If You Want It Done Right, Design It Yourself

DHShome4.jpg

[Editor's Note: Today we have a guest entry from David Battafarano (that's him talking to the ump), who recently had an interesting experience designing his team's uniforms. -- PL]

By David Battafarano

I’m a Social Studies teacher at Delcastle Technical High School in Wilmington, Delaware, where I’m also an assistant football coach and head baseball coach.

I’ve had the unique opportunity to design the uniforms for the varsity football and baseball teams. Our high school has traditional colors for me to work with (navy, gray, and white), which works out wel, bcause I’m uni traditionalist, as you can see in these photos of our football team.

When I took over the baseball program nine years ago, the team wore the typical high school baseball uniform: dark jersey, white pants, solid blue soccer socks (usually obscured by the pajama or “sloppy joe” look). Within two years I was able to transform our home uniform to a more traditional look, which really stands out compared to our opponents. We maintain a mandatory high-cuffed look and wear solid navy stirrups at home and striped stirrups on the road.

By the time these players have hit high school, they’ve already developed horrible uni habits, so I give each player this handout at the beginning of the season. I actually have to hold a practice session on how to wear the uniform, why we wear it a certain way, and how to cuff the pants. There are no other teams in Delaware that wear stirrups, stripes, and sanitaries, and also no teams who have a mandatory high-cuffed policy, so we receive quite a few comments and questions every time we take the field.

This winter I was informed by my Athletic Director that it was baseball’s “turn” to order new uniforms. Having no intention to change either our home or road designs, I decided to create and design a Negro League-based throwback look for an alternate uniform. My concept was that the uniform would be gray with a navy blue collar and wide stripe running down the placket (along the lines of the 1910 Dodgers, 1912 Pirates, and, especially, the 1910 White Sox), with our team name “Cougars” stitched in white down the placket. The pants would also be gray with navy belt loop piping, a navy stripe down the sides of the pants, and navy pocket flaps, much like the Brewers’ Negro League throwbacks. I envisioned an old-school waving American flag patch for the left sleeve, à la the 1917 White Sox wore.

Or at least that was the idea.

My first lesson in specialty uni design was that it’s essential to sit down with a representative from the manufacturer — in this case, a Rawlings rep named Bill Murray, who works the entire mid-Atlantic region. I presented him with all my diagrams, details, and specifications. After 45 minutes, he looked at me and said, “In 16 years on the job, I have never experienced what we just went through. I’m going to order an extra one of these for myself. You weren’t kidding about being a ‘uniform guy!’”

Unfortunately, my next few conversations with Bill did not go as well. He informed me that Rawlings was not able to reproduce the pocket flaps and did not have the old-style American Flag patch I wanted. The most disappointing news was that Rawlings didn’t have the capability to do the vertical placket lettering. I couldn’t understand how this could be — how come they were able to stitch lettering across the chest but could not go vertical down the placket? I was exasperated. Honestly, I believe that they just didn’t want to go through the hassle.

Undaunted, I went to Plan B. Here is the result. As you can see, the major change is the lettering across the chest. On the actual jersey, the “DT” will be on the right chest and “HS” on the left. I chose the “bridged arch” layout for the lettering, 5″ high and 14″ across. The white lettering on grey will look sweet, and I’m hoping the overlapping “T” and “H” on the navy placket will provide something like this classic look.

I kept the numerals navy blue on the back and was hoping to use the McAuliffe font to achieve this effect, but I was informed that Rawlings cannot do that style at this time either. I also had to settle for a standard yellow-trimmed American Flag patch on the left sleeve. Despite all the disappointments and challenges, I still believe I have created an incredibly unique jersey.

For the pants, I made some minor adjustments to accentuate the white used on the jersey lettering. The belt loop piping will be 1″ in width and will feature a navy-white-navy striping pattern. (You can see the pant striping if you click the arrow on the uniform-builder graphic.) The same 1″ piping used down the pant legs, which have 27″ inseams to eliminate any chance of low-cuffed pajama styling.

The final two components of this throwback uniform are the hats and hosiery. Our hats are navy blue with a white D logo. The brims this season will be white, as will the button and six eyelets on top, like so. For legwear, we are going with white stirrups, a 4″ cut with this style. The thin stripes are gray and the thick middle stripe is navy. I couldn’t find navy sanitaries, so we will wear our white sanitary socks under the white stirrups.

