30’s. It is my educated guess that they would have been adopted by a major black club like the American Giants well before 1938.[/quote]
    I’m no expert either, but the telling word in the letter has to be ‘homemade.’ The author is complaining that the numbers look sloppy, not that they’re on the jerseys at all.

    Also, does anyone else think the Bills’ uniforms look 100 times better without the contrast border around the yoke in the Coy Wire photo?

  • ChrisN | November 3, 2009 at 9:22 am |

    Georgia Tech has a uniform choice to make Saturday. They usually wear white jerseys at home, but this week, Weak Forest won’t let them.

    http://www.ajc.com/s...

  • leon | November 3, 2009 at 9:30 am |

    Anyone planning on creating a sweater from the officially licensed 1990 knitting guide should be forewarned that the Redskins color palate contains an egregious, though common, error.
    :)

  • BuckeyeMark | November 3, 2009 at 9:35 am |

    that Invaders jersey is awesome. anybody got a link to the place where he got the blank hockey jersey? might like to try a little DIY myself…

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 9:40 am |

    [quote comment=”357879″]Georgia Tech has a uniform choice to make Saturday. They usually wear white jerseys at home, but this week, Weak Forest won’t let them.

    http://www.ajc.com/s... [/quote]

    What the hell? Why the heck should the visiting team have veto power? Way to go with the stupid rule NCAA.

    As much as I don’t like white jerseys, the home team should always have the first choice in uniform color.

  • Colin | November 3, 2009 at 9:51 am |

    Saints looked terrible last night. They should have gone with gold pants.

  • Mark K | November 3, 2009 at 9:53 am |

    Here is the relevant rule…

    1. The visiting team shall wear white jerseys; however, the home team may wear white jerseys if the teams have agreed in writing before the season.

    2. If the home team wears colored jerseys, the visiting team may also wear colored jerseys, if and only if the following conditions have been satisfied:

    (a) The home team has agreed in writing prior to the game; and
    (b) The conference of the home team certifies that the jersey of the visiting team is of a contrasting color.

    3. If on the kickoff at the start of each half the visiting team wears a colored jersey in violation of the conditions specified in Rule 1-4-3-a-2 (above), it is a foul for unsportsmanlike conduct.

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 9:56 am |

    I’ve explained the white-at-home phenomenon in the NHL before, but here’s why Phoenix went with white against the Kings.

    All NHL teams can apply to wear white at home with the NHL offices before the season starts. The NHL takes these requests into consideration when they are looking at the schedule with respect to who the team is playing so that the visiting team isn’t bringing a pile of laundry with them as they travel.

    Phoenix applied, and received the “ok” from the league’s offices because Los Angeles was on a one-game road trip to Phoenix. LA was only playing one game away from the Staples Center, so facilitating the white-at-home for Phoenix would be easy for the Kings’ equipment manager.

  • Geeman | November 3, 2009 at 10:06 am |

    [quote comment=”357885″]I’ve explained the white-at-home phenomenon in the NHL before, but here’s why Phoenix went with white against the Kings.

    All NHL teams can apply to wear white at home with the NHL offices before the season starts. The NHL takes these requests into consideration when they are looking at the schedule with respect to who the team is playing so that the visiting team isn’t bringing a pile of laundry with them as they travel.

    Phoenix applied, and received the “ok” from the league’s offices because Los Angeles was on a one-game road trip to Phoenix. LA was only playing one game away from the Staples Center, so facilitating the white-at-home for Phoenix would be easy for the Kings’ equipment manager.[/quote]

    Teebz — why did the NHL switch from white at home a few years ago?

  • Rich | November 3, 2009 at 10:17 am |

    http://www.bostonher...

    Boston company already printing Yankees WS champs t-shirts. that is one bad looking design.

  • Chad | November 3, 2009 at 10:19 am |

    the other day a producer of the office posted this on his twitter account
    http://twitter.com/p...

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 10:21 am |

    [quote comment=”357886″][quote comment=”357885″]I’ve explained the white-at-home phenomenon in the NHL before, but here’s why Phoenix went with white against the Kings.

    All NHL teams can apply to wear white at home with the NHL offices before the season starts. The NHL takes these requests into consideration when they are looking at the schedule with respect to who the team is playing so that the visiting team isn’t bringing a pile of laundry with them as they travel.

    Phoenix applied, and received the “ok” from the league’s offices because Los Angeles was on a one-game road trip to Phoenix. LA was only playing one game away from the Staples Center, so facilitating the white-at-home for Phoenix would be easy for the Kings’ equipment manager.[/quote]

    Teebz — why did the NHL switch from white at home a few years ago?[/quote]

    Jersey sales. The majority of jerseys that were being sold in home cities were white. In order to facilitate the alternate jersey craze, teams began wearing them at home, and the NHL saw the numbers spike for sales of those jerseys. The next logical step was to sell the then-road jerseys at home, and the easiest way was to have the teams wear them at home.

    Of course, up until the 1970s when a pile of new teams invaded the NHL (“The Next Six”), everyone wore dark at home as well. With all the new colour schemes and attempts to sell the new teams, the NHL had the road teams play in their dark uniforms to help sell these new teams. People remember the colourful better than the white uniforms, so it was easier to identify these new teams.

    The NHL will claim that historically this is how it happened, but that’s a thinly-veiled reason when it comes to dollars and cents.

  • ClubMedSux | November 3, 2009 at 10:28 am |

    When I found the blank jersey online, I thought it was black/yellow, but when I got it in the mail I was surprised to find it was brown/yellow.

    Wow… Somebody else besides my alma mater (Valparaiso University) made the conscious decision to use a brown and gold color scheme? Crazy!

  • aliceq | November 3, 2009 at 10:30 am |

    As a knitter and a sports fan, I think those NFL logo charts are way cool. On Ravelry, a knitting and crochet community with over 500,000 members, there are active sports fan forums; aside from being concerned with their teams’ performances, members of these forums are often in search of yarn in appropriate colors for, say, the Packers or the Canadiens, as well as charted logos.

  • brad keppler | November 3, 2009 at 10:36 am |

    I was wondering if any readers had any information about the floor design of the Richfield Coliseum used for the 1960’s cleveland cavaliers. i want to attempt to paint my coffee table in that fashion. I would love to use the current floor design in honor of the King James era, however i think its hideous and should never have been painted. any help is appreciated. thank you

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”357891″]As a knitter and a sports fan, I think those NFL logo charts are way cool. On Ravelry, a knitting and crochet community with over 500,000 members, there are active sports fan forums; aside from being concerned with their teams’ performances, members of these forums are often in search of yarn in appropriate colors for, say, the Packers or the Canadiens, as well as charted logos.[/quote]

    Hey, AliceQ…

    One of the intriguing things about those sweaters is that I imagine they’d give someone the ability to alter the designs, to customize them. Wouldn’t take much to eliminate the white panel, or the stripes, or both, would it?

    Or change the colors…say, update the Rams from their 1990 royal-athletic gold to today’s navy-old gold?

    Or re-pattern the Giants helmet with the “ny”?

    Correct?

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | November 3, 2009 at 10:41 am |

    [quote comment=”357892″]I was wondering if any readers had any information about the floor design of the Richfield Coliseum used for the 1960’s cleveland cavaliers. i want to attempt to paint my coffee table in that fashion. I would love to use the current floor design in honor of the King James era, however i think its hideous and should never have been painted. any help is appreciated. thank you[/quote]

    im sure our man on the street, jim vilk, would have anything you need…check out this article we did on the coliseum back in the summer

    if you want, shoot me an email and im sure i can put you in touch with jim

  • Geeman | November 3, 2009 at 10:42 am |

    [quote comment=”357889″][quote comment=”357886″][quote comment=”357885″]I’ve explained the white-at-home phenomenon in the NHL before, but here’s why Phoenix went with white against the Kings.

    All NHL teams can apply to wear white at home with the NHL offices before the season starts. The NHL takes these requests into consideration when they are looking at the schedule with respect to who the team is playing so that the visiting team isn’t bringing a pile of laundry with them as they travel.

    Phoenix applied, and received the “ok” from the league’s offices because Los Angeles was on a one-game road trip to Phoenix. LA was only playing one game away from the Staples Center, so facilitating the white-at-home for Phoenix would be easy for the Kings’ equipment manager.[/quote]

    Teebz — why did the NHL switch from white at home a few years ago?[/quote]

    Jersey sales. The majority of jerseys that were being sold in home cities were white. In order to facilitate the alternate jersey craze, teams began wearing them at home, and the NHL saw the numbers spike for sales of those jerseys. The next logical step was to sell the then-road jerseys at home, and the easiest way was to have the teams wear them at home.

    Of course, up until the 1970s when a pile of new teams invaded the NHL (“The Next Six”), everyone wore dark at home as well. With all the new colour schemes and attempts to sell the new teams, the NHL had the road teams play in their dark uniforms to help sell these new teams. People remember the colourful better than the white uniforms, so it was easier to identify these new teams.

    The NHL will claim that historically this is how it happened, but that’s a thinly-veiled reason when it comes to dollars and cents.[/quote]

    Very interesting. Thanks.

  • DJ | November 3, 2009 at 10:43 am |

    What the hell? Why the heck should the visiting team have veto power?

    On the theory that it’s easier for the home team to go back to their equipment room — on site or not too far away — and dig out jerseys in contrasting colors than it is for the visiting team to pack two sets of jerseys.

  • Ry Co 40 | November 3, 2009 at 10:44 am |

    thanks for the DIY-Invaders love and the helpful suggestions! i appreciate it! also, forgot to mention i wanted to keep the jerseys NNOB… a much more old-school look!

    my source for the blank jerseys is here:

    http://www.hockeyjer...

    it’s great because you don’t have to buy a minimum order of jerseys.

  • JimV19 | November 3, 2009 at 10:44 am |

    [quote comment=”357892″]I was wondering if any readers had any information about the floor design of the Richfield Coliseum used for the 1960’s cleveland cavaliers. i want to attempt to paint my coffee table in that fashion. I would love to use the current floor design in honor of the King James era, however i think its hideous and should never have been painted. any help is appreciated. thank you[/quote]

    You mean 70s or 80s?

    70s: http://www.flickr.co... and yes it’s accurate, even though it’s a DIY. Here’s the real thing: http://www.flickr.co...

    80s and early 90s: http://www.flickr.co...

  • TEH | November 3, 2009 at 10:45 am |

    Excellent article on the different flannels used on jerseys – kind of scary to think how many non-professional-grade “blouses” are out there being sold as “professional”

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 10:49 am |

    Seinfeld episode where George gets Yankees into cotton unis aired around here yesterday. Perhaps elsewhere. Don’t remember if was on local channel or TBS.

  • JimV19 | November 3, 2009 at 10:52 am |

    Ryan, great DIY idea, and kudos for keeping a level head when things didn’t turn out right.

    You should get a rival team to become the Pac-Men, or the Centipedes, or something like that…

  • glen | November 3, 2009 at 10:53 am |

    [quote comment=”357890″]When I found the blank jersey online, I thought it was black/yellow, but when I got it in the mail I was surprised to find it was brown/yellow.

    Wow… Somebody else besides my alma mater (Valparaiso University) made the conscious decision to use a brown and gold color scheme? Crazy![/quote]

    Wyoming anyone?

  • LI Phil | November 3, 2009 at 10:57 am |

    [quote comment=”357900″]Seinfeld episode where George gets Yankees into cotton unis aired around here yesterday. Perhaps elsewhere. Don’t remember if was on local channel or TBS.[/quote]

    cotton breathes, you see — it’s much softer…imagine playing games and your team is five degrees cooler than the other team

    don’t you think that would be an advantage? they’re cooler, they’re more comfortable…they’re happier — they’re gonna play better

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 11:03 am |

    [quote comment=”357903″][quote comment=”357900″]Seinfeld episode where George gets Yankees into cotton unis aired around here yesterday. Perhaps elsewhere. Don’t remember if was on local channel or TBS.[/quote]

    cotton breathes, you see — it’s much softer…imagine playing games and your team is five degrees cooler than the other team

    don’t you think that would be an advantage? they’re cooler, they’re more comfortable…they’re happier — they’re gonna play better[/quote]
    Oh my God, Mattingly just split his pants!

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 11:04 am |

    [quote comment=”357896″]What the hell? Why the heck should the visiting team have veto power?

    On the theory that it’s easier for the home team to go back to their equipment room — on site or not too far away — and dig out jerseys in contrasting colors than it is for the visiting team to pack two sets of jerseys.[/quote]

    Better solution – the home team announces their jersey choices before the season starts. The schedules are known far enough in advance, that shouldn’t be an issue. Even it’s just “light” or “dark” to allow last minute black alts like the Tennessee game, I don’t think the visiting team should be able to dictate the home uniform.

  • Giancarlo | November 3, 2009 at 11:08 am |

    [quote comment=”357889″]
    Of course, up until the 1970s when a pile of new teams invaded the NHL (“The Next Six”), everyone wore dark at home as well.
    [/quote]
    Teebz, you disappoint me. The Next Six joined the league in 1967.

  • concealed78 | November 3, 2009 at 11:10 am |

    Have to say, love that Invaders jersey, especially with the brown & Old Athletic Gold color scheme. The pixelated numbers were an interesting idea as well. You should use a thicker material & more stitching so it holds up better after washing. Tho I do really like the sharpness of screen printing (wish I had that equipment!)

  • Aaron | November 3, 2009 at 11:19 am |

    1. I sent Paul the email about the 1938 Chicago American Giants #OB, and I have to agree with the above commenters that there must have been something specifically unusual about them. The book “Black Baseball In Chicago” by Larry Lester, Sammy J. Miller and Dick Clark is a photographic history, so if anyone has access to it, there’s an off chance of finding a picture of the back of a ’38 American Giant.

    2. I intend to never wash my KC Scouts DIY jersey out of fear of how it would hold up…My 2 year old will no doubt get his Rangers jersey dirty enough that I’ll be forced to wash it. I’ll be nervous for sure when that happens.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 11:21 am |

    [quote comment=”357896″][quote]What the hell? Why the heck should the visiting team have veto power?[quote]

    On the theory that it’s easier for the home team to go back to their equipment room — on site or not too far away — and dig out jerseys in contrasting colors than it is for the visiting team to pack two sets of jerseys.[/quote]
    Why would a football team need to pack two sets of jerseys? They’ll go to Atlanta and then come right back to Winson-Salem after the game.

    It’s not as though they’re on an extended road trip which has them heading to Miami or Tallahassee or Boston from there.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 11:22 am |

    Fixed. I think.
    [quote comment=”357909″][quote]What the hell? Why the heck should the visiting team have veto power?[/quote]

    On the theory that it’s easier for the home team to go back to their equipment room — on site or not too far away — and dig out jerseys in contrasting colors than it is for the visiting team to pack two sets of jerseys.[/quote]
    Why would a football team need to pack two sets of jerseys? They’ll go to Atlanta and then come right back to Winson-Salem after the game.

    It’s not as though they’re on an extended road trip which has them heading to Miami or Tallahassee or Boston from there.

  • JimV19 | November 3, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    [quote comment=”357902″][quote comment=”357890″]When I found the blank jersey online, I thought it was black/yellow, but when I got it in the mail I was surprised to find it was brown/yellow.

    Wow… Somebody else besides my alma mater (Valparaiso University) made the conscious decision to use a brown and gold color scheme? Crazy![/quote]

    Wyoming anyone?[/quote]

    Western Michigan.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 11:26 am |

    [quote comment=”357901″]Ryan, great DIY idea, and kudos for keeping a level head when things didn’t turn out right.

    You should get a rival team to become the Pac-Men, or the Centipedes, or something like that…[/quote]
    Defenders?

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 11:28 am |

    [quote comment=”357906″][quote comment=”357889″]
    Of course, up until the 1970s when a pile of new teams invaded the NHL (“The Next Six”), everyone wore dark at home as well.
    [/quote]
    Teebz, you disappoint me. The Next Six joined the league in 1967.[/quote]

    Giancarlo, your disappointment is unfounded. The first time a team wore white at home as mandated by the NHL was in 1970-71. In fact, the Montreal Canadiens were the last team to wear their darks at home during that season.

    The NHL was still sorting itself out during the late-1960s. In case you may have forgotten, all of the Next Six teams were grouped together in one division. This led to an extremely unbalanced pool of talent where the Eastern Division teams – made of the Original Six teams – dominated the Western Division teams. The reason for this unbalance? The NHL wanted a newly-founded team to play for the Stanley Cup.

    In 1970, the NHL added two more teams in the Buffalo Sabres and the Vancouver Canucks. With all of the teams having colourful home jerseys, the NHL decided to put colour on the road where a team would be instantly recognized based on their colour scheme, thereby intensifying the rivalries.

    For the Original Six teams, this didn’t do much to intensify the already-heated matchups, but for the Pittsburgh-Philadelphia, Buffalo-New York Rangers, and California-Los Angeles rivalries, it gave instant recognition for the hatred of the other team if they weren’t wearing white. It didn’t matter if you knew who was coming to town: if they weren’t wearing white, they were the enemy.

  • War Damn Eagle | November 3, 2009 at 11:30 am |

    [quote comment=”357890″]When I found the blank jersey online, I thought it was black/yellow, but when I got it in the mail I was surprised to find it was brown/yellow.

    Wow… Somebody else besides my alma mater (Valparaiso University) made the conscious decision to use a brown and gold color scheme? Crazy![/quote]

    Other schools choosing this “interesting” color combo:

    Wyoming
    Baldwin-Wallace

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 11:35 am |

    [quote comment=”357914″][quote comment=”357890″]When I found the blank jersey online, I thought it was black/yellow, but when I got it in the mail I was surprised to find it was brown/yellow.

    Wow… Somebody else besides my alma mater (Valparaiso University) made the conscious decision to use a brown and gold color scheme? Crazy![/quote]

    Other schools choosing this “interesting” color combo:

    Wyoming
    Baldwin-Wallace[/quote]

    He didn’t really choose it. He said he thought it was black when he ordered it. Deciding to go with what you get isn’t exactly picking.

  • ClubMedSux | November 3, 2009 at 11:38 am |

    He didn’t really choose it. He said he thought it was black when he ordered it.

    For the record, I was referring to the manufacturer of the jersey.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 11:44 am |

    [quote comment=”357916″]He didn’t really choose it. He said he thought it was black when he ordered it.

    For the record, I was referring to the manufacturer of the jersey.[/quote]

    And that the Bruins had at one time chosen those colors, not Ryan’s Invaders (it’s Bruins’ vintage blank).

    —Ricko

  • ClubMedSux | November 3, 2009 at 11:47 am |

    And that the Bruins had at one time chosen those colors, not Ryan’s Invaders (it’s Bruins’ vintage blank).

    Oddly enough, Valpo has unofficially moved away from brown and gold to black and gold (at least for the basketball team–the school’s most visible representation). Must be the natural progression of things… maybe bees started out brown and yellow too?

  • War Damn Eagle | November 3, 2009 at 11:53 am |

    [quote comment=”357918″]And that the Bruins had at one time chosen those colors, not Ryan’s Invaders (it’s Bruins’ vintage blank).

    Oddly enough, Valpo has unofficially moved away from brown and gold to black and gold (at least for the basketball team–the school’s most visible representation). Must be the natural progression of things… maybe bees started out brown and yellow too?[/quote]

    Long Beach State?

  • david goodfriend | November 3, 2009 at 11:55 am |

    Love the ’63 army-navy photos. I was at that game which was less then a month after JFK was killed.
    I believe LBJ was at the game.

    I used to go to all the Army home games and that game was a thrill. Both teams were top 10.

    At the end of the game my friend and I ran on the field and asked Staubach for a autograph. He told us to hold on to his jersey and proceeded to take us into the dressing room. What a nice man.

    Army really blew that game!

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 12:02 pm |

    “The NHL wanted a newly-founded team to play for the Stanley Cup.”

    At the time, I remember thinking it was a really stupid idea.
    Then I figured out it actually was quite shrewd. Had they spread the new teams out in a newly-realigned East-West format, it likely would have kept the new teams lowly for a long time, and really handicapped their ability to garner a fan base.

    And it would have minimized, or in some cases perhaps even destroyed, some long standing rivalries among the Original Six.

    Instead, some new rivalries grew between new teams (N.Stars-Blues, N.Stars-Flyers certainly were heated hereabouts), as well as some dandies among new and old (N.Stars-Hawks, Flyers-Bruins).

    It turned out to be the best way possible to double the size of an existing league, without having to have appeared to create a “lower division”.

    Wasn’t long before that guarantee of a West team in the finals was removed, though, right? When did they change that, Teebz? After three or four seasons? Just enough years to give the West the “status” it needed to get going?

    —Ricko

  • Joe D | November 3, 2009 at 12:03 pm |

    INVADERS Jersey – nice work indeed but I have a comment.

    – the Invaders should have a 1970’s style base jersey, when the game was popular. The jersey you featured was a Boston Bruins model from the 30’s or 40’s.

    You could have gotten away with using the name Invaders , with usage of imagery and designs from early science fiction genre.

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 12:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”357918″]And that the Bruins had at one time chosen those colors, not Ryan’s Invaders (it’s Bruins’ vintage blank).

    Oddly enough, Valpo has unofficially moved away from brown and gold to black and gold (at least for the basketball team–the school’s most visible representation). Must be the natural progression of things… maybe bees started out brown and yellow too?[/quote]

    Yes, bees did start out as brown and yellow. Also, monarch butterflies used to be plain orange… and look at them now with their black stripes and random white spots…

  • Lwiedy | November 3, 2009 at 12:08 pm |

    Super Dave’s twin has also been seen at Dodger Stadium: http://www.hbo.com/l...

  • Lwiedy | November 3, 2009 at 12:10 pm |

    The NFL sweaters are great but I really like the MLB patterns: http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    …they replicate the team’s warm-up jackets.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 12:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”357925″]The NFL sweaters are great but I really like the MLB patterns: http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    …they replicate the team’s warm-up jackets.[/quote]

    You’re right. Definitely cool.

    (Where you been, dude?)

    —Ricko

  • Lwiedy | November 3, 2009 at 12:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”357926″][quote comment=”357925″]The NFL sweaters are great but I really like the MLB patterns: http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    …they replicate the team’s warm-up jackets.[/quote]

    You’re right. Definitely cool.

    (Where you been, dude?)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Oh man, I knew that was coming. I’m sorry, I’ve been around but real busy and most of the time I’m an “all-in” or “all-out” guy. Really just haven’t had time to check comments so I really don’t want to jump in and find that “Yeah, we’ve covered that”, but thanks for asking.

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 12:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”357921″]
    Wasn’t long before that guarantee of a West team in the finals was removed, though, right? When did they change that, Teebz? After three or four seasons? Just enough years to give the West the “status” it needed to get going?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    They really did it right when looking at the expansion idea despite its obvious talent flaws.

    The Canucks and Sabres were both put into the Eastern Division in 1970, thereby handicapping them significantly. However, the NHL gave the Western Division a power boost by moving the Blackhawks to the West. That season saw the Canadiens defeat the Blackhawks in seven games.

    The Blackhawks were far and away the best team in the West that season, and the NHL’s playoff format made little sense. The first-place team played the third-place team, while the second-place team played the fourth-place team in each division.

    Because of this, the North Stars are believed to have lost their final four regular season games in order to end up in fourth-place, guaranteeing them a date with the St. Louis Blues. This was a much better matchup for the Stars, and they defeated the Blues. However, they still ran into the Blackhawks who had swept the third-place Flyers. The Blackhawks made short work of the North Stars to represent the West in the Stanley Cup Final.

    Because of the North Stars unproven method to find a better matchup, the NHL opted for a one-four/two-three playoff format for the next season, but it came with a twist.

    In 1971-72, this format worked against the Western Division. The format was kept throughout the playoffs, meaning that Round Two featured the #1 Bruins (119 pts, East) against the #4 Blues (67, West), and the #2 Rangers (109, East) against the #3 Blackhawks (107, West). These were interdivisional matchups instead of West-West and East-East, thus allowing one divisional matchup to faceoff in the Stanley Cup Final.

    The Bruins and Rangers both won their series, guaranteeing an Eastern Division Stanley Cup Final. The Bruins prevailed over the Rangers.

    This same format happened in 1972-73. #1 Montreal (East) eliminated #4 Philadelphia (West), while #3 Chicago (West) eliminated #2 New York (East). Montreal defeated Chicago in the Final, but the West was represented in the Final.

    Philadelphia represented the West in 1973-74, but the NHL gained some playoff credibility when they went to four divisions in 1974-75, thereby eliminating the “atlas” divisions.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 12:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”357927″][quote comment=”357926″][quote comment=”357925″]The NFL sweaters are great but I really like the MLB patterns: http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    …they replicate the team’s warm-up jackets.[/quote]

    You’re right. Definitely cool.

    (Where you been, dude?)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Oh man, I knew that was coming. I’m sorry, I’ve been around but real busy and most of the time I’m an “all-in” or “all-out” guy. Really just haven’t had time to check comments so I really don’t want to jump in and find that “Yeah, we’ve covered that”, but thanks for asking.[/quote]

    np. Just making sure you’re okay.

  • Jeff P | November 3, 2009 at 12:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”357889″][quote comment=”357886″][quote comment=”357885″]I’ve explained the white-at-home phenomenon in the NHL before, but here’s why Phoenix went with white against the Kings.

    All NHL teams can apply to wear white at home with the NHL offices before the season starts. The NHL takes these requests into consideration when they are looking at the schedule with respect to who the team is playing so that the visiting team isn’t bringing a pile of laundry with them as they travel.

    Phoenix applied, and received the “ok” from the league’s offices because Los Angeles was on a one-game road trip to Phoenix. LA was only playing one game away from the Staples Center, so facilitating the white-at-home for Phoenix would be easy for the Kings’ equipment manager.[/quote]

    Teebz — why did the NHL switch from white at home a few years ago?[/quote]

    Jersey sales. The majority of jerseys that were being sold in home cities were white. In order to facilitate the alternate jersey craze, teams began wearing them at home, and the NHL saw the numbers spike for sales of those jerseys. The next logical step was to sell the then-road jerseys at home, and the easiest way was to have the teams wear them at home.

    Of course, up until the 1970s when a pile of new teams invaded the NHL (“The Next Six”), everyone wore dark at home as well. With all the new colour schemes and attempts to sell the new teams, the NHL had the road teams play in their dark uniforms to help sell these new teams. People remember the colourful better than the white uniforms, so it was easier to identify these new teams.

    The NHL will claim that historically this is how it happened, but that’s a thinly-veiled reason when it comes to dollars and cents.[/quote]

    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.

    The reason he gives is transport- for the same reason you mention with teams getting approval to do white at home, it’s so they don’t have to lug around two sets on every road trip. Alternate jerseys came into being, and most all teams used colored ones, forcing teams to lug around two sets of jerseys. Teams complained about transport costs and effort, so they went to color at home to simplify things.

  • Lwiedy | November 3, 2009 at 12:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”357925″]The NFL sweaters are great but I really like the MLB patterns: http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    …they replicate the team’s warm-up jackets.[/quote]

    Here are the NL’s:
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.

  • Jeff P | November 3, 2009 at 12:28 pm |

    Oh, and Paul, that Varsity jacket site may have some great jackets, but I think I have to call about the pricing on some of those sweaters.

    Bottom left especially.

    Amazing. Been looking for one of those.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 12:29 pm |

    [quote comment=”357931″][quote comment=”357925″]The NFL sweaters are great but I really like the MLB patterns: http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    …they replicate the team’s warm-up jackets.[/quote]

    Here are the NL’s:
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...

    I bid on the AL one, intending to sent it to Paul for scanning if I do win.

    Hopefully whoever bought the NL version is someone thinking the same thing. I really don’t want to have to buy them both. lol

    —Ricko

  • Elena | November 3, 2009 at 12:32 pm |

    I’ve tried knitting just enough to know I’d rather stick to sewing fabric, and crocheting. I asked my knitting-expert friend, who owns a few knitting machines, about intarsia. She said it requires an extraordinary amount of time to set up, and a large space. And to expect to pay $600-800 to get any knitter to make one of those football sweaters for you.

  • Jeff P | November 3, 2009 at 12:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”357932″][quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.[/quote]
    2% is not that much, and it didn’t really affect overall sales much at all, at least according to the guy with the numbers. Just the number of darks versus the number of lights, and that wasn’t much of an appreciable change.

    Third Jerseys and constant uniform changes have a much, much larger effect on jersey sales.

  • LI Phil | November 3, 2009 at 12:35 pm |

    welcome back, larry

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 12:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”357936″][quote comment=”357932″][quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.[/quote]
    2% is not that much, and it didn’t really affect overall sales much at all, at least according to the guy with the numbers. Just the number of darks versus the number of lights, and that wasn’t much of an appreciable change.

    Third Jerseys and constant uniform changes have a much, much larger effect on jersey sales.[/quote]

    The guy with numbers also inflates attendance numbers. I’m not saying he’s lying, but in your example, you said they sold 2:1. Simple ecomonics says that if you’re moving millions of dark jerseys at 2x the number of white jerseys, you can increase your profits ridiculously by selling at a higher ratio. 3:1 on average sales of 1 million jerseys at $250 is a lot of extra coin.

  • Lwiedy | November 3, 2009 at 12:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”357937″]welcome back, larry[/quote]

    Thanks, buddy. Never really left, always here in spirit! I’ll drop you a line.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 12:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”357935″]I’ve tried knitting just enough to know I’d rather stick to sewing fabric, and crocheting. I asked my knitting-expert friend, who owns a few knitting machines, about intarsia. She said it requires an extraordinary amount of time to set up, and a large space. And to expect to pay $600-800 to get any knitter to make one of those football sweaters for you.[/quote]

    Could, say, the logo graphics be incorporated into another existing pattern NOT designed for machine knitting?

    (I ask because, in another lifetime, the woman I was seeing knit me a fabulous shawl collar sweater/jacket as a Christmas gift, and she altered the pattern quite a bit, eliminating much of the extraneous crap)

    —Ricko

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”357938″][quote comment=”357936″][quote comment=”357932″][quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.[/quote]
    2% is not that much, and it didn’t really affect overall sales much at all, at least according to the guy with the numbers. Just the number of darks versus the number of lights, and that wasn’t much of an appreciable change.

    Third Jerseys and constant uniform changes have a much, much larger effect on jersey sales.[/quote]

    The guy with numbers also inflates attendance numbers. I’m not saying he’s lying, but in your example, you said they sold 2:1. Simple ecomonics says that if you’re moving millions of dark jerseys at 2x the number of white jerseys, you can increase your profits ridiculously by selling at a higher ratio. 3:1 on average sales of 1 million jerseys at $250 is a lot of extra coin.[/quote]
    So you’re saying that 75% of jerseys sold are of the dark variety? Where’s that info coming from?

    Not challenging you, just wondering.

  • DJ | November 3, 2009 at 12:42 pm |

    The Canucks and Sabres were both put into the Eastern Division in 1970, thereby handicapping them significantly.

    But this did put all three Canadian teams in the same division, as well as creating a geographic divisional rival in Toronto vs. Buffalo. It enabled the Canucks and Sabres to get a lot of big-interest games right out of the gate.

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 12:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”357941″][quote comment=”357938″][quote comment=”357936″][quote comment=”357932″][quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.[/quote]
    2% is not that much, and it didn’t really affect overall sales much at all, at least according to the guy with the numbers. Just the number of darks versus the number of lights, and that wasn’t much of an appreciable change.

    Third Jerseys and constant uniform changes have a much, much larger effect on jersey sales.[/quote]

    The guy with numbers also inflates attendance numbers. I’m not saying he’s lying, but in your example, you said they sold 2:1. Simple ecomonics says that if you’re moving millions of dark jerseys at 2x the number of white jerseys, you can increase your profits ridiculously by selling at a higher ratio. 3:1 on average sales of 1 million jerseys at $250 is a lot of extra coin.[/quote]
    So you’re saying that 75% of jerseys sold are of the dark variety? Where’s that info coming from?

    Not challenging you, just wondering.[/quote]

    I’m just saying that economics, the driving force behind business, forced the change back to dark. With teams wearing their alternate jerseys at home, it caused a spike in the 1990s in terms of the number of alt jerseys sold. With the change back to dark – something that people remember vividly – it would account for an increase in sales.

    When we think of hockey jerseys, we never think white first. It’s always the bold blue of the Maple Leafs, the red of the Canadiens, the yellow-and-black of the Bruins.

    Moving back to dark is an economic move as much as it is a traditional one. My example of the ratio is simply to explain the rationale behind the move.

    Sorry for not being clearer before! :)

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”357938″][quote comment=”357936″][quote comment=”357932″][quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.[/quote]
    2% is not that much, and it didn’t really affect overall sales much at all, at least according to the guy with the numbers. Just the number of darks versus the number of lights, and that wasn’t much of an appreciable change.

    Third Jerseys and constant uniform changes have a much, much larger effect on jersey sales.[/quote]

    The guy with numbers also inflates attendance numbers. I’m not saying he’s lying, but in your example, you said they sold 2:1. Simple ecomonics says that if you’re moving millions of dark jerseys at 2x the number of white jerseys, you can increase your profits ridiculously by selling at a higher ratio. 3:1 on average sales of 1 million jerseys at $250 is a lot of extra coin.[/quote]

    I think you’re missing something.

    The ratio of sales doesn’t mean anything unless there’s also an increase in total sales.

    If you sell 10 million jerseys with a 2:1 dark/light ratio, that’s 6.67 dark and 3.33 light. If the ratio changes to 3:1 but you still sell only 10 million, now it’s 7.5 dark, 2.5 light. Doesn’t mean more money, unless you’re also selling the darker ones for a higher price.

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”357942″]The Canucks and Sabres were both put into the Eastern Division in 1970, thereby handicapping them significantly.

    But this did put all three Canadian teams in the same division, as well as creating a geographic divisional rival in Toronto vs. Buffalo. It enabled the Canucks and Sabres to get a lot of big-interest games right out of the gate.[/quote]

    True, which is important. But neither team were close to sniffing the playoffs where the real heated rivalries are formed.

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 12:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”357944″][quote comment=”357938″][quote comment=”357936″][quote comment=”357932″][quote comment=”357930″]
    Not really. Colored jerseys have always outsold whites by about a 2:1 margin. Bettman gives the percentage figures when asked that question on his radio show, since they changed, the percentage of colored jerseys sold to white ones has gone up one or two percent, and there really was no drastic change in jersey sales overall. it went from something like 65% to 67% jerseys sold being colored ones.[/quote]

    Except 2:1 moving to 3:1 is a significant jump when you consider than millions of jerseys are being moved.[/quote]
    2% is not that much, and it didn’t really affect overall sales much at all, at least according to the guy with the numbers. Just the number of darks versus the number of lights, and that wasn’t much of an appreciable change.

    Third Jerseys and constant uniform changes have a much, much larger effect on jersey sales.[/quote]

    The guy with numbers also inflates attendance numbers. I’m not saying he’s lying, but in your example, you said they sold 2:1. Simple ecomonics says that if you’re moving millions of dark jerseys at 2x the number of white jerseys, you can increase your profits ridiculously by selling at a higher ratio. 3:1 on average sales of 1 million jerseys at $250 is a lot of extra coin.[/quote]

    I think you’re missing something.

    The ratio of sales doesn’t mean anything unless there’s also an increase in total sales.

    If you sell 10 million jerseys with a 2:1 dark/light ratio, that’s 6.67 dark and 3.33 light. If the ratio changes to 3:1 but you still sell only 10 million, now it’s 7.5 dark, 2.5 light. Doesn’t mean more money, unless you’re also selling the darker ones for a higher price.[/quote]

    If I could guarantee 10 million sales of jerseys in one year, I’d still need to find a way to improve my market share. Alternates jerseys are that attempt to pick up more of the market share. After all, I don’t know too many people that own a closet of red Blackhawks jerseys. :o)

    However, as I stated, the jump in terms of selling three dark jerseys for every one white jersey is based on the one white jersey. If I sell 1 million white jerseys, I’m guaranteed to sell 3 million dark jerseys if the ratio holds true.

    Again, it’s not a perfect system. It’s just an example that moving to the dark jerseys is an economic ideal by the NHL: dark jerseys are loved by fans, and they sell more if they’re seen more.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 12:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”357942″]The Canucks and Sabres were both put into the Eastern Division in 1970, thereby handicapping them significantly.

    But this did put all three Canadian teams in the same division, as well as creating a geographic divisional rival in Toronto vs. Buffalo. It enabled the Canucks and Sabres to get a lot of big-interest games right out of the gate.[/quote]

    Yup. New teams weren’t gonna make the playoffs the first couple years anyway, better to let fans in those markets get a look at the league’s famous teams. Again, for all its apparent lack of brainpower these days, the NHL really did do their first expansions with some insightful marketing strategies (though not necessarily recognized as such at the time).

    —Ricko

  • allenjd | November 3, 2009 at 1:02 pm |

    Pat Forde hears rumours of an all-silver Ohio State combo this month:

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

  • Giancarlo | November 3, 2009 at 1:04 pm |

    Thanks for the background, Teebz. Like I said before, you never disappoint me. I’ve always thought it kind of cool that the NHL’s original six wore primary colors & black whereas 4 of the 6 Next Six teams wore secondary colors (plus the Penguins wore a previously unseen light blue). That was good color-strategizing.

  • Teebz | November 3, 2009 at 1:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”357950″]Thanks for the background, Teebz. Like I said before, you never disappoint me. I’ve always thought it kind of cool that the NHL’s original six wore primary colors & black whereas 4 of the 6 Next Six teams wore secondary colors (plus the Penguins wore a previously unseen light blue). That was good color-strategizing.[/quote]

    I agree, Giancarlo. :o)

    Like Ricko said, it was some ingenious marketing on the NHL’s part early on to get a solid foothold on those cities. Unfortunately, they were a little off when it came to Atlanta and Oakland, but the southern cities are still struggling to adopt the game today.

  • aliceq | November 3, 2009 at 5:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”357893″][quote comment=”357891″]

    One of the intriguing things about those sweaters is that I imagine they’d give someone the ability to alter the designs, to customize them. Wouldn’t take much to eliminate the white panel, or the stripes, or both, would it?

    Or change the colors…say, update the Rams from their 1990 royal-athletic gold to today’s navy-old gold?

    Or re-pattern the Giants helmet with the “ny”?

    Correct?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Absolutely correct. You could do oddball things like make a Giants logo sweater in Packers colors. And, adding panels on the sides (or removing them) is similar to what you might have to do to get a custom fit (think changing a men’s XL to a kids’ M).

  • Joe | November 3, 2009 at 5:40 pm |

    Recovered from the comments pre-update
    [quote comment=”358009″][quote comment=”358007″][quote comment=”358006″]Maybe now that they’re going to hire Ernie Accorsi and Bernie Kosar to run the front office, the Browns will go back to the white pants.
    Oh, and keep the striped socks too.
    http://missioncritic...

    yup

    despite what all the white-at-home haters say, that is easily one of the top 10 unis of all time

    just a fantastic (and classic) look[/quote]
    You never look tougher than with an all-white jersey covered in mud, grass, and blood.[/quote]

  • aliceq | November 3, 2009 at 5:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”357940″]
    Could, say, the logo graphics be incorporated into another existing pattern NOT designed for machine knitting?

    (I ask because, in another lifetime, the woman I was seeing knit me a fabulous shawl collar sweater/jacket as a Christmas gift, and she altered the pattern quite a bit, eliminating much of the extraneous crap)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Sure. In about 2 seconds, I turned up a pattern for mittens with a Canadiens logo, and in the appropriate colors, two different Red Sox hats. It took a little longer to find a baby hat with a U of Louisville Cardinal on it.

  • Paul Lukas | November 3, 2009 at 7:06 pm |

    Thanks for bearing with us thru this afternoon’s tech repairs. Should be good to go now.

  • John Ekdahl | November 3, 2009 at 7:14 pm |

    All the site’s posts will now be tweeted.

    Follow us at: twitter.com/uniwatch

  • Anne | November 3, 2009 at 7:38 pm |

    Hey now, there are LOTS of knitters who like sports – including some of your readers. Someone already mentioned Ravelry.com and if you were a member, you could see that there are dozens of groups related to sports (I run one with over a thousand Red Sox fans who also knit and crochet) and probably hundreds or thousands of uni-related knitting projects, ranging from socks to sweaters to hats and mittens. I myself have seriously considered knitting stirrups and may eventually do it one of these days.

    And yes, Ricko, you could easily modify those designs to reflect your particular preferences – there are websites and software that can help you design an intarsia or other colorwork pattern. Also, machine knit patterns have to be translated a bit for hand-knitting, but it’s not terribly hard to do. You can email me if you have more specific questions.

  • Ricko | November 3, 2009 at 7:55 pm |

    Is this thing on?

  • timmy b | November 3, 2009 at 8:00 pm |

    Teebz can corrected me if I’m wrong, but haveing done extensive research on the subject five-eight years, I think this is an accurate timeline for NHL white/color at home:

    1917-1951: No rule. Teams can wear whatever they want at home (as long as there was no color clash (though I have spotted white vs white at times))

    1951-roughly end November 1955: White at home, dark away. The NHL beats the NFL with a one team color/one team white mandate by six years!

    Roughly beginning December 1955-1970: White (or gold) away/Dark home. Though the 1965-1967 Bruins frequently wore white at home for reasons unknown.

    1970-2003*: Dark away/white (or gold) home.

    2003-present: White away/Dark home.

    *Note that from after the All-Star game to the end of the regular season in 1991-92, teams wore white away and dark at home.

  • Casey L. | November 3, 2009 at 8:02 pm |

    A possible argument against color-on-color matchups (though there’s no excuse for this):

    http://sports.yahoo....

  • LI Phil | November 3, 2009 at 8:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”357962″]Is this thing on?[/quote]

    yup

  • Hithere | November 3, 2009 at 9:03 pm |

    Kind of random, but I want to know why Devin Hester is still allowed to wear 23. He’s not listed as a DB anymore.

  • Hibbsy | November 3, 2009 at 9:07 pm |

    It’s amazing how good the The Violent Femmes and The Dead Milkmen really were.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 9:14 pm |

    Wow, comments are being quoted with the original author’s handle once again. This takes me back to the early days of the Uni Watch blog.

  • Oakville Endive | November 3, 2009 at 9:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”357928″][quote comment=”357921″]
    Wasn’t long before that guarantee of a West team in the finals was removed, though, right? When did they change that, Teebz? After three or four seasons? Just enough years to give the West the “status” it needed to get going?

    —Ricko[/quote]

    They really did it right when looking at the expansion idea despite its obvious talent flaws.

    The Canucks and Sabres were both put into the Eastern Division in 1970, thereby handicapping them significantly. However, the NHL gave the Western Division a power boost by moving the Blackhawks to the West. That season saw the Canadiens defeat the Blackhawks in seven games.

    The Blackhawks were far and away the best team in the West that season, and the NHL’s playoff format made little sense. The first-place team played the third-place team, while the second-place team played the fourth-place team in each division.

    Because of this, the North Stars are believed to have lost their final four regular season games in order to end up in fourth-place, guaranteeing them a date with the St. Louis Blues. This was a much better matchup for the Stars, and they defeated the Blues. However, they still ran into the Blackhawks who had swept the third-place Flyers. The Blackhawks made short work of the North Stars to represent the West in the Stanley Cup Final.

    Because of the North Stars unproven method to find a better matchup, the NHL opted for a one-four/two-three playoff format for the next season, but it came with a twist.

    In 1971-72, this format worked against the Western Division. The format was kept throughout the playoffs, meaning that Round Two featured the #1 Bruins (119 pts, East) against the #4 Blues (67, West), and the #2 Rangers (109, East) against the #3 Blackhawks (107, West). These were interdivisional matchups instead of West-West and East-East, thus allowing one divisional matchup to faceoff in the Stanley Cup Final.

    The Bruins and Rangers both won their series, guaranteeing an Eastern Division Stanley Cup Final. The Bruins prevailed over the Rangers.

    This same format happened in 1972-73. #1 Montreal (East) eliminated #4 Philadelphia (West), while #3 Chicago (West) eliminated #2 New York (East). Montreal defeated Chicago in the Final, but the West was represented in the Final.

    Philadelphia represented the West in 1973-74, but the NHL gained some playoff credibility when they went to four divisions in 1974-75, thereby eliminating the “atlas” divisions.[/quote]

    When helping my parents move this past summer, found a 1971 edition of the Montreal Star sport section – the headline was a game 1 victory for Montreal over Minnesota in that year’s play-offs. This was the series after Montreal pulled off a stunning upset of the Big Bad Boston Bruins in the first round – and the crowd for that first game of the semi-final – was just over 16,000 (not a sell-out) – Montreal was/and always has been a fickle sports market.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 9:46 pm |

    Hey, new anti-spam words as well.

    Here’s another one from before the shutdown.
    [quote comment=”357980″]If I can swing it, I might put together a UW Winter Classic t-shirt. Any interest in this?

    And no, you don’t have to attend to get one. My goal is to keep the price in the $10-20 range, and make them available to all that want them.

    Oui ou non pour les vetements?[/quote]
    So what’d you have in mind for a design, Teebz?

    And does that last bit say something about the UW Winter Classic being a clothing-optional event?

  • LI Phil | November 3, 2009 at 10:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”357970″]Hey, new anti-spam words as well.

    Here’s another one from before the shutdown.
    [quote comment=”357980″]If I can swing it, I might put together a UW Winter Classic t-shirt. Any interest in this?

    And no, you don’t have to attend to get one. My goal is to keep the price in the $10-20 range, and make them available to all that want them.

    Oui ou non pour les vetements?[/quote]
    So what’d you have in mind for a design, Teebz?

    And does that last bit say something about the UW Winter Classic being a clothing-optional event?[/quote]

    something like this, right teebz?

    and yes, james, it’s clothing optional

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 10:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”357971″][quote comment=”357970″]Hey, new anti-spam words as well.

    Here’s another one from before the shutdown.
    [quote comment=”357980″]If I can swing it, I might put together a UW Winter Classic t-shirt. Any interest in this?

    And no, you don’t have to attend to get one. My goal is to keep the price in the $10-20 range, and make them available to all that want them.

    Oui ou non pour les vetements?[/quote]
    So what’d you have in mind for a design, Teebz?

    And does that last bit say something about the UW Winter Classic being a clothing-optional event?[/quote]

    something like this, right teebz?

    and yes, james, it’s clothing optional[/quote]
    Except for stirrups, right? Those are required.

  • interlockingtc | November 3, 2009 at 10:12 pm |

    [quote comment=”357963″]Teebz can corrected me if I’m wrong, but haveing done extensive research on the subject five-eight years, I think this is an accurate timeline for NHL white/color at home:

    1917-1951: No rule. Teams can wear whatever they want at home (as long as there was no color clash (though I have spotted white vs white at times))

    1951-roughly end November 1955: White at home, dark away. The NHL beats the NFL with a one team color/one team white mandate by six years!

    Roughly beginning December 1955-1970: White (or gold) away/Dark home. Though the 1965-1967 Bruins frequently wore white at home for reasons unknown.

    1970-2003*: Dark away/white (or gold) home.

    2003-present: White away/Dark home.

    *Note that from after the All-Star game to the end of the regular season in 1991-92, teams wore white away and dark at home.[/quote]

    “1970-2003*: Dark away/white (or gold) home.”

    Yes, and if you grew up watching the NHL during this period as I did (specificaly the ’70’s, the association with white at home is so strong that I still cannot get used to the dark at home. Stubborn or simply embedded in my mind? I dunno. But I think white at home, at least in hockey, looks right. The good guys: swift, visible, identifiable. The bad guys: slow, dark, interchangable.

  • JimV19 | November 3, 2009 at 10:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”357966″]Kind of random, but I want to know why Devin Hester is still allowed to wear 23. He’s not listed as a DB anymore.[/quote]

    I’m not sure. I know when Roy Green of the St. Louis Football Cardinals switched from DB to WR, he went from 25 to 81. Don’t know if he had to or if he just chose that.

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 11:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”357974″][quote comment=”357966″]Kind of random, but I want to know why Devin Hester is still allowed to wear 23. He’s not listed as a DB anymore.[/quote]

    I’m not sure. I know when Roy Green of the St. Louis Football Cardinals switched from DB to WR, he went from 25 to 81. Don’t know if he had to or if he just chose that.[/quote]
    The Bears have another wide receiver who used to play cornerback. Rashied Davis wore #21 his rookie year. When he switched to offense the next season, he went to #81.

    The difference? There weren’t a whole lot of unsold Rashied Davis #21 jerseys lying around prior to the 2006 season.

  • The Jeff | November 3, 2009 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”357974″][quote comment=”357966″]Kind of random, but I want to know why Devin Hester is still allowed to wear 23. He’s not listed as a DB anymore.[/quote]

    I’m not sure. I know when Roy Green of the St. Louis Football Cardinals switched from DB to WR, he went from 25 to 81. Don’t know if he had to or if he just chose that.[/quote]

    Well the number rules are more relaxed lately with the recent allowance of 10-19 as WR numbers. Maybe the NFL just decided to let him slide since he’s still wearing an eligible number.

  • Shaun | November 3, 2009 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”357974″][quote comment=”357966″]Kind of random, but I want to know why Devin Hester is still allowed to wear 23. He’s not listed as a DB anymore.[/quote]

    I’m not sure. I know when Roy Green of the St. Louis Football Cardinals switched from DB to WR, he went from 25 to 81. Don’t know if he had to or if he just chose that.[/quote]

    just feel like messin with the quoting thing and new anti spam words =)

  • Ray | November 3, 2009 at 11:26 pm |

    People just love that neon green nowadays

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

  • JTH | November 3, 2009 at 11:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”357976″][quote comment=”357974″][quote comment=”357966″]Kind of random, but I want to know why Devin Hester is still allowed to wear 23. He’s not listed as a DB anymore.[/quote]

    I’m not sure. I know when Roy Green of the St. Louis Football Cardinals switched from DB to WR, he went from 25 to 81. Don’t know if he had to or if he just chose that.[/quote]

    Well the number rules are more relaxed lately with the recent allowance of 10-19 as WR numbers. Maybe the NFL just decided to let him slide since he’s still wearing an eligible number.[/quote]
    They could always argue that he’s a flanker. And since that position started life as one of the halfbacks in the T formation, 23 is a perfectly reasonable number.

  • ripped pants | November 4, 2009 at 12:25 am |

    Has this ever been mentioned with the Canucks shoulder?

    http://fr.wikipedia....

  • ripped pants | November 4, 2009 at 12:28 am |

    If you grew up in Canada you would know the Vashon logo is part of pop culture,,,They made the Canadian versions of Hostess cakes (joe louis/half moons, twinkies,etc)

  • ripped pants | November 4, 2009 at 12:28 am |

    *Vachon

  • =bg= | November 4, 2009 at 12:44 am |

    [quote comment=”357876″]Not sure which is tackier — dressing up as Dravecky or running a photo of a guy who dressed up as him.[/quote]

    Yup, pretty poor taste with that photo.

  • Drew | November 6, 2009 at 1:31 am |

    Ryan,

    Love the jerseys and the double entendre old school with the 30s Bruins sweaters and 80s graphics. The numbering was beautiful.

    The fabric you need is a rayon or poly twill–something synthetic which does not fray when washed.