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

But I Absolutely Refuse to Write About the Draft Caps

Screen shot 2010-03-01 at 2.59.32 PM.png

As you may recall from the lead-up to the Super Bowl, the NFL is introducing a new logo system for the big game. Turns out they’re also revising a bunch of other logos and graphics. Let’s take a look:

The new conference logos: The new letterforms are fine — an improvement, even — but the new treatment of the stars is a classic case of overthinking. Did anyone out there equate the number of stars with the number of divisions in each conference? Like, anyone? And now the AFC mark looks badly out of balance. Pfeh.

The new offseason and preseason logos: I’m fine with the change in the shield shape. Seems like the two-line wordmarks (“Scouting Combine” and “Training Camp”) were easier to read in the old configuration, though.

The new conference championship trophies: What a disaster. They’ve taken a pair of interesting trophy designs and turned them into a pair of junior-grade Lombardi Trophy clones. Boooo!

The new playoff logos: Okay, so it’s not like the old designs were anything to get excited about. But these new marks are a total snooze-o-rama, no? Yes, I get it, the entire postseason is lead-up to the Lombardi Bowl, but you’d think they could come up with a bit more graphic originality here. Also: Why does each round of the playoff need to be branded anyway? Total overkill. Why not come up with logos for Week 1, Week 2, and so on while you’re at it? (You just know someone at the NFL offices is taking that suggestion very seriously.) Also-also: Note that the new logo set shows “Wildcard” as one word — let’s hope that’s just a typo and not their new style rule.

The new standardized Super Bowl logo: After thinking long and hard about this, I plead indifference. On the one hand, it was kinda nice when each Super Bowl got its own logo design; on the other hand, most of those designs sucked. Imposing a standardized design program doesn’t have to be a bad thing, although it would be nice if the design motif they’re using didn’t have that annoying “WE’RE THE NFL AND WE’RE HUUUUUGE!” feel to it. On the other hand, I’m kind of amazed they’re going with a sans serif font — almost wussy by NFL standards. Whatever, the Super Bowl may be the biggest event on the planet, but the Lombardi Trophy is still nothing compared to the Stanley Cup, no matter how many Lombardi-esque logos the NFL comes up with, the end.

Uni Watch News Ticker: New soccer kit for Scotland. Additional info here (with thanks to Michael Orr and Patrick Runge). … Fausto Carmona was pitching with a white glove the other day. That wouldn’t fly during a game. … Mike Sweeney has been wearing those annoying Phiten socks, which really ought to be banned. … A.J. Pierzynski is still wearing that odd catching helmet that nobody else seems to wear. … Some touch-up paint work is going on in Orioles camp. … Could someone please buy this curling sweater knitting pattern and knit it for me, pronto? Thanks. … Ed Price reports that Blue Jays pitcher Kyle Drabek is wearing No. 4. He doesn’t have much shot at making the Opening Day roster, but if he made it he’d be the first single-digit pitcher since Josh Towers, and the lowest-numbered pitcher since David Wells wore No. 3 in 2005. Further info here. … Man vs. Food host Adam Richman continues to wear the Naming Wrongs T-shirt line. That photo is, of course, from Cleveland, where he recently took the Melt Challenge: a five-pound grilled cheese sandwich with 13 different cheeses). “The episode will air in June, but the folks at Melt posted some pictures on their Facebook page,” says Jason Tirotta, who forwarded that photo to me. … Color-on-color hoops alert. That’s from Saturday night’s Premier Basketball League game between the Lawton-Fort Sill Cavalry and the Maryland GreenHawks (with thanks to Chuck Miller). … There are lots of good reasons to wear green and gold, but Man U fans recently did so to protest the team’s ownership (with thanks to Andrew Maloney). … I’m not sure why anyone would want a Knicks-themed snowboard, but here it is anyway (with thanks to Jon Alviani). … Marc Swanson took a stab at colorizing one of the wire photos from yesterday’s post and did a great job. … Looks like the new MLB undershirts have heat zones, or something along those lines. … Do you look, sound, or act like Vince Lombardi? If so, there may be a role for you on Broadway (nice find by Nick Ruggeri). … Excellent slideshow of old White Sox program covers — set to the old “Go-Go White Sox” song — here (superb find by Lance “Squiddie” Smith). … Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh). … Slate ran a really good article yesterday about sign design (with thanks to Andrew Moeschberger). … Soccer tip from Chris Cruz, who writes: “The UK-based magazine/website When Saturday Comes has a very interesting regular feature that has a badge (club crest), shirt, and sticker of the week. A great site for checking out soccer fashion.” … The horror, the horror (blame the Rev. Nørb). … Amusing douchebag maneuver over at the D-League, which has banned all non-Adidas branding. This would but a lot more contemptible if anyone on the entire planet actually gave a shit about the D-League. … Some guy in Cleveland wants a new uni number.

 

195 comments to But I Absolutely Refuse to Write About the Draft Caps

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 8:15 am |

    from the ticker:

    Marc Swanson took a stab at colorizing one of the wire photos from yesterday’s post and did a great job.

    indeed; late yesterday in the comments, it was revealed that the sweaters were actually red with white and blue stripes, like so

    that’s why B&W photos are so frustrating sometimes — i would have bet money the sweater was blue, with red and white stripes, based on the black and white

    great job…wrong colors…i almost like the dark blue better

  • Justin | March 2, 2010 at 8:36 am |

    I’d venture to say that the “improved” playoff logos are going to look quite awful when painted on the playing field. Ditto for the new SB crap.

  • Bob A | March 2, 2010 at 8:36 am |

    Wait, I missed this… you mean they are using the same basic logo for every Super Bowl from now on? Are you f’ing kidding me? Absolutely the worst decision the NFL has ever made. Even the crappy Super Bowl logos were cool. This just sucks.

  • josh's twin | March 2, 2010 at 8:36 am |

    Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.

  • The Jeff | March 2, 2010 at 8:46 am |

    Well I’m cool with the NFL’s new logo system. No one outside of this site actually cares what the logo is anyway.

    As for that colorized hockey picture… I’m seriously wondering if the NHL didn’t screw up the new version. The black & white shot really really really really really makes it look like it should be blue. Red does not typically look lighter than any dark shade of blue.

    In fact here’s the red version in black & white:
    http://img43.imagesh...

    That does NOT look like the jersey in the old photo at all.

  • pk | March 2, 2010 at 8:48 am |

    Seems like the NFL is taking the UFL’s template of making everything the same..

  • Roger Faso | March 2, 2010 at 8:52 am |

    Shading to simulate a shiny metal is tacky, for a logo. It will look worse on a jersey patch or field paint. Flat color is the way to go. If you want your logo to look metallic, just use a metal.

  • The Jeff | March 2, 2010 at 8:54 am |

    [quote comment=”379992″]Well I’m cool with the NFL’s new logo system. No one outside of this site actually cares what the logo is anyway.

    As for that colorized hockey picture… I’m seriously wondering if the NHL didn’t screw up the new version. The black & white shot really really really really really makes it look like it should be blue. Red does not typically look lighter* than any dark shade of blue.

    In fact here’s the red version in black & white:
    http://img43.imagesh...

    That does NOT look like the jersey in the old photo at all.[/quote]

    *darker

    (stupid lack of a preview window)

  • traxel | March 2, 2010 at 8:56 am |

    [quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    I agree completely. My favorite MLB jersey (seriously) needs to be someone else – Wilbur Wood, Alan Bannister, Mike Squires, Chet Lemon, Ralph Garr…

  • Andy | March 2, 2010 at 9:00 am |

    [quote comment=”379992″]Well I’m cool with the NFL’s new logo system. No one outside of this site actually cares what the logo is anyway.

    As for that colorized hockey picture… I’m seriously wondering if the NHL didn’t screw up the new version. The black & white shot really really really really really makes it look like it should be blue. Red does not typically look lighter than any dark shade of blue.

    The new Hunt and Halas trophies might be strange and not terribly attractive or appealing, but you’ve got to admit that the old trophies were even more strange, ass-ugly and outdated. I will not miss those at all. They looked like bowling league trophies, circa 1974.

    In fact here’s the red version in black & white:
    http://img43.imagesh...

    That does NOT look like the jersey in the old photo at all.[/quote]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.

  • KT | March 2, 2010 at 9:01 am |

    Well, hell, Halas and Hunt are both dead now, so why not mess with their trophies?

    And how much do you think Tiffany got for designing those baby conference Lombardis? Whatever it was, it was too much. Holy cow. How short was THAT design meeting?

  • JimWa | March 2, 2010 at 9:13 am |

    Yeah, I posted it yesterday afternoon, but it’s too beautiful for those that didn’t see it to miss out …

    http://www.baseball-...

  • Joe Barrie | March 2, 2010 at 9:13 am |

    Carmona’s glove is tan, with sun glare caught by the camera at that moment.

    Many Rawlings gloves are that shade.

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 9:15 am |

    What – no “NFL Labor Negotiations” or “NFL Lockout” logos?

    As for all the logos they did tweak, that’s money they could have put into the players’ concussion fund.

  • Ry Co 40 | March 2, 2010 at 9:16 am |

    [quote comment=”379997″][quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    I agree completely. My favorite MLB jersey (seriously) needs to be someone else – Wilbur Wood, Alan Bannister, Mike Squires, Chet Lemon, Ralph Garr…[/quote]

    DIY it traxel!

  • Geenf | March 2, 2010 at 9:17 am |

    [quote comment=”379993″]Seems like the NFL is taking FIFA’s template of making everything the same..[/quote]

    Fixed your post.

  • Jordan Sogn | March 2, 2010 at 9:17 am |

    I wonder if the NFL is still going to paint the “Play 60” logo on the fields certain weeks…To me, it’s Bush League.

  • Geenf | March 2, 2010 at 9:18 am |

    The When Saturday Comes site has a link to Classic Football Shirts, which provided photos from some of the Kits of Yesteryear.

    What an abomination I saw on the front of that site today:

    http://www.classicfo...

    This makes the Norwegian curling team’s pants actually look GOOD.

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 9:23 am |

    Paul Lukas said:
    “Could someone please buy this curling sweater knitting pattern and knit it for me, pronto?”
    http://gupanddave.ea...

    That would go great with Norway’s curling pants, eh?

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 9:28 am |

    [quote comment=”380002″]that’s money they could have put into the players’ concussion fund.[/quote]

    or the jimmy mac fund

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 9:39 am |

    Considering the NFL’s opinion of itself, it’s completely understandable, and not surprising, that the logo for their championship is being changed to what might be (is?) the most obvious and ridiculous phallic symbol in big-time sports.

    Hard to believe a corporation/organization would so unashamed about showing its narcissism.

    Or maybe the truth is that they’re so overwhelmed with their own “we’re the big dog” smugness that they’re oblivious to what they’re doing…and how it looks.

    I once said of a co-worker, “He’s too full of himself to realize how conceited he looks.” Seems to apply to the NFL here.

    —Ricko

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 9:48 am |

    I don’t know, Paul, that Purple Store had some interesting things. Too bad they don’t sell these for men:
    http://www.thepurple...

    Is there a Neon Green Store?

  • Adam | March 2, 2010 at 9:49 am |

    The NFL should be ashamed of itself, especially taking away the Hunt and Halas trophies…

  • Mike from Queens | March 2, 2010 at 9:50 am |

    [quote comment=”379999″]Well, hell, Halas and Hunt are both dead now, so why not mess with their trophies?[/quote]

    How about, because they’re dead?

  • A Tama | March 2, 2010 at 9:51 am |

    Isn’t part of the reason you have a logo is to make your product instantly recognizable without asking someone to read all the details? Nice job NFL, making all the logos look the same which makes it more difficult to figure out. I liked the old approach, in which they were all similar enough that you new they were NFL but they had some distinct differences. Classic case of overthinking.

  • The Jeff | March 2, 2010 at 9:55 am |

    [quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.

  • ScottyM | March 2, 2010 at 9:56 am |

    Paul, there’s gold in them thar hills of the NBA D-League. The franchises can’t accomplish anything without the league intervening.

    For example, say I want to buy Fort Wayne Mad Ants apparel … you’d think when visiting Fort Wayne, I could do so? Nope. Nowhere but AT the games, or the piddly amount of stuff available online at the D-League site (a few shirts).

    Apparently, the franchises are struggling to build a merchandise following (ala MiLB) because they aren’t able to actually sell at retail outlets (like Dick’s, etc.).

  • The Jeff | March 2, 2010 at 9:59 am |

    [quote comment=”380012″][quote comment=”379999″]Well, hell, Halas and Hunt are both dead now, so why not mess with their trophies?[/quote]

    How about, because they’re dead?[/quote]

    Did Hunt or Halas design the original trophies? If they actually did, then yeah the NFL shouldn’t have touched them. But if they didn’t… what’s the problem? Halas & Hunt are still being honored and remembered by the fact that the trophies are named after them. The actual design of the trophy doesn’t really matter.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 9:59 am |

    Ocho Cinco on DANCING WITH THE STARS?

    That’s the story out there.

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | March 2, 2010 at 10:02 am |

    [quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

  • Richard | March 2, 2010 at 10:04 am |

    The AFC logo purges a historical reference to the AFL. I would think the Chiefs at least would make a stink about that.

    The plus the ruining of 2 perfectly good trophies, and the whole stars=divisions idiocy…

    This package is a victory only for the anal retentive types who need everything matching exactly (like people who want 2 stripes on the Colts helmets)

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 10:07 am |

    [quote comment=”380016″][quote comment=”380012″][quote comment=”379999″]Well, hell, Halas and Hunt are both dead now, so why not mess with their trophies?[/quote]

    How about, because they’re dead?[/quote]

    Did Hunt or Halas design the original trophies? If they actually did, then yeah the NFL shouldn’t have touched them. But if they didn’t… what’s the problem? Halas & Hunt are still being honored and remembered by the fact that the trophies are named after them. The actual design of the trophy doesn’t really matter.[/quote]

    Actually, when you come right down, nothing at all. Had they dropped the names, that would have been shameful.

    I guess what takes some of us aback is how every once in a while branding runs amok. Everything has to be new, and the same, and sleek, and modern, and updated.

    And there is logic to that, yes. Sometimes, though, it runs so far out that the limb supporting it gets pretty thin.

    You probably aren’t old enough to remember how well “new” Coke went over.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | March 2, 2010 at 10:07 am |

    [quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    Well, phooey. Phooey!

    Black & white photography is the tool of the devil. It clearly only works to attempt to deceive us.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 10:09 am |

    [quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    A-ha! But the stripes ARE Royal, not Navy. Said that yesterday. No, way navy (even if it’s a b&w print from a color negative) shows as light as in yesterday’s photo.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment=”380020″]You probably aren’t old enough to remember how well “new” Coke went over.[/quote]

    I kinda liked it. Am I the only one?

  • Adam | March 2, 2010 at 10:12 am |

    [quote comment=”380016″][quote comment=”380012″][quote comment=”379999″]Well, hell, Halas and Hunt are both dead now, so why not mess with their trophies?[/quote]

    How about, because they’re dead?[/quote]

    Did Hunt or Halas design the original trophies? If they actually did, then yeah the NFL shouldn’t have touched them. But if they didn’t… what’s the problem? Halas & Hunt are still being honored and remembered by the fact that the trophies are named after them. The actual design of the trophy doesn’t really matter.[/quote]

    REALLY? THE ACTUAL DESIGN DOESNT MATTER? By your logic THE JEFF the Stanley Cup, the HOLY GRAIL OF Sports is WRONG THEN… the ORIGINAL Cup that Lord Stanley gave out was just the little BOWL at the top of the current deisgn with the rings and such! Bad idea…

  • pk | March 2, 2010 at 10:12 am |

    [quote comment=\”380011\”]The NFL should be ashamed of itself, especially taking away the Hunt and Halas trophies…[/quote]

    That’s until Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder buy the trophies & Re-name them…along with corporate naming rights…

  • Chris M | March 2, 2010 at 10:15 am |

    Now I only spent ~5 minutes doing this, but c’mon, this has got to be a better Conference logo than what the NFL came up with…

    http://farm5.static....

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 10:16 am |

    [quote comment=”380020″]
    You probably aren’t old enough to remember how well “new” Coke went over.[/quote]

    um…some of us are

    and, im sure for reasons completely different from mothervilker, i liked it — know why? it was far less sweet

    which is why, i suppose, it didn’t go over well

    it wasn’t so much that it was “new” and “different”…

    to this day i don’t drink coke (or pepsi or any cola)…and it actually all started when new coke was introduced…once ‘original coke’ came back, i stopped drinking any cola altogether

  • Broadway Connie | March 2, 2010 at 10:17 am |

    [quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    First off, Paul sure has it right… … “Marc Swanson took a stab at colorizing one of the wire photos from yesterday’s post and did a great job. …” Wonderful work. Funny about the blue=dark supposition must of us have about the colors of things depicted in black-and-white photographs. I certainly work on that basis. But going through a lot of early-20th century photographs in which the US flag appeared, I was surprised to note that the red was often darker than the blue. Not always, but frequently. Can’t begin to explain it, of course.

  • The Jeff | March 2, 2010 at 10:18 am |

    [quote comment=”380024″][quote comment=”380016″][quote comment=”380012″][quote comment=”379999″]Well, hell, Halas and Hunt are both dead now, so why not mess with their trophies?[/quote]

    How about, because they’re dead?[/quote]

    Did Hunt or Halas design the original trophies? If they actually did, then yeah the NFL shouldn’t have touched them. But if they didn’t… what’s the problem? Halas & Hunt are still being honored and remembered by the fact that the trophies are named after them. The actual design of the trophy doesn’t really matter.[/quote]

    REALLY? THE ACTUAL DESIGN DOESNT MATTER? By your logic THE JEFF the Stanley Cup, the HOLY GRAIL OF Sports is WRONG THEN… the ORIGINAL Cup that Lord Stanley gave out was just the little BOWL at the top of the current deisgn with the rings and such! Bad idea…[/quote]

    I think you’ve got that backwards. If Lord Stanley’s Cup has changed over the years while maintaining the name and glory associated with it, why can’t the Hunt & Halas trophies change?

  • Bernard | March 2, 2010 at 10:18 am |

    I always thought the Hunt and Halas trophies were the most bootleg, clumsy, cobbled-together-looking trophies in sports. Which is exactly why they were so fantastic.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 10:19 am |

    [quote comment=”380025″][quote comment=\”380011\”]The NFL should be ashamed of itself, especially taking away the Hunt and Halas trophies…[/quote]

    That’s until Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder buy the trophies & Re-name them…along with corporate naming rights…[/quote]

    Hey! You just mentioned the two owners voted The Quickest To Sell Their Teams If the NFL Made a Rule for the Networks: “No shots of owners during the game or on the field afterward.”

    —Ricko

  • Tris Wykes | March 2, 2010 at 10:19 am |

    That Purple Store is pure genius. I’m buying the suit jacket right now.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 10:21 am |

    [quote comment=”380032″]That Purple Store is pure genius. I’m buying the suit jacket right now.[/quote]

    Bet The Joker shops there, huh.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 10:29 am |

    [quote comment=”380027″][quote comment=”380020″]
    You probably aren’t old enough to remember how well “new” Coke went over.[/quote]

    um…some of us are

    and, im sure for reasons completely different from mothervilker, i liked it — know why? it was far less sweet

    which is why, i suppose, it didn’t go over well

    it wasn’t so much that it was “new” and “different”…

    to this day i don’t drink coke (or pepsi or any cola)…and it actually all started when new coke was introduced…once ‘original coke’ came back, i stopped drinking any cola altogether[/quote]

    Wasn’t it flatter as well as less sweet? That’s why I liked it, I think.

    Probably reminded me of working at the Coliseum, where any cups of Coke that weren’t sold at the end of the game got dumped unless we drank them. Gotta tell you, few things tasted better than flat watered-down Coke, with hot dogs steamed so much the buns stuck to them.

  • Mason | March 2, 2010 at 10:34 am |

    I agree totally.. and it will completely flop like the USFL .. but merely because from a marketing and merchandising stand point, no one will be interested in this crap. How many uniform more combinations can you make from 4 ugly colors?

    I hate all the playoff logos.. what a disgrace. The uniqueness of the Super Bowl logo is a triubte to the city, the host team, and the graphic styling of the era. This new standardizing method is just dumb. This looks like if I was asked back in 1972 what I would think the logo would like in 2010. No one knows where graphic design is heading, and to assume that in 10 years this is where we’ll be is astonishing.

    It definitely is the first huge mistake by Goodell.

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 10:34 am |

    [quote comment=”380033″]Bet The Joker shops there, huh.[/quote]

    (fixed)

  • Mason | March 2, 2010 at 10:35 am |

    [quote comment=”379993″]Seems like the NFL is taking the UFL’s template of making everything the same..[/quote]

    response to above. fail lol.

  • Alex | March 2, 2010 at 10:35 am |

    It seems Roger Goodell REALLY wants people to remember his tenure. Or to think he is secretly a graphic designer. He’s changed the league logo, the ball’s graphic design and now the conference logos (along with the rest of the changes we saw today). He’s made more changes in the 3+ years he’s been at the helm than Paul Tagliabue made in his entire tenure.

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 10:36 am |

    [quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    A Brian Downing!!!!! or Wilbur Wood in a XXXL, :)

  • Big Matt | March 2, 2010 at 10:38 am |

    [quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    When I was a kid I had a cheap replica of this jersey and had my mom put #12 on the back for Soderholm, but if I had my choice it would be for Harold Baines, my favorite of all time, and his rookie jersey.

  • markw | March 2, 2010 at 10:46 am |

    If there’s a Broadway play coming out about Vince Lombardi, great.

    But does the actor need to “sound” like Lombardi – how many of us would even know what Lombardi sounded like?

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 10:47 am |

    [quote comment=”380002″]What – no “NFL Labor Negotiations” or “NFL Lockout” logos?

    As for all the logos they did tweak, that’s money they could have put into the players’ concussion fund.[/quote]
    Good points, Vilk.

    How about these others:
    1. Drunken WR plowing into a pedestrian
    2. or the lesser: annual Minnesota State police nailing a viking on speeding and/or DUI.
    3. bi-weekly gun charge/domestic battery/sexual crime… we can call this section the Lawrence Phillips.

  • FuzzyDunlop | March 2, 2010 at 10:47 am |

    Kyle Drabek wore single digit number last season in AA in the Phillies sytem. IIRC, he wore #4 at Reading.

  • TC Lofton | March 2, 2010 at 10:53 am |

    [quote comment=”380038″]It seems Roger Goodell REALLY wants people to remember his tenure. Or to think he is secretly a graphic designer. He’s changed the league logo, the ball’s graphic design and now the conference logos (along with the rest of the changes we saw today). He’s made more changes in the 3+ years he’s been at the helm than Paul Tagliabue made in his entire tenure.[/quote]

    This trend of complete brand overhauls is really cooking my grits. I understand the need to have graphic (or “identity”) standards, but it seems like all it’s really accomplishing is stunting creativity and putting tons of money in the hands of 2o-something marketing agents. (This coming from a 20-something University Marketing worker who refuses to sell his soul.)

    Paul, where can one track down an NFL Identity Guide?

  • Squiddie | March 2, 2010 at 10:55 am |

    [quote comment=”380041″]If there’s a Broadway play coming out about Vince Lombardi, great.

    But does the actor need to “sound” like Lombardi – how many of us would even know what Lombardi sounded like?[/quote]

    Let’s take a look at YouTube!

    The bonus is that you get to see some great unis even if the image isn’t very sharp.

  • JRJR | March 2, 2010 at 10:59 am |

    [quote comment=”380028″][quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    First off, Paul sure has it right… … “Marc Swanson took a stab at colorizing one of the wire photos from yesterday’s post and did a great job. …” Wonderful work. Funny about the blue=dark supposition must of us have about the colors of things depicted in black-and-white photographs. I certainly work on that basis. But going through a lot of early-20th century photographs in which the US flag appeared, I was surprised to note that the red was often darker than the blue. Not always, but frequently. Can’t begin to explain it, of course.[/quote]

    Black and white films, particularly older black and white films, are biased–more sensitive too–the red spectrum than any other color. Reds tend to appear as a darker shade than they would to the naked eye seeing color. This is part of the reason that Ansel Adams created his “zone system” that more accurately(he said) reproduced gradients as the naked eye see’s them.

    It is very common to find older press photos, which were processed and printed for speed, not gradation accuracy and often not processed by the photographer, that have reds that look nearly black.

    Looking for some good examples, glad I went to photo school pre-digital!

  • Paul Lukas | March 2, 2010 at 11:01 am |

    [quote comment=”380044″]Paul, where can one track down an NFL Identity Guide?[/quote]

    Well, you can find the new logos right here on this site today.

    Seriously: Not publicly accessible.

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 11:02 am |

    [quote comment=”380041″]
    But does the actor need to “sound” like Lombardi – how many of us would even know what Lombardi sounded like?[/quote]

    surely you must have seen one of those NFL ads where he’s screaming “WHAT THE HELL IS GOIN’ ON HEAH?”

    of course…he may not have spoken like that ALL the time…

  • Ferdinand Cesarano | March 2, 2010 at 11:06 am |

    The only problem with that White Sox jersey is that the collar didn’t go all the way around.

    Apart from this (and apart from the few games in which these jerseys were worn with shorts), that uni was beautiful in its unconventionality.

  • joe | March 2, 2010 at 11:23 am |

    That snowboard isn’t a Knicks one, its some Tech 9 logo garbage.

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 11:30 am |

    [quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    Wow… I didn’t expect a two-hour Photoshop job to get so much reponse (thanks for the kudos, btw). Anyway, there seems to be a lack of color photo evidence on that particular uniform. The image Doug Brie sent is the same one I found and it’s from a different year than the one Bentley’s wearing — 1949 as opposed to Bentley’s 1948. When looking at Bentley’s jersey, I thought — as have some of you — that the darker color had to be blue. I did a test with color chips approximating the same blue and red from the jersey-in-a-box and desaturated, over and under-exposed and generally anything else I could think of to see if the darker color would have been blue or red. My tests (completely unscientific and done in the course of about 7 minutes) yielded dark = blue. Wrong or right, that’s what I came up with, I liked it and so I went with it. The final blue is a bit darker than what I’d hoped for (though pretty close to the navy in the throwbacks), but anything lighter tended to look hokey and unrealistic. As for the breezers and socks, again no evidence to help, but I thought the blue looked better. Artistic license rules!

    Broadway Connie brought up an interesting point about the US flag colors with red sometimes being darker. I went back to my color chips and made the colors a little more equal in terms of saturation and indeed sometimes the red was a bit darker. My assumption on this would be the flag(s) had been sun-bleached. A new flag likely wouldn’t look that way, but one that’s been out in the elements might. I don’t know about any of you, but my experience seems to be that the blue (navy) on the U.S. flag tends to fade quicker than the red leaving the red more saturated and therefore a bit darker in a black and white exposure.

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 11:40 am |

    [quote comment=”380034″]Probably reminded me of working at the Coliseum, where any cups of Coke that weren’t sold at the end of the game got dumped unless we drank them. Gotta tell you, few things tasted better than flat watered-down Coke, with hot dogs steamed so much the buns stuck to them.[/quote]

    The only thing better was Cleveland Stadium’s Coke in a wax-covered cup that had gone soft from holding flat Coke and melted ice in 85 degree heat over which the Saran Wrap cover had come loose just as the vendor had left his refill station. Oh yeah… and the over-steamed hot dogs. At the very least, there was Stadium Mustard. Mmmmmmm…. Stadium Mustard (my fellow Clevelanders know what I’m talkin’ about).

  • JimWa | March 2, 2010 at 11:41 am |

    Looks like the 2010 AL All Star batting practice/HR Derby jersey can now be seen on ESPN’s MLB front page (may have to refresh – there are different “commercials” with Joe Mauer). Red jersey with dark blue lettering. Looked very 70s from behind.

    http://sports-ak.esp...

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 12:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”380052″][quote comment=”380034″]Probably reminded me of working at the Coliseum, where any cups of Coke that weren’t sold at the end of the game got dumped unless we drank them. Gotta tell you, few things tasted better than flat watered-down Coke, with hot dogs steamed so much the buns stuck to them.[/quote]

    The only thing better was Cleveland Stadium’s Coke in a wax-covered cup that had gone soft from holding flat Coke and melted ice in 85 degree heat over which the Saran Wrap cover had come loose just as the vendor had left his refill station. Oh yeah… and the over-steamed hot dogs. At the very least, there was Stadium Mustard. Mmmmmmm…. Stadium Mustard (my fellow Clevelanders know what I’m talkin’ about).[/quote]

    Wow, except for the Cleveland-specific mustard sounds just like Met Stadium before the Twins moved indoors.

    Can’t speak for Cleveland, but here the hot dog bun seemed to have been form-fit around the wienie, almost as if someone had shoved the finished product into its waxy sleeve and then squeeeeezed it ever so gently to be certain vendors could pack more of them into their aluminum (or were they stainless steel?) carrying cases.

    —Ricko

  • pk | March 2, 2010 at 12:10 pm |

    For Teebz:

    The Times Union Center’s general manager tells us it’s set to announce a new AHL team coming to the center in the next eight to 10 days…

    (Who is it, Hartford or Bridgeport…I know you must know)

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 12:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”380051″][quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    Wow… I didn’t expect a two-hour Photoshop job to get so much reponse (thanks for the kudos, btw). Anyway, there seems to be a lack of color photo evidence on that particular uniform. The image Doug Brie sent is the same one I found and it’s from a different year than the one Bentley’s wearing — 1949 as opposed to Bentley’s 1948. When looking at Bentley’s jersey, I thought — as have some of you — that the darker color had to be blue. I did a test with color chips approximating the same blue and red from the jersey-in-a-box and desaturated, over and under-exposed and generally anything else I could think of to see if the darker color would have been blue or red. My tests (completely unscientific and done in the course of about 7 minutes) yielded dark = blue. Wrong or right, that’s what I came up with, I liked it and so I went with it. The final blue is a bit darker than what I’d hoped for (though pretty close to the navy in the throwbacks), but anything lighter tended to look hokey and unrealistic. As for the breezers and socks, again no evidence to help, but I thought the blue looked better. Artistic license rules!

    Broadway Connie brought up an interesting point about the US flag colors with red sometimes being darker. I went back to my color chips and made the colors a little more equal in terms of saturation and indeed sometimes the red was a bit darker. My assumption on this would be the flag(s) had been sun-bleached. A new flag likely wouldn’t look that way, but one that’s been out in the elements might. I don’t know about any of you, but my experience seems to be that the blue (navy) on the U.S. flag tends to fade quicker than the red leaving the red more saturated and therefore a bit darker in a black and white exposure.[/quote]

    Most often It had to do with making a b&w image from a color original. Don’t know if happened when printed from the neg, don’t know if it happened when shooting a half-tone.

    But…

    If I can find them when I get home, I will scan and post B&W photos (used in a preseason annual) of the 1960 Patriots (from the color 1961 Fleer football cards) that would make you SWEAR they wore blue jerseys (probably navy) with white-red-white shoulder loops. And I’ll post the color Fleer card, too.

    Confused the shit out of me in 1961. Thought perhaps Patriots had had a navy jersey at some point.

    I’ll also show a b&w of, I believe, Packer Jim Taylor in b&w that would lead one to believe Green Bay had a set of dark pants. But it’s just the red component in the yellow-gold being dominant in the translation to b&w.

    —Ricko

  • chance michaels | March 2, 2010 at 12:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”380057″]
    I’ll also show a b&w of, I believe, Packer Jim Taylor in b&w that would lead one to believe Green Bay had a set of dark pants. But it’s just the red component in the yellow-gold being dominant in the translation to b&w.[/quote]
    Have you posted that one before? Sounds familiar.

    I’ve also seen b&w photos of the 1959 Packers (before the helmet logo was added) where the gold looks so dark you would swear they were the Cleveland Browns.

  • pk | March 2, 2010 at 12:34 pm |

    Actually, from what I’m gathering, the Portland Pirates are the favorite to move to Albany…makes sense since it’s for Buffalo…

  • Squiddie | March 2, 2010 at 12:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”380052″][quote comment=”380034″]Probably reminded me of working at the Coliseum, where any cups of Coke that weren’t sold at the end of the game got dumped unless we drank them. Gotta tell you, few things tasted better than flat watered-down Coke, with hot dogs steamed so much the buns stuck to them.[/quote]

    The only thing better was Cleveland Stadium’s Coke in a wax-covered cup that had gone soft from holding flat Coke and melted ice in 85 degree heat over which the Saran Wrap cover had come loose just as the vendor had left his refill station. Oh yeah… and the over-steamed hot dogs. At the very least, there was Stadium Mustard. Mmmmmmm…. Stadium Mustard (my fellow Clevelanders know what I’m talkin’ about).[/quote]

    It should come as no surprise that Cleveland’s Stadium Mustard has its own website. I may have to order me some.

    I like the photos of the customers with their mustard.

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 12:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”380054″]Wow, except for the Cleveland-specific mustard sounds just like Met Stadium before the Twins moved indoors.

    Can’t speak for Cleveland, but here the hot dog bun seemed to have been form-fit around the wienie, almost as if someone had shoved the finished product into its waxy sleeve and then squeeeeezed it ever so gently to be certain vendors could pack more of them into their aluminum (or were they stainless steel?) carrying cases.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The franks at Cleveland Stadium were wrapped in wax paper and “squeeeeeezed” would probably a generous term for what the vendors did to fit more dogs. “Smooooooooshed” is probably more apropos.

    As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.

  • Teebz | March 2, 2010 at 12:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”380055″]For Teebz:

    The Times Union Center’s general manager tells us it’s set to announce a new AHL team coming to the center in the next eight to 10 days…

    (Who is it, Hartford or Bridgeport…I know you must know)[/quote]

    Working on it, but it seems that this is being kept quiet for now on the AHL front. With Albany not having an affiliation next season, it’s hard to say how they would stockpile players or why players looking for a shot at the next level would sign there.

    Maybe they’re going ECHL?

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 12:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”380058″][quote comment=”380057″]
    I’ll also show a b&w of, I believe, Packer Jim Taylor in b&w that would lead one to believe Green Bay had a set of dark pants. But it’s just the red component in the yellow-gold being dominant in the translation to b&w.[/quote]
    Have you posted that one before? Sounds familiar.

    I’ve also seen b&w photos of the 1959 Packers (before the helmet logo was added) where the gold looks so dark you would swear they were the Cleveland Browns.[/quote]

    Nope, haven’t posted it. But have seen Pack helmet photos similar to those you mention.

    I honestly don’t how it happens. But logic says is either a b&w print from a color negative, or that something about shooting a halftone of a color shot would go wiggy.

    Suspect was in direct transfer from neg., cuz the B&W version of the 1960 NFL Championship highlights does make the Packers look like the Sipe-era Browns.

    And it was filmed in color. Seen the color version, too.

    —Ricko

  • pk | March 2, 2010 at 12:50 pm |

    Here’s where I heard the AHL talk:

    http://www.cmsbmedia...

    What’s interesting: Albany would keep the Rats logo name, however Portland would most likely lose their identity…

    I think IF it is the Pirates moving to Albany, the name would change to reflect more to the Sabres….

  • Geenf | March 2, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”380010″]I don’t know, Paul, that Purple Store had some interesting things. Too bad they don’t sell these for men:
    http://www.thepurple...

    Is there a Neon Green Store?[/quote]

    You can get those “sneaker socks” at any place that sells cheap Chinese knockoff goods. Some look like ballet slippers, too.

  • Lee | March 2, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

    Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee

  • Geenf | March 2, 2010 at 12:58 pm |

    [quote comment=\”380026\”]Now I only spent ~5 minutes doing this, but c\’mon, this has got to be a better Conference logo than what the NFL came up with…

    http://farm5.static....

    The NFL Design Team: \”C\’MON, MAN!\”

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 12:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”380063″][quote comment=”380058″][quote comment=”380057″]
    I’ll also show a b&w of, I believe, Packer Jim Taylor in b&w that would lead one to believe Green Bay had a set of dark pants. But it’s just the red component in the yellow-gold being dominant in the translation to b&w.[/quote]
    Have you posted that one before? Sounds familiar.

    I’ve also seen b&w photos of the 1959 Packers (before the helmet logo was added) where the gold looks so dark you would swear they were the Cleveland Browns.[/quote]

    Nope, haven’t posted it. But have seen Pack helmet photos similar to those you mention.

    I honestly don’t how it happens. But logic says is either a b&w print from a color negative, or that something about shooting a halftone of a color shot would go wiggy.

    Suspect was in direct transfer from neg., cuz the B&W version of the 1960 NFL Championship highlights does make the Packers look like the Sipe-era Browns.

    And it was filmed in color. Seen the color version, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Okay, no need to wait on Patriots.
    Check this out…
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...

    Then check these…
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...

    And, no, the cards weren’t hand-tinted….
    http://cgi.ebay.com/...

    —Ricko

  • Kevin | March 2, 2010 at 1:01 pm |

    “Did anyone out there equate the number of stars with the number of divisions in each conference? Like, anyone?”

    *raises hand* Yes , sir I did.

    The new conference trophy stink on ice.

  • chance michaels | March 2, 2010 at 1:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”380061″][quote comment=”380054″]Wow, except for the Cleveland-specific mustard sounds just like Met Stadium before the Twins moved indoors.

    Can’t speak for Cleveland, but here the hot dog bun seemed to have been form-fit around the wienie, almost as if someone had shoved the finished product into its waxy sleeve and then squeeeeezed it ever so gently to be certain vendors could pack more of them into their aluminum (or were they stainless steel?) carrying cases.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The franks at Cleveland Stadium were wrapped in wax paper and “squeeeeeezed” would probably a generous term for what the vendors did to fit more dogs. “Smooooooooshed” is probably more apropos.

    As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.[/quote]
    Ain’t none of your mustards can hold a candle to secret stadium sauce.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 1:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”379988″]from the ticker:

    Marc Swanson took a stab at colorizing one of the wire photos from yesterday’s post and did a great job.

    indeed; late yesterday in the comments, it was revealed that the sweaters were actually red with white and blue stripes, like so

    that’s why B&W photos are so frustrating sometimes — i would have bet money the sweater was blue, with red and white stripes, based on the black and white

    great job…wrong colors…i almost like the dark blue better[/quote]

    Awesome

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 1:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 1:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”379992″]Well I’m cool with the NFL’s new logo system. No one outside of this site actually cares what the logo is anyway.

    As for that colorized hockey picture… I’m seriously wondering if the NHL didn’t screw up the new version. The black & white shot really really really really really makes it look like it should be blue. Red does not typically look lighter than any dark shade of blue.

    In fact here’s the red version in black & white:
    http://img43.imagesh...

    That does NOT look like the jersey in the old photo at all.[/quote]

    Good point. Sometimes I make a color pic b&w to get idea since i know the real colors. As somebody who likes to colorize, it is tricky trying to guess or figure out the true colors.

    I agree about red the red and blue and then in b&w

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 1:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”380074″][quote comment=”379992″]Well I’m cool with the NFL’s new logo system. No one outside of this site actually cares what the logo is anyway.

    As for that colorized hockey picture… I’m seriously wondering if the NHL didn’t screw up the new version. The black & white shot really really really really really makes it look like it should be blue. Red does not typically look lighter than any dark shade of blue.

    In fact here’s the red version in black & white:
    http://img43.imagesh...

    That does NOT look like the jersey in the old photo at all.[/quote]

    Good point. Sometimes I make a color pic b&w to get idea since i know the real colors. As somebody who likes to colorize, it is tricky trying to guess or figure out the true colors.

    I agree about red the red and blue and then in b&w[/quote]

    LOL, See post #79, LarryB

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 1:14 pm |

    [quote comment=”380061″][quote comment=”380054″]Wow, except for the Cleveland-specific mustard sounds just like Met Stadium before the Twins moved indoors.

    Can’t speak for Cleveland, but here the hot dog bun seemed to have been form-fit around the wienie, almost as if someone had shoved the finished product into its waxy sleeve and then squeeeeezed it ever so gently to be certain vendors could pack more of them into their aluminum (or were they stainless steel?) carrying cases.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The franks at Cleveland Stadium were wrapped in wax paper and “squeeeeeezed” would probably a generous term for what the vendors did to fit more dogs. “Smooooooooshed” is probably more apropos.

    As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.[/quote]

    Whatever kind of metal they used for the Coliseum hot dog containers, it was heavy…and there was a place at the bottom for a can of Sterno (great in the winter, but darned uncomfortable come playoff time). The dogs were wrapped in foil and yeah, smooshed would be a good way to describe them. But I love smooshed bologna sandwiches, too, so the dogs were just fine with me.

    By the way, Stadium (or Ballpark) Mustard is great on pretzels or Swiss cheese sandwiches, too.

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 1:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]
    yes…. the World cup of Polo, that is.

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 1:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”380077″][quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]
    yes…. the World cup of Polo, that is.[/quote]
    Let me link onto my own stupid attempt at funny by asking about Leon’s whereabouts. anyone????

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 1:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”380077″][quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]
    yes…. the World cup of Polo, that is.[/quote]

    Ralph Lauren’s sponsoring the World Cup now?

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 1:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”380046″][quote comment=”380028″][quote comment=”380018″][quote comment=”380014″][quote comment=”379998″]

    Seriously, you can’t use a desaturated internet image to make a point about how red and blue are supposed to look in a genuine black and white photo. There are so many other factors at play, like lighting, type of film, exposure, and so on. Blue and red are nearly indistinguishable in many old B&W photos, and in some, there might be a clear difference like we see here.[/quote]

    Ok, show me another black & white photo where red appears that much darker than blue.

    Generally speaking, they either look almost the same, or blue is darker. I know converting a color shot to black & white in photoshop isn’t quite the same… but it’s obvious that blue is usually the darker color, or the recolored version wouldn’t have been done that way in the first place.[/quote]

    Reader Doug Brei just sent me a photo of one of the actual jerseys (not the modern throwback), and sure enough, it’s red:
    http://www.insidehoc...

    First off, Paul sure has it right… … “Marc Swanson took a stab at colorizing one of the wire photos from yesterday’s post and did a great job. …” Wonderful work. Funny about the blue=dark supposition must of us have about the colors of things depicted in black-and-white photographs. I certainly work on that basis. But going through a lot of early-20th century photographs in which the US flag appeared, I was surprised to note that the red was often darker than the blue. Not always, but frequently. Can’t begin to explain it, of course.[/quote]

    Black and white films, particularly older black and white films, are biased–more sensitive too–the red spectrum than any other color. Reds tend to appear as a darker shade than they would to the naked eye seeing color. This is part of the reason that Ansel Adams created his “zone system” that more accurately(he said) reproduced gradients as the naked eye see’s them.

    It is very common to find older press photos, which were processed and printed for speed, not gradation accuracy and often not processed by the photographer, that have reds that look nearly black.

    Looking for some good examples, glad I went to photo school pre-digital![/quote]

    Ya another quote, but I am finding some very good points by many here today. I also wondered about the much older b&w film, wondering it it did indeed give a different look to reds in b&w than more recent b&w film.

    I have looked at a lot of old Ohio State pictures and it does seem the red appears darker in most old film then say film from late 1940’s,50’s,60’s

  • eBod | March 2, 2010 at 1:27 pm |

    as a graphic designer and sports fan I am mortified at the sophomoric thought process and even worse execution of the NFL logo re-branding. Nothing was broken to fix. Wake up league office, you have taken two steps backwards in the branding of your product.
    I guess you can partner with Pepsi and make it a marriage from design hell.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 1:32 pm |

    Ricko just found and read #79.

    Again it is all very interesting to me as one who tries to guess colors from old b&w pictures.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 1:35 pm |

    As a Cav’s fan I have mixed feelings about Lebron wanting to change to #6 next year. I guess it is no big deal. As long as he stays with the Cavs.

  • Jeremy | March 2, 2010 at 1:50 pm |

    [quote comment=\”380006\”]The When Saturday Comes site has a link to Classic Football Shirts, which provided photos from some of the Kits of Yesteryear.

    What an abomination I saw on the front of that site today:

    http://www.classicfo...

    This makes the Norwegian curling team\’s pants actually look GOOD.[/quote]

    The early-mid 90\’s produced some really bad soccer shirts. This may be the worst of the bunch-Norwich City\’s \”bird poo\” kit http://blog.oldfootb...

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 1:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”380083″]As a Cav’s fan I have mixed feelings about Lebron wanting to change to #6 next year. I guess it is no big deal. As long as he stays with the Cavs.[/quote]

    i see it as he’s going from paying tribute to jordan to paying tribute to the good doctor. regardless, the nba stands to make a rump-load of cash from it.

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 2:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”380083″]As a Cav’s fan I have mixed feelings about Lebron wanting to change to #6 next year. I guess it is no big deal. As long as he stays with the Cavs.[/quote]

    Guess this means Boston, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Sacramento have no shot at signing him next year.
    http://www.nba.com/h...

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 2:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”380084″][quote comment=\”380006\”]The When Saturday Comes site has a link to Classic Football Shirts, which provided photos from some of the Kits of Yesteryear.

    What an abomination I saw on the front of that site today:

    http://www.classicfo...

    This makes the Norwegian curling team\’s pants actually look GOOD.[/quote]

    The early-mid 90\’s produced some really bad soccer shirts. This may be the worst of the bunch-Norwich City\’s \”bird poo\” kit http://blog.oldfootb...

    Those are bad – these are worse:
    http://bleacherrepor...

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 2:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”380087″][quote comment=”380084″][quote comment=\”380006\”]The When Saturday Comes site has a link to Classic Football Shirts, which provided photos from some of the Kits of Yesteryear.

    What an abomination I saw on the front of that site today:

    http://www.classicfo...

    This makes the Norwegian curling team\’s pants actually look GOOD.[/quote]

    The early-mid 90\’s produced some really bad soccer shirts. This may be the worst of the bunch-Norwich City\’s \”bird poo\” kit http://blog.oldfootb...

    Those are bad – these are worse:
    http://bleacherrepor...

    Except for Coventry City and Kilmarnock. I might wear those.

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”380086″][quote comment=”380083″]As a Cav’s fan I have mixed feelings about Lebron wanting to change to #6 next year. I guess it is no big deal. As long as he stays with the Cavs.[/quote]

    Guess this means Boston, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Sacramento have no shot at signing him next year.
    http://www.nba.com/h...

    http://blog.prescrip...
    If LBJ had chosen 32 instead of 6 that would have given me more hope of a jump to the Nets … but this guys’s too smart to jump into that mess ( either Nets or Knicks)…. Isn’t he??????

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 2:23 pm |

    [quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]

    What is this “World Cup” of which you speak?

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 2:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”380089″][quote comment=”380086″][quote comment=”380083″]As a Cav’s fan I have mixed feelings about Lebron wanting to change to #6 next year. I guess it is no big deal. As long as he stays with the Cavs.[/quote]

    Guess this means Boston, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Sacramento have no shot at signing him next year.
    http://www.nba.com/h...

    http://blog.prescrip...
    If LBJ had chosen 32 instead of 6 that would have given me more hope of a jump to the Nets … but this guys’s too smart to jump into that mess ( either Nets or Knicks)…. Isn’t he??????[/quote]

    In a small way, like Orlando Hudson a few weeks ago…
    “Hmmm…the money’s close. Do I want to play for the Nationals, or the Twins?”

    Just sayin’, you’d think he’d see there isn’t much sense in playing in the biggest market if it’s for the one of the biggest trash heaps of a basketball team.

    Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 2:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”380089″][quote comment=”380086″][quote comment=”380083″]As a Cav’s fan I have mixed feelings about Lebron wanting to change to #6 next year. I guess it is no big deal. As long as he stays with the Cavs.[/quote]

    Guess this means Boston, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Sacramento have no shot at signing him next year.
    http://www.nba.com/h...

    http://blog.prescrip...
    If LBJ had chosen 32 instead of 6 that would have given me more hope of a jump to the Nets … but this guys’s too smart to jump into that mess ( either Nets or Knicks)…. Isn’t he??????[/quote]

    He wants to be a billionaire someday. If the Nets or Knicks get him there, he just might make that jump.

    Some Cleveland sports hosts think LeBron applying for the number change is a good sign. Others say even though he only has to do that if he’s staying in Cleveland, don’t look that far into it.

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 2:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”380091″]Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I was thinking of them as well. They do have that number 23 already up in the rafters…

    Also, with Michael Jordan now becoming the owner of the Bobcats (soon to be Mikecats?) does Charlotte become a possibility?

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”380093″][quote comment=”380091″]Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I was thinking of them as well. They do have that number 23 already up in the rafters…

    Also, with Michael Jordan now becoming the owner of the Bobcats (soon to be Mikecats?) does Charlotte become a possibility?[/quote]

    Bulls a better young club. Got someone in place already to be his Pippen…and it’s a big enough market. Look what Michael accomplished there. Ownership pretty good, too.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 2:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”380091″]In a small way, like Orlando Hudson a few weeks ago…
    “Hmmm…the money’s close. Do I want to play for the Nationals, or the Twins?”[/quote]

    ricko…how many titles did the bulls win before MJ?

    how many after?

    exactly

    im certainly not gonna defend the knicks, but the baseball analogy doesn’t fly here

    the knicks have not one but TWO max cap spots…they can get REAL GOOD REAL FAST if they sign lebron

    here’s where that “east coast bias” comes into play — why would lebron want to play for cleveland or minnesota if he could make it big in NY? (or chicago for that matter)

    that’s the logic he’s working under…he has no loyalty to the team or city where he grew up and learned his chops…he’s already KING of cleveland (with exactly ZERO titles to show for it)…why wouldn’t he want to be king of NY?

    difference is, unlike the twins/nationals analogy…lebron plus chris bosh or d-wade or some other max cap free agent may not guarantee a title…but it’ll come pretty close

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 2:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”380093″][quote comment=”380091″]Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I was thinking of them as well. They do have that number 23 already up in the rafters…

    Also, with Michael Jordan now becoming the owner of the Bobcats (soon to be Mikecats?) does Charlotte become a possibility?[/quote]

    “MikeCats.” LOL.

  • Traxel | March 2, 2010 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment=”380003″][quote comment=”379997″][quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    I agree completely. My favorite MLB jersey (seriously) needs to be someone else – Wilbur Wood, Alan Bannister, Mike Squires, Chet Lemon, Ralph Garr…[/quote]

    DIY it traxel![/quote]
    Thought about it. Problem is finding the right base. The untucked shirt tails, the unique v-neck, you almost have to start from scratch. Frosty is the man who could pull it off better than anyone I’ve seen. I still might butcher an attempt some day too. We ought to have our own contest. Who can DIY the best 1978 Sox jersey!

  • JimWa | March 2, 2010 at 2:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”380097″][quote comment=”380003″][quote comment=”379997″][quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    I agree completely. My favorite MLB jersey (seriously) needs to be someone else – Wilbur Wood, Alan Bannister, Mike Squires, Chet Lemon, Ralph Garr…[/quote]

    DIY it traxel![/quote]
    Thought about it. Problem is finding the right base. The untucked shirt tails, the unique v-neck, you almost have to start from scratch. Frosty is the man who could pull it off better than anyone I’ve seen. I still might butcher an attempt some day too. We ought to have our own contest. Who can DIY the best 1978 Sox jersey![/quote]

    Another tallest midget contest. Yea.

  • Squiddie | March 2, 2010 at 2:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”380090″][quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]

    What is this “World Cup” of which you speak?[/quote]

    Hero Honda FIH World Cup 2010, of course.

    When can we expect a breakdown of the unis of field hockey? Those New Zealand Black Stick unis are pretty sweet.

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 2:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”380095″]why would lebron want to play for cleveland or minnesota if he could make it big in NY?[/quote]

    how much bigger could lebron possibly get?

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 2:55 pm |

    [quote comment=”380095″][quote comment=”380091″]In a small way, like Orlando Hudson a few weeks ago…
    “Hmmm…the money’s close. Do I want to play for the Nationals, or the Twins?”[/quote]

    ricko…how many titles did the bulls win before MJ?

    how many after?

    exactly

    im certainly not gonna defend the knicks, but the baseball analogy doesn’t fly here

    the knicks have not one but TWO max cap spots…they can get REAL GOOD REAL FAST if they sign lebron

    here’s where that “east coast bias” comes into play — why would lebron want to play for cleveland or minnesota if he could make it big in NY? (or chicago for that matter)

    that’s the logic he’s working under…he has no loyalty to the team or city where he grew up and learned his chops…he’s already KING of cleveland (with exactly ZERO titles to show for it)…why wouldn’t he want to be king of NY?

    difference is, unlike the twins/nationals analogy…lebron plus chris bosh or d-wade or some other max cap free agent may not guarantee a title…but it’ll come pretty close[/quote]

    Oh, I just meant generally that you’d like to think a player would at least ponder for a moment a franchise’s successes and failures because it might say something about management.

    And, of course, lord knows one player can change the fortunes of basketball team more than it can a baseball team.

    What I was getting at with the Bulls is that they might be the sleeper in this whole thing.

    —Ricko

  • Christopher | March 2, 2010 at 2:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”380100″][quote comment=”380095″]why would lebron want to play for cleveland or minnesota if he could make it big in NY?[/quote]

    how much bigger could lebron possibly get?[/quote]

    He’s nowhere near Jordan. If he won a title or six in New York? The answer to your question is “lots”.

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 2:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”380099″]Hero Honda FIH World Cup 2010, of course.[/quote]

    sorry, never heard of it. is this some new sport they’re trying, like “bulletball?”

  • Christopher | March 2, 2010 at 2:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”379997″][quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    I agree completely. My favorite MLB jersey (seriously) needs to be someone else – Wilbur Wood, Alan Bannister, Mike Squires, Chet Lemon, Ralph Garr…[/quote]

    My absolute favorite as well. But I really wish they’d do the blue jersey as well as the white.

    I, too, think of Wilbur Wood as a more iconic player in that jersey… but Fisk’s signing is a very special moment in White Sox history.

  • Andy | March 2, 2010 at 3:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”380094″][quote comment=”380093″][quote comment=”380091″]Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I was thinking of them as well. They do have that number 23 already up in the rafters…

    Also, with Michael Jordan now becoming the owner of the Bobcats (soon to be Mikecats?) does Charlotte become a possibility?[/quote]

    Bulls a better young club. Got someone in place already to be his Pippen…and it’s a big enough market. Look what Michael accomplished there. Ownership pretty good, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    As much as he admires the guy, LeBron seems like the last person who would want to play in the shadow of MJ in Chicago. That’s part of what makes Cleveland appealing. There’s no MJ, no Russell or Bird, no Magic or Kareem in the rafters to compare him to. He’s already the greatest Cav there ever was and maybe the greatest Cav there ever will be. Staying would most likely cement the latter part of the statement.

  • Traxel | March 2, 2010 at 3:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”380098″][quote comment=”380097″][quote comment=”380003″][quote comment=”379997″][quote comment=”379991″]Mitchell & Ness plans to start selling the 1970s Chisox leisure suit jersey soon (with thanks to Mike Hersh).

    Fisk is too easy, and he only wore that jersey for a season or two at the end of the run. I’m hoping for an Eric Soderholm, Frankie Barrios, or Lamar Johnson.[/quote]
    I agree completely. My favorite MLB jersey (seriously) needs to be someone else – Wilbur Wood, Alan Bannister, Mike Squires, Chet Lemon, Ralph Garr…[/quote]

    DIY it traxel![/quote]
    Thought about it. Problem is finding the right base. The untucked shirt tails, the unique v-neck, you almost have to start from scratch. Frosty is the man who could pull it off better than anyone I’ve seen. I still might butcher an attempt some day too. We ought to have our own contest. Who can DIY the best 1978 Sox jersey![/quote]

    Another tallest midget contest. Yea.[/quote]
    Oh, we can get downright scientific on this one. “Best” can be catagorized into just about anything.

    Hey rpm, can you get us some of those White Sox non-stirrups from that era? I think the striping pattern was a little different every year…

  • Perry | March 2, 2010 at 3:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”380041″]If there’s a Broadway play coming out about Vince Lombardi, great.

    But does the actor need to “sound” like Lombardi – how many of us would even know what Lombardi sounded like?[/quote]

    Anybody who ever watched NFL films! “We want to get a seal HEAH and a seal HEAH.”

  • DSFenkel | March 2, 2010 at 3:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”380035″]I agree totally.. and it will completely flop like the USFL .. but merely because from a marketing and merchandising stand point, no one will be interested in this crap. How many uniform more combinations can you make from 4 ugly colors?

    I hate all the playoff logos.. what a disgrace. The uniqueness of the Super Bowl logo is a triubte to the city, the host team, and the graphic styling of the era. This new standardizing method is just dumb. This looks like if I was asked back in 1972 what I would think the logo would like in 2010. No one knows where graphic design is heading, and to assume that in 10 years this is where we’ll be is astonishing.

    It definitely is the first huge mistake by Goodell.[/quote]

    I really could care less about the conference championship trophies, but ONE standard SB logo? MLB used that same World Series logo from the late 70s through the 80s, and you cannot tell one from the other – except for the year , of course. Some SB logos sucked and some were great, but I always looked forward to their unveiling. They do say something about the host city and/or the times in which the game was played. Bad job by the NFL.

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 3:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”380102″]He’s nowhere near Jordan. If he won a title or six in New York? The answer to your question is “lots”.[/quote]

    he’s also not played out his entire career yet. what happens if he wins a title or six in cleveland? he’s already as big as guys like kobe and jeter. how does he get bigger? the man is known all over the world and he already makes a rump-load of money. seems to me the only way lebron’s getting any bigger is if he starts hittin’ the ben & jerry’s pretty hard.

  • timmy b | March 2, 2010 at 3:15 pm |

    OK.

    Tell me what looks darker (red or blue) from these pics from the Hockey Hall of Fame itself (hope to God these links work):

    Joe Hall: http://www.legendsof...

    Ching Johnson:
    http://www.legendsof...

    Howie Morenz:
    http://www.legendsof...

  • Andy | March 2, 2010 at 3:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”380111″]OK.

    Tell me what looks darker (red or blue) from these pics from the Hockey Hall of Fame itself (hope to God these links work):

    Joe Hall: http://www.legendsof...

    Ching Johnson:
    http://www.legendsof...

    Howie Morenz:
    http://www.legendsof...

    That’s wild. Are there any darkroom junkies that might be able to confirm Ricko’s suspicions as to why the red appears darker than the blue?

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 3:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”380090″][quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]

    What is this “World Cup” of which you speak?[/quote]

    It’s this:
    http://www.youtube.c...

  • The Hemogoblin | March 2, 2010 at 4:05 pm |

    I almost ran over someone this morning on my way through the business school building who was wearing the most gorgeous Hartford Whalers hoodie. Looks like it was DIYed (and nothing on Google matches it)… unfortunately, I was in a hurry. So, does anyone know if a Uni Watcher DIYed a Whalers hoodie?

  • JTH | March 2, 2010 at 4:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”380034″][quote comment=”380027″][quote comment=”380020″]
    You probably aren’t old enough to remember how well “new” Coke went over.[/quote]

    um…some of us are

    and, im sure for reasons completely different from mothervilker, i liked it — know why? it was far less sweet

    which is why, i suppose, it didn’t go over well

    it wasn’t so much that it was “new” and “different”…

    to this day i don’t drink coke (or pepsi or any cola)…and it actually all started when new coke was introduced…once ‘original coke’ came back, i stopped drinking any cola altogether[/quote]

    Wasn’t it flatter as well as less sweet? That’s why I liked it, I think.

    Probably reminded me of working at the Coliseum, where any cups of Coke that weren’t sold at the end of the game got dumped unless we drank them. Gotta tell you, few things tasted better than flat watered-down Coke, with hot dogs steamed so much the buns stuck to them.[/quote]
    No, no, no… You guys are remembering it all wrong. It was actually sweeter than the original recipe.

    I don’t recall it being less fizzy, but it was definitely less acidic.

    For the record, I was indifferent because I’ve never been a cola drinker but at the time, I thought it was one of the stupider ideas of all time.

    Stupider like a fox!

  • Dan | March 2, 2010 at 4:08 pm |

    Joe Mauer talk about the new twins uni’s:

    “How are you liking the new unis on the Twins in the game?

    They look good! I went to our throwback, I think it’s a ’65 jersey, a little tinted white. They looked good out there.

    What’s your favorite one of the new ones?

    That would probably be it. I think they’re only going to let us use them for one game a week, but I’m going to try to campaign for them for most of our home games, and we’ll see what happens.”

    From this article:
    http://gameinformer....

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 4:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”380112″][quote comment=”380111″]OK.

    Tell me what looks darker (red or blue) from these pics from the Hockey Hall of Fame itself (hope to God these links work):

    Joe Hall: http://www.legendsof...

    Ching Johnson:
    http://www.legendsof...

    Howie Morenz:
    http://www.legendsof...

    That’s wild. Are there any darkroom junkies that might be able to confirm Ricko’s suspicions as to why the red appears darker than the blue?[/quote]

    Aha that is interesting. And I ask again it is there something about much older b&w film that differs from film from 50’s and later?

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 4:25 pm |

    [quote comment=”380105″][quote comment=”380094″][quote comment=”380093″][quote comment=”380091″]Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I was thinking of them as well. They do have that number 23 already up in the rafters…

    Also, with Michael Jordan now becoming the owner of the Bobcats (soon to be Mikecats?) does Charlotte become a possibility?[/quote]

    Bulls a better young club. Got someone in place already to be his Pippen…and it’s a big enough market. Look what Michael accomplished there. Ownership pretty good, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    As much as he admires the guy, LeBron seems like the last person who would want to play in the shadow of MJ in Chicago. That’s part of what makes Cleveland appealing. There’s no MJ, no Russell or Bird, no Magic or Kareem in the rafters to compare him to. He’s already the greatest Cav there ever was and maybe the greatest Cav there ever will be. Staying would most likely cement the latter part of the statement.[/quote]

    ‘Already the greatest Cav there ever was’….
    Gasp!!!!! even over this guy???
    http://www.checkoutm...

    or:

    http://mavswiki.com/...

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 4:27 pm |

    Yeow! Check out the socks here.
    I mean, we all know they’re royal with three red stripes…
    http://personal.deni...

    —Ricko

  • marc | March 2, 2010 at 4:31 pm |

    [quote comment=”380119″]Yeow! Check out the socks here.
    I mean, we all know they’re royal with three red stripes…
    http://personal.deni...

    —Ricko[/quote]

    holy crud! now i feel like a tool. thanks ricko. ;-)

  • Bob from Akron | March 2, 2010 at 4:39 pm |

    Another thumbs down for the NFL re-dos.

    Just as pathetic are the slogans for the Super Bowl. (“One Game, One Dream.” “Who Wants It More?” “Own The Moment”) Wow — gets me fired up!!

    There’s even a slogan for the NFL Scouting Combine: “Path To The Draft”

    What’s next?
    NFL Draft: “Ramp To The Camp”
    NFL Training Camp: “Reason For The Preseason”
    NFL Preseason: “It’s All One Big Dress Rehearsal”

    This Is The NFL. One League. One Identity. One Boring Graphic Design.

  • rpm | March 2, 2010 at 4:50 pm |

    ~chet lemon was far and away the best sock in collar.

    ~it just so happens that the browns were 4~0 after sock delivery to close out the season. as a thank you i got a case of stadium mustard in the mail from a happy fan, which was awesome in that it is the best ever. but what to do when i get re~addicted? two days later i am in the hispanic grocery store down the street, where it is hard to get things like pasta let alone a regional mustard. but what did they start stocking? stadium mustard! it’s a stryped miracle. so if you are in chicago and want stadium mustard go to the casa de pueblo at 18th and blue island.

    ~i would get that curling pattern and hire the sweatshop across the hall to start mass producing these, but there is nothing near a 48, so if i can’t get one, nertz to that idea.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 4:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”380121″]Another thumbs down for the NFL re-dos.

    Just as pathetic are the slogans for the Super Bowl. (“One Game, One Dream.” “Who Wants It More?” “Own The Moment”) Wow — gets me fired up!!

    There’s even a slogan for the NFL Scouting Combine: “Path To The Draft”

    What’s next?
    NFL Draft: “Ramp To The Camp”
    NFL Training Camp: “Reason For The Preseason”
    NFL Preseason: “It’s All One Big Dress Rehearsal”

    This Is The NFL. One League. One Identity. One Boring Graphic Design.[/quote]

    Exactly. Kinda like when we wondered if MLB was gonna come up with a “Day Game After A Night Game” logo. Y’know, so you wouldn’t expect, say, a catcher such as Joe Mauer to play.

    Slogan could be: Right Back At It.

    —Ricko

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:01 pm |

    As I looked at some older pictures it does seem like maybe pre 1930 film is where red looks very dark

    Here is a game with one team that has blue as its color and the other red.

    In looking at it. It is hard to tell which is which

    http://img.photobuck...

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:04 pm |

    And I know the color of this but in looking at it others may not

    http://img.photobuck...

  • Matthew Robins | March 2, 2010 at 5:06 pm |

    Why is there a ESPN Page 2 uniform article that Paul did not write? http://espn.go.com/e...

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:16 pm |

    2 more for now. I know the colors of the 2 teams in the old picture and the one from the 1950’s most everybody knows anyhow.

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    As somebody else said earlier, maybe Ricko, it may be a lot of the visual has to do with the lighting in the original. The 1st picture here it appears was a sunny day and therefore the 2 shades may be easier to judge.

    If it was a a cloudy day or perhaps a night game the reds do appear much darker.

    If you see Ohio State vs Notre Dame in 1935 game pictures both appear fairly dark.

    But pictures from the 1910’s the red does seem pretty dark in b&w

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”380118″][quote comment=”380105″][quote comment=”380094″][quote comment=”380093″][quote comment=”380091″]Now, the Bulls…that could be another story.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I was thinking of them as well. They do have that number 23 already up in the rafters…

    Also, with Michael Jordan now becoming the owner of the Bobcats (soon to be Mikecats?) does Charlotte become a possibility?[/quote]

    Bulls a better young club. Got someone in place already to be his Pippen…and it’s a big enough market. Look what Michael accomplished there. Ownership pretty good, too.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    As much as he admires the guy, LeBron seems like the last person who would want to play in the shadow of MJ in Chicago. That’s part of what makes Cleveland appealing. There’s no MJ, no Russell or Bird, no Magic or Kareem in the rafters to compare him to. He’s already the greatest Cav there ever was and maybe the greatest Cav there ever will be. Staying would most likely cement the latter part of the statement.[/quote]

    ‘Already the greatest Cav there ever was’….
    Gasp!!!!! even over this guy???
    http://www.checkoutm...

    or:

    http://mavswiki.com/...

    Good ole Bingo Smith.

    Lebron James is simply amazing. He is easily the most gifted players ever physically. If people judge on NBA titles or something like that they may say MJ or Kobe. In my opinion there is no doubt Lebron is the best.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 5:25 pm |

    No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 5:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I mean, y’know, as tough acts for LeBron to follow in Chicago.

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 5:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”380128″]If people judge on NBA titles or something like that.[/quote]

    are those important?

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 5:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”380131″][quote comment=”380128″]If people judge on NBA titles or something like that.[/quote]

    are those important?[/quote]

    Sure, but if championships are the only measure, then Ernie Banks and Dan Marino, for example, weren’t very good.

    —Ricko

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”380131″][quote comment=”380128″]If people judge on NBA titles or something like that.[/quote]

    are those important?[/quote]

    Kinda sorta lol. But I do not see how it proves who the best all time players are.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”380112″][quote comment=”380111″]OK.

    Tell me what looks darker (red or blue) from these pics from the Hockey Hall of Fame itself (hope to God these links work):

    Joe Hall: http://www.legendsof...

    Ching Johnson:
    http://www.legendsof...

    Howie Morenz:
    http://www.legendsof...

    That’s wild. Are there any darkroom junkies that might be able to confirm Ricko’s suspicions as to why the red appears darker than the blue?[/quote]

    And it kind of makes me wonder about my lighting theory of red and blue. Since the first picture looks like a bright day.
    Hmmm

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 5:43 pm |

    oh, i know…would be like saying bill russell, with 11 rings, was like 5X better than wilt, who only had two

    just saying that many people measure a player’s greatness by the number of rings he has

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 5:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”380135″]oh, i know…would be like saying bill russell, with 11 rings, was like 5X better than wilt, who only had two

    just saying that many people measure a player’s greatness by the number of rings he has[/quote]

    Yep and the Russell and Chamberlain comparison is a good one to make a point.

    One thing I know Lebron said before when he talked about switching was he felt all NBA teams should retire #23.

    Now that I disagree 100% on. No way should that happen.

  • JRJR | March 2, 2010 at 5:54 pm |

    [quote comment=”380127″]2 more for now. I know the colors of the 2 teams in the old picture and the one from the 1950’s most everybody knows anyhow.

    http://img.photobuck...

    http://img.photobuck...

    As somebody else said earlier, maybe Ricko, it may be a lot of the visual has to do with the lighting in the original. The 1st picture here it appears was a sunny day and therefore the 2 shades may be easier to judge.

    If it was a a cloudy day or perhaps a night game the reds do appear much darker.

    If you see Ohio State vs Notre Dame in 1935 game pictures both appear fairly dark.

    But pictures from the 1910’s the red does seem pretty dark in b&w[/quote]

    Clouds and night would affect film sensitivity, in that the film would “see” more infra-red spectrum and less visible solar spectrum and therefore produce darker reds. All right, I’m done. Back to unis.

  • Chris from Carver | March 2, 2010 at 6:04 pm |

    [quote comment=”380100″][quote comment=”380095″]why would lebron want to play for cleveland or minnesota if he could make it big in NY?[/quote]

    how much bigger could lebron possibly get?[/quote]
    If he starts to eat the 5 Buck Box, he could reach Barkley proportions.

  • Hibbsy | March 2, 2010 at 6:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”380034″][quote comment=”380027″][quote comment=”380020″]
    You probably aren’t old enough to remember how well “new” Coke went over.[/quote]

    um…some of us are

    and, im sure for reasons completely different from mothervilker, i liked it — know why? it was far less sweet

    which is why, i suppose, it didn’t go over well

    it wasn’t so much that it was “new” and “different”…

    to this day i don’t drink coke (or pepsi or any cola)…and it actually all started when new coke was introduced…once ‘original coke’ came back, i stopped drinking any cola altogether[/quote]

    Wasn’t it flatter as well as less sweet? That’s why I liked it, I think.

    Probably reminded me of working at the Coliseum, where any cups of Coke that weren’t sold at the end of the game got dumped unless we drank them. Gotta tell you, few things tasted better than flat watered-down Coke, with hot dogs steamed so much the buns stuck to them.[/quote]
    Man… I love my buns steamed. And I love mustard AND ketchup on my dog. I wish I had that cartoon. Really cute.

    P.S.
    New Coke was way way way sweeter.

  • Hibbsy | March 2, 2010 at 6:25 pm |

    I will claim it every time, Robertmarshall.

  • Gill | March 2, 2010 at 6:26 pm |

    World cup uni update:
    http://www.wired.com...

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 6:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”380135″]oh, i know…would be like saying bill russell, with 11 rings, was like 5X better than wilt, who only had two

    just saying that many people measure a player’s greatness by the number of rings he has[/quote]

    Great teams are measured by the number of rings.

    Great players?

    Patrick Ewing, Pete Maravich, George Gervin, Reggie Miller, Archie Manning, Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly, Ernie Banks, Ted Williams, Fergie Jenkins, Harmon Killebrew, etc. Not a title to be found.

    Those who measure greatness by titles need a different measuring stick.

  • Metropoliben | March 2, 2010 at 6:41 pm |

    [quote comment=”380073″][quote comment=”380067″]Can people PLEASE stop calling the Super Bowl the “biggest event on the planet”?

    Thanks
    Lee[/quote]

    World Cup fan?

    Me too – THAT’s the biggest sporting event on the planet.[/quote]

    3rd’d. The Citi v Shea argument goes all day and this gets a relative pass?! Egregious!

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 6:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”380118″][quote comment=”380105″]He’s already the greatest Cav there ever was and maybe the greatest Cav there ever will be. Staying would most likely cement the latter part of the statement.[/quote]

    ‘Already the greatest Cav there ever was’….
    Gasp!!!!! even over this guy???
    http://www.checkoutm...

    I was partial to World B. Free:
    http://blog.clevelan...

  • willf6 | March 2, 2010 at 6:49 pm |

    [quote comment=”380102″][quote comment=”380100″][quote comment=”380095″]why would lebron want to play for cleveland or minnesota if he could make it big in NY?[/quote]

    how much bigger could lebron possibly get?[/quote]

    He’s nowhere near Jordan. If he won a title or six in New York? The answer to your question is “lots”.[/quote]
    The comparisons are all ready there w/ out him winning a single title. If he won a 3 or more anywhere he would be at the same level as MJ…and he doesn’t need to do it in NY either. What huge names in the NBA has playing in NY created to support your theory. He would down as won the top 3 most talented to play the game if he retired tomorrow!!Also, the glove Carmona is wearing is not a White Sox glove…it’s a nike glove. It is a white swoosh inside of a black circle.

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 6:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”380142″]Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly[/quote]

    can’t tell you the number of “off board” conversations i’ve had with ricko about those two, in particular, mr. vilk

    we both agree

    and yet, somehow, brad johnson and trent dilfer have rings

    neither could hold tark or kelly’s jock

  • Vasav | March 2, 2010 at 6:56 pm |

    I’m happy to hear other folks aren’t pleased about the standardized Super Bowl Logo. I thought I may be the only one – but I feel like this definitely takes a little bit of the luster off the Super Bowl. I just get that icky feeling that the No Fun League’s next move is to make it permanently in Los Angeles starting with Super Bowl L

  • Carl | March 2, 2010 at 7:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”380015″]Paul, there’s gold in them thar hills of the NBA D-League. The franchises can’t accomplish anything without the league intervening.

    For example, say I want to buy Fort Wayne Mad Ants apparel … you’d think when visiting Fort Wayne, I could do so? Nope. Nowhere but AT the games, or the piddly amount of stuff available online at the D-League site (a few shirts).

    Apparently, the franchises are struggling to build a merchandise following (ala MiLB) because they aren’t able to actually sell at retail outlets (like Dick’s, etc.).[/quote]

    …interesting Addi-only for the NBDL. Makes me wonder if they’re in cahoots with 3M, Johnson&Johnson, Mueller or any of the other athletic tape manufacturers? Then again, if people have to query the acronym ‘NBDL’ to find out what it is, maybe not.

    Closed circuit to the NFL – Quit it with your obsession of messing with what works. It reminds us of a certain Oregon based merchandise manufacturer that already has a poor image for it’s hyper-branding of things. You aren’t further establishing the ‘brand’ of the NFL by revising and unify existing logos with poorly conceived and over thought graphic design; only heightening the awareness of jaded fans that the NFL is about 1)money, 2)public exposure (money), 3)TV ratings (money). You don’t care about the fans so long as they continue to shell out a weeks wages to attend a game or buy overpriced Bangladeshian merchandise. Thanks. End of rant.

  • Jeff P | March 2, 2010 at 7:02 pm |

    So sue me, I like the new conference trophies.

    Are they great? No.

    But are they better then the thrown together crap they had? Much. Just because it’s old does not mean it’s good.

    But what the NFL should do if they ever get the urge again is to pick up the phone and give the NHL a ring. They know how to design trophies. Not everything has to involve a football (or a puck).

    As for the logos, meh. I like some better then the old ones, some I like less. The AFC logo I like the shape of the A on, but I liked the arching stars better. The NFC logo isn’t that different, and looks nice enough.

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 7:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”380115″]No, no, no… You guys are remembering it all wrong. It was actually sweeter than the original recipe![/quote]

    [quote comment=”380139″]P.S.
    New Coke was way way way sweeter.[/quote]

    im not so sure it was sweeter…but it did “introduce” us to HFCS…

    i always thought it was less sweet, but what the fuck do i know, it was like 25 years ago

  • Mike Engle | March 2, 2010 at 7:22 pm |

    Interesting and well-meaning Photoshop on ESPN.com, for this Tim Tebow article.
    Note the just-enough manipulation on the Green Bay uniform, turning the usual 15 into a 16, owing to Bart Starr’s retired #15 for the Packers.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 7:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”380147″]I’m happy to hear other folks aren’t pleased about the standardized Super Bowl Logo. I thought I may be the only one – but I feel like this definitely takes a little bit of the luster off the Super Bowl. I just get that icky feeling that the No Fun League’s next move is to make it permanently in Los Angeles starting with Super Bowl L[/quote]

    Or the JerryDome.
    Could see him lobbying heavily for that.
    I mean, they’re already de-emphasizing the city, which has to be, frankly, a disappointment for the host cities. A bit like a first step toward saying, “You’re irrelevant.”

    —Ricko

  • Rob Ullman | March 2, 2010 at 7:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”380061″]As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.[/quote]

    I have a bottle of each in the fridge right now, and blasphemer though I may be, I’ve always preferred the Stadium to the Bertman’s. But only by a whisker!

  • rpm | March 2, 2010 at 8:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”380153″][quote comment=”380061″]As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.[/quote]

    I have a bottle of each in the fridge right now, and blasphemer though I may be, I’ve always preferred the Stadium to the Bertman’s. But only by a whisker![/quote]

    if i remember correctly, i always found the two pretty much indistinguishable.

  • JGoodrich | March 2, 2010 at 8:18 pm |

    Two things about the NFL logos:
    1) The wrong element was dropped on the Playoff logos. Divisional what?

    2) It will be interesting to see what the SB XLVI Regional logo looks like. Lucas Oil Stadium is brown, not silver like Cowboys Stadium. Something’s gonna give.

  • JimV19 | March 2, 2010 at 8:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”380146″][quote comment=”380142″]Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly[/quote]

    can’t tell you the number of “off board” conversations i’ve had with ricko about those two, in particular, mr. vilk

    we both agree

    and yet, somehow, brad johnson and trent dilfer have rings

    neither could hold tark or kelly’s jock[/quote]

    Kelly could have had an ’86 USFL ring.

    /walks away, saying “Trump!” the way Seinfeld used to say “Newman!”

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 8:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”380154″][quote comment=”380153″][quote comment=”380061″]As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.[/quote]

    I have a bottle of each in the fridge right now, and blasphemer though I may be, I’ve always preferred the Stadium to the Bertman’s. But only by a whisker![/quote]

    if i remember correctly, i always found the two pretty much indistinguishable.[/quote]

    Can not say I recall the difference between the 2 either. I do know I think the mustard is very very good. I have not looked for the mustard in stores lately. But I have bought in NE Ohio over the years.

    When going to a baseball game in person which is not as often as years ago. I always try and get a hot dog. Rarely try any of the newfangled food they offer.

  • jerry kulig | March 2, 2010 at 8:35 pm |

    check out today’s USA Page 1 of sports cover story and picture – Three things

    The pants – are they BAUER or REEBOK?????

    the socks are those stripes different?

    Team Name – Headline correctly indicates the team name is one word – like the Blackhawk Indians. Jersey logo makes it look like the hawks are black, as opposed to any other color.

  • rpm | March 2, 2010 at 8:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”380157″][quote comment=”380154″][quote comment=”380153″][quote comment=”380061″]As for “stadium mustard,” it’s been sold at Indians games since the 1920s and it’s actually a misnomer for my preference. Though known as “Stadium Mustard” for years (since the Tribe played at League Park), “Bertman’s Original Ball Park Mustard” is the best. There is a “Stadium Mustard” that came out in the 1960s to capitalize on Bertman’s success (and the fact Joe Bertman hadn’t yet packaged his product for individual sale), but IMHO, it’s the inferior product.[/quote]

    I have a bottle of each in the fridge right now, and blasphemer though I may be, I’ve always preferred the Stadium to the Bertman’s. But only by a whisker![/quote]

    if i remember correctly, i always found the two pretty much indistinguishable.[/quote]

    Can not say I recall the difference between the 2 either. I do know I think the mustard is very very good. I have not looked for the mustard in stores lately. But I have bought in NE Ohio over the years.

    When going to a baseball game in person which is not as often as years ago. I always try and get a hot dog. Rarely try any of the newfangled food they offer.[/quote]

    i know you are supposed to pick a dog in the mustard fight, but oh well. and i love that there is a stadium mustard conversation every 3~4 months.
    again, stadium mustard in chicago…casa del pueblo on 18th and blue island. while you are there hit the awesome taqueria

  • Tim Stoops | March 2, 2010 at 8:52 pm |

    There’s a guy making his debut for the Columbus Blue Jackets tonight named Grant Clitsome. Think NHL.com would allow the purchase of that customized jersey? I hope that T is silent.

  • Rev. Nørb | March 2, 2010 at 8:54 pm |

    LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???

    Also, i did buy that purple suit. Four button suits are kinda weird but maybe chicks will think i’m mod or something.

  • jerry | March 2, 2010 at 8:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”380158″]check out today’s USA Page 1 of sports cover story and picture –

    Three things

    The pants – are they BAUER or REEBOK?????

    the socks are those stripes different?

    Team Name – Headline correctly indicates the team name is one word – like the Blackhawk Indians. Jersey logo makes it look like the hawks are black, as opposed to any other color.[/quote]

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 9:09 pm |

    [quote comment=”380122″]~chet lemon was far and away the best sock in collar.

    ~it just so happens that the browns were 4~0 after sock delivery to close out the season. as a thank you i got a case of stadium mustard in the mail from a happy fan, which was awesome in that it is the best ever. but what to do when i get re~addicted? two days later i am in the hispanic grocery store down the street, where it is hard to get things like pasta let alone a regional mustard. but what did they start stocking? stadium mustard! it’s a stryped miracle. so if you are in chicago and want stadium mustard go to the casa de pueblo at 18th and blue island.

    ~i would get that curling pattern and hire the sweatshop across the hall to start mass producing these, but there is nothing near a 48, so if i can’t get one, nertz to that idea.[/quote]
    hey rpm, my man… how’s that bobble you be cobblin’???? ..

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 9:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    that’s NVL, Innit?
    Now, that was a player!

  • rpm | March 2, 2010 at 9:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”380163″][quote comment=”380122″]~chet lemon was far and away the best sock in collar.

    ~it just so happens that the browns were 4~0 after sock delivery to close out the season. as a thank you i got a case of stadium mustard in the mail from a happy fan, which was awesome in that it is the best ever. but what to do when i get re~addicted? two days later i am in the hispanic grocery store down the street, where it is hard to get things like pasta let alone a regional mustard. but what did they start stocking? stadium mustard! it’s a stryped miracle. so if you are in chicago and want stadium mustard go to the casa de pueblo at 18th and blue island.

    ~i would get that curling pattern and hire the sweatshop across the hall to start mass producing these, but there is nothing near a 48, so if i can’t get one, nertz to that idea.[/quote]
    hey rpm, my man… how’s that bobble you be cobblin’???? ..[/quote]

    with any luck the end of the weekend. working on the ones i need to get done tonight.

  • Hibbsy | March 2, 2010 at 9:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”380161″]LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???

    Also, i did buy that purple suit. Four button suits are kinda weird but maybe chicks will think i’m mod or something.[/quote]
    One or two too many to be mod. One or two too few to be Keyshawn Johnson.

  • JTH | March 2, 2010 at 9:43 pm |

    [quote comment=”380164″][quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    that’s NVL, Innit?
    Now, that was a player![/quote]
    Yeah, that’s Norm. Bob Love wore #10 …and looked completely different.

    (Just messin’ with ya, Rick.)

  • JTH | March 2, 2010 at 9:45 pm |

    OK, I’m retarded. Please disregard that last one.

    Move along, nothing to see here.

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 9:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”380167″][quote comment=”380164″][quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    that’s NVL, Innit?
    Now, that was a player![/quote]
    Yeah, that’s Norm. Bob Love wore #10 …and looked completely different.

    (Just messin’ with ya, Rick.)[/quote]

    That came up when I google image searched Buttberbean Love, and after I posted it, I thought, “Damn, that ain’t Butterbean Love.”

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | March 2, 2010 at 9:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”380166″][quote comment=”380161″]LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???

    Also, i did buy that purple suit. Four button suits are kinda weird but maybe chicks will think i’m mod or something.[/quote]
    One or two too many to be mod. One or two too few to be Keyshawn Johnson.[/quote]

    But perfect (as noted earlier) for The Joker.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 9:50 pm |

    [quote comment=”380161″]LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???[/quote]

    because LBJ has never heard of bill russell

  • JTH | March 2, 2010 at 9:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”380169″][quote comment=”380167″][quote comment=”380164″][quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    that’s NVL, Innit?
    Now, that was a player![/quote]
    Yeah, that’s Norm. Bob Love wore #10 …and looked completely different.

    (Just messin’ with ya, Rick.)[/quote]

    That came up when I google image searched Buttberbean Love, and after I posted it, I thought, “Damn, that ain’t Butterbean Love.”

    —Ricko[/quote]
    No. That IS him. On the right. In the Nets uni.

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 10:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”380169″][quote comment=”380167″][quote comment=”380164″][quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    that’s NVL, Innit?
    Now, that was a player![/quote]
    Yeah, that’s Norm. Bob Love wore #10 …and looked completely different.

    (Just messin’ with ya, Rick.)[/quote]

    That came up when I google image searched Buttberbean Love, and after I posted it, I thought, “Damn, that ain’t Butterbean Love.”

    —Ricko[/quote]
    The question here is:

    Who wore #10 for the Nets during their first year in the NBA???

    NOTE: Boe didn’t sell the team off to Taub and cronies until the second year so that ‘New York’ uniform seen here is identical to the Championship winning Nets of 1975-’76.

  • Bob Loblaw | March 2, 2010 at 10:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”380172″][quote comment=”380169″][quote comment=”380167″][quote comment=”380164″][quote comment=”380129″]No love for Butterbean Love?
    http://chictrib.imag...

    —Ricko[/quote]
    that’s NVL, Innit?
    Now, that was a player![/quote]
    Yeah, that’s Norm. Bob Love wore #10 …and looked completely different.

    (Just messin’ with ya, Rick.)[/quote]

    That came up when I google image searched Buttberbean Love, and after I posted it, I thought, “Damn, that ain’t Butterbean Love.”

    —Ricko[/quote]
    No. That IS him. On the right. In the Nets uni.[/quote]
    It ocurred to me that the Net was B Love as the chummy shot w/ NVL made sense, however, I had NO idea that B Love did a stint on those putrid Net’s teams. wow….

    Ricko scores another one over his detractors…. :)

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 10:08 pm |

    [quote comment=”380160″]There’s a guy making his debut for the Columbus Blue Jackets tonight named Grant Clitsome. Think NHL.com would allow the purchase of that customized jersey? I hope that T is silent.[/quote]

    LOL and darn it my being in the Penguins territory for NHL telecasts. I rarely get to see the CBJ on Time Warner cable.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 10:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”380171″][quote comment=”380161″]LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???[/quote]

    because LBJ has never heard of bill russell[/quote]

    I detect sarcasm Phil. Lebron is one of the few who does know NBA history.

  • LI Phil | March 2, 2010 at 10:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”380176″][quote comment=”380171″][quote comment=”380161″]LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???[/quote]

    because LBJ has never heard of bill russell[/quote]

    I detect sarcasm Phil. Lebron is one of the few who does know NBA history.[/quote]

    only slightly (my sarcasm, not LBJs ‘knowledge’)…but the point is, history to most of these guys (not just NBAers, but across all sports) usually ONLY extends to the guys they saw growing up, not the ones who pioneered the game or came before they were born

    but if that is the case with LBJ, and he does know the history of the game, Rev. Nørb’s point is even more valid

  • Alec | March 2, 2010 at 10:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”380158″]check out today’s USA Page 1 of sports cover story and picture –

    Three things

    The pants – are they BAUER or REEBOK?????

    the socks are those stripes different?

    Team Name – Headline correctly indicates the team name is one word – like the Blackhawk Indians. Jersey logo makes it look like the hawks are black, as opposed to any other color.[/quote]

    They’re both, guys wear all sorts of breezers.

    The socks on the 2nd guy on the left have black tape on them, everybody else is a clear tape.

    Black Hawks is a nod to the old days.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 10:32 pm |

    Phil, I agree for the most part about the players today only knowing guys they watched. And that goes for most all sports.

    That is too bad but it is true. I assume Lebron does know more than most players as I have heard him talk about guy of the past such as Jerry West and so on.

  • LarryB | March 2, 2010 at 10:38 pm |

    Even though some may say Rickey Williams of Texas and the Dolphins was a little wacky. One thing I did like and respect about him was when he was talking about Doak Walker.

  • Hibbsy | March 2, 2010 at 10:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”380177″][quote comment=”380176″][quote comment=”380171″][quote comment=”380161″]LeBron wants to honor the sport by wearing #6 and retiring #23 because he thinks the entire NBA should retire it in Jordan’s honor? And how is there NOT a corollary from this that implies Bill Russell == Chopped Liver???[/quote]

    because LBJ has never heard of bill russell[/quote]

    I detect sarcasm Phil. Lebron is one of the few who does know NBA history.[/quote]

    only slightly (my sarcasm, not LBJs ‘knowledge’)…but the point is, history to most of these guys (not just NBAers, but across all sports) usually ONLY extends to the guys they saw growing up, not the ones who pioneered the game or came before they were born

    but if that is the case with LBJ, and he does know the history of the game, Rev. Nørb’s point is even more valid[/quote]
    His point is mega valid.
    Ever since I first saw Lebron, I thought he was an idiot for wearing #23. Completely unoriginal.
    I stated it then, and I will state it now, “He has cursed himself.” Changing to #6 solidifies my belief. Get your own #, Lebron. Even if it’s ugly. Get a copy “Best By Numbers”, find a # with so-so (if I can say that) caliber players (preferably none from basketball), and pick one.

  • Johnny O | March 2, 2010 at 11:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”380045″][quote comment=”380041″]If there’s a Broadway play coming out about Vince Lombardi, great.

    But does the actor need to “sound” like Lombardi – how many of us would even know what Lombardi sounded like?[/quote]

    Let’s take a look at YouTube!

    The bonus is that you get to see some great unis even if the image isn’t very sharp.[/quote]

    In all seriousness… if they want to do this show right, these people in charge of costumes need to get in touch with Paul right now. I mean it would be terrible if all the time and work was put into this production only to have the Packer’s uniforms and Vince’s wardrobe not done correctly. Wouldn’t this be a great segment for ESPN? Paul does Broadway! I think it would be an amazing lead story on ESPN (and here of course).

  • inkracer | March 3, 2010 at 12:13 am |

    With all this hate (rightfully so) for the bastardized, er standardized Super Bowl Logos, maybe that should be added to the Uni-Watch Design-Its? Maybe even do a contest each year.. a prize for best and worst..

  • rpm | March 3, 2010 at 1:38 am |

    does this seem absurd to anybody?

  • rpm | March 3, 2010 at 2:38 am |

    sorry… this

  • Doug | March 3, 2010 at 2:18 pm |

    Carmona’s glove is technically “blonde” in color which is legal for pitchers. However, what is not legal on the glove are the red laces. For a blonde glove to be legal, it must have brown laces or any shade in the “brown family”.