The uniforms are currently in production and should be done by the middle of April. I let the team know what was in the works and they are extremely excited. I’ll send photos as soon as we suit up in them.

=====

Paul here. Big thanks to David for giving us a peek inside his team’s uni-creation process.

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

Culinary Corner: Why is this week different from all other weeks? Because Passover started at sundown last night, which has beneficial effects that ripple throughout the food chain, even if you’re not Jewish.

Here’s the deal: Observant Jews (a group that definitely does not include me) only eat Kosher food, but there’s a higher standard of Kosher-osity during Passover — called, simply enough, “Kosher for Passover.” Many foods that are Kosher during the rest of the year don’t pass the Passover test. This especially applies to foods sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup, because corn is one of the Passover-prohibited grains (a category known as chametz). Some food companies using high-fructose corn syrup simply accept that observant Jews won’t purchase their products during Passover. But a few brands make special production runs of Passover product sweetened with cane sugar.

The most notable of these brands is Coca-Cola, which makes Kosher for Passover Coke each spring — a godsend for foodies who believe cane sugar results in a crisper, fresher product than corn syrup. (Mexican and Canadian Coke are prized year-round for the same reason.) Some folks — including the Coca-Cola company itself — say there’s no difference in the flavor; others maintain that the sugar-sweetened version is superior. If you want to decide for yourself, look for Coke bottles with the telltale yellow cap and a Hebrew seal of approval.

Personally, I’m a Diet Coke guy, so I don’t get too excited about the Coke thing. I do get excited, however, about the Passover version of Fox’s U-Bet chocolate syrup, the classic component of a New York egg cream and other chocolaty drinks. It’s normally made with corn syrup, but they switch to cane sugar for Passover. The special product is easy to spot.

Of course, the best food-related aspect of Passover is matzo brei. I’ll have more to say about that later in the holiday.

Uni Watch News Ticker: Campbell Soup product with the old NFL logo is still on the shelves. Shaun Kuter bought that can just the other day. “Even though the logo is expired, the soup is good until November 2011,” he writes. … Jason Hillyer recently got this book about the Browns and scanned a few relevant passages, including one about Greg Pruitt’s tearaway jerseys and a bit about longtime team trainer Leo Murphyt. … Jason’s wife, Alison, also got him a Rob Ullman pin-up illo of herself for his 40th birthday. Nice! … Eric Greenwald has created a superb site devoted to Michigan State uniform history, called SpartanJerseys.com. Click around — highly recommended. … Firefighter-themed uniforms on tap this summer for the Brooklyn Cyclones. Further details here (with thanks to Terence Kearns). … Eddie Brewer reports that the University of the Pacific baseball team wears camo jerseys for Sunday home games. … Here’s a video clip of the last portion of the Yankee Stadium upper deck coming down (with thanks to Terence O’Donohue). … Brian Fitterman sent along some pics of the 1919 Little Rock High School baseball team. “At first it was the vertical lettering that caught my eye,” he writes, “but upon closer inspection the dual-buckle belts were also pretty cool. Also: Similar to your fascination with stirrups by the old hats worn by non-uniformed managers/coaches.” … If you watch this 1982 Bills/Bengals game footage, you’ll see the Bills wearing blue facemasks — except for Joe Cribbs, who’s wearing gray (good spot by Bill Hoppe). … What makes a bad NBA team logo? The folks at The Orange County Register think they know (with thanks to Tim Erney). … Here are what the season ticket presentations look like for the Pirates and Mets (big thanks to Dan Cichalski). … You’ve heard of color vs. color? How about Angels vs. Angels? That odd situation happened when two small SoCal Little League programs — Saddleback and Lake Forest — got together from some interleague games. Both leagues had an Angels team. While the uniforms were largely identical, there were a few differences (with thanks to Matt Stern).

 

158 comments to If You Want It Done Right, Design It Yourself

  • Aaron | March 30, 2010 at 7:56 am |

    What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 8:08 am |

    [quote comment="383363"]What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.[/quote]

    I’m in no position to give an official stance, but unofficially I think they should pick one set of colors.

  • Robert Eden | March 30, 2010 at 8:10 am |

    Big thumbs up to David. Superb entry, and fine work showing those kids how to look like ballplayers instead of clowns.

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 8:24 am |

    outstanding job david!

    always loved the vertical placket lettering; too bad rawlings couldn’t make that a reality

  • don g | March 30, 2010 at 8:27 am |

    On those Delcastle football helmets, the logo on one side and number on the other is AWESOME! Love both sports’ unis.

  • Joel M. | March 30, 2010 at 8:34 am |

    Let me be the first to say that contributor Jason is apparently a very lucky man.

  • Andy | March 30, 2010 at 8:42 am |

    David

    I enjoy the look of your team’s uniforms. The road set is exceptional. Vintage style that will always look great. I think I prefer the solid blue caps, though. Speaking of which, in the shot of you arguing with the umpire, why are you wearing a white-brimmed cap while your players behind out in the dugout sport solid blue caps?

    Anyway, Twin City Knitting has navy blue baseball socks that will look great with your new white stirrups.

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 8:46 am |

    thanks for the early positive comments on the uni column! interesting story about the football helmets; I am a HUGE numbers-on-the-helmets (both sides) fan (alabama, browns throwbacks, etc.) so I proposed the switch 5 years ago and we’ve gone with it ever since. 3 years ago a new head coach took over he wanted a little pittsburgh steeler flavor with a logo on 1 side, so I proposed we keep the numerals on the other. It is a unique/classic look that no-one else uses! The grey facemasks were also my idea, switching from navy blue this past season.

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 8:51 am |

    andy..

    funny story about the caps.. last season my cap order was messed up and we received 2 dozen white-brimmed caps. I didn’t know what to do with them, but when the players saw them, they LOVED the look! So, last season the coaches wore them (similar to the A’s when the coaches wore different caps than the team) and this season the team asked if we could wear them full-time.

    My fear about the brims getting dirty never materialized, and it gives us another unique look. We still have the solid blues just in case!

    As for the blue socks under the white stirrups, I don’t know if they would work as they might be too thick. Not a bad idea though! Paul proposed I get the team navy blue dress socks!!

  • RS Rogers | March 30, 2010 at 8:54 am |

    Is there somewhere we can nominate David for high school baseball coach of the year?

    But ixnay on the flag atchpay. The U.S. Flag Code, the law that codifies the proper display of and respect for the American flag, is absolutely clear: The flag should never be put on an athletic uniform. Never. To quote the U.S. Flag Code (US Code, Title 4, Section 8, subsections E and J):

    “The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.”

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.”

    Dragging the flag through dirt and mud on the ground, rubbing it on the grass, ripping it, and stepping on it are all forms of flag desecration. If you saw someone doing any of those things to the Stars and Stripes, you’d assume he hates America. Yet that’s exactly what will happen to each and every flag patch on any baseball uniform.

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 9:01 am |

    [quote comment="383369"]why are you wearing a white-brimmed cap while your players behind out in the dugout sport solid blue caps?[/quote]

    shout out to the old a’s was my first thought; then i saw david’s response and he confirmed

    another outstanding little uniquirkage

  • UmpLou | March 30, 2010 at 9:05 am |

    BIG kudos to Coach Dave for both his designs AND the uni discipline!

    As far as the Kosher Coke is concrened, I always stock up on it – it is definitely crisper and less heavy. No matter Coke/Pepsi might say, I truly believe there is a real connection with the HFCS explosion and the coinciding explosion of obesity. HFCS simply does not satisfy certain needs as well as regular cane sugar. When Coke puts out the Kosher Coke, or when Pepsi periodically puts out ‘throwback’ Pepsi/Mt Dew/Dr Pepper, there a noticeable less need to guzzle a whole 2 liter bottle to try to satisfy ones sweet urges. HFCS does nothing but push more Coke and or Pepsi sales, as one is not totally ‘refreshed’ by just one serving.

    One ironic thing, however, is that in the World of Coca Cola store in Vegas, they have coolers fully stocked with tall glass bottles of Mexican Coca Cola made with real sugar…..very odd….

  • ClassicOldSchool | March 30, 2010 at 9:09 am |

    Great read, David. If you run into any other snags, Classic Old School would be happy to take a run at your team set. As you know, our world headquarters are in Hockessin, so we could deliver your jerseys in person!

    I’ll have to block off my schedule to take in one of your games once the new jerseys come in…

  • Mark K | March 30, 2010 at 9:09 am |

    The flag patch seems like overkill on that throwback anyway- especially if it’s just the standard rectangle.

    Coach looks like he’s ready to slug the ump!

  • Tom V | March 30, 2010 at 9:22 am |

    I think Paul mentioned it here before, Pepsi is doing the “throwback” thing for a limited time using real sugar in lieu of HFCS. I’ve bought a few cases of it and it definately tastes better than the usual stuff. Never knew about the Kosher/no corn thing, so I’d guess thats the reason Pepsi is doing it to keep up with Coke.

    Nice column today David!

  • Tim | March 30, 2010 at 9:31 am |

    Coach Dave, Nice work. Had a similar styled coach in High School and loved it. One spring practice we were all done..had our final “cirlce-up” with the Coach. He said good work, but we all need to wait while the left handed catchers run 5 more laps. We had no lefty catchers..he said we would stand and wait till the lefty catcher did his thing. Turns out one of lefty pitchers ran laps with his cap backwards…since only catchers could EVER wear their cap backwards…he made a point to let us figureout the uniform/team violation and make the offender pay.

  • Lew Holst | March 30, 2010 at 9:33 am |

    I am so proud of David – what fantastic stuff.

    You have restored my faith there is still hope for this world.

  • JamesP. | March 30, 2010 at 9:33 am |

    David,

    You, sir, are an awesome coach! You are doing what I one fay hope to do with my kids baseball/softball leagues.

    A thought on the lack of a nave sani…what about dying the white sani? It shouldn’t be to difficult to do.

    I love the respect you are requiring of your players. What is the reaction of the new guys when you tell them the rules, and what is the general thoughts the guys have on the uniforms?

  • Bernard | March 30, 2010 at 9:36 am |

    [quote comment="383372"]Is there somewhere we can nominate David for high school baseball coach of the year?

    But ixnay on the flag atchpay. The U.S. Flag Code, the law that codifies the proper display of and respect for the American flag, is absolutely clear: The flag should never be put on an athletic uniform. Never. To quote the U.S. Flag Code (US Code, Title 4, Section 8, subsections E and J):

    “The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.”

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.”

    Dragging the flag through dirt and mud on the ground, rubbing it on the grass, ripping it, and stepping on it are all forms of flag desecration. If you saw someone doing any of those things to the Stars and Stripes, you’d assume he hates America. Yet that’s exactly what will happen to each and every flag patch on any baseball uniform.[/quote]

    Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).

  • JamesP. | March 30, 2010 at 9:37 am |

    Paul,

    Passover Coke is the drink of the gods! Every year, I buy around 12 bottles to use through out the year (never lasts longer than 4-6 months) but since SAM’S Club started carrying Mexican Coke it makes it easier to get the cane sweetened goodness. Oh, Coke says that there is no differance in taste because if they admitted that the cane suger sweetened soda was better, they couldn’t get away with using that damn corn syrup shit!

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 9:40 am |

    [quote comment="383378"]Coach Dave, Nice work. Had a similar styled coach in High School and loved it. One spring practice we were all done..had our final “cirlce-up” with the Coach. He said good work, but we all need to wait while the left handed catchers run 5 more laps. We had no lefty catchers..he said we would stand and wait till the lefty catcher did his thing. Turns out one of lefty pitchers ran laps with his cap backwards…since only catchers could EVER wear their cap backwards…he made a point to let us figureout the uniform/team violation and make the offender pay.[/quote]

    …and that would be the type of thing that stopped me from playing baseball after age 12. Well, that and the lack of skill.

    (We talkin bout practice? Not a game. Not a game. We’re talkin about practice…)

  • Thomas Clark | March 30, 2010 at 9:42 am |

    First, love the home and road jerseys David’s teams have. They are great.

    Two questions, first do all coaches wear a cap different from those of the players at home? Or was this an oversight.

    Second, do you allow your pitchers/players an option on in between temperature days for sleeves or do you go with the idea that if one wears them they all wear them? I know many pitchers have varying temperature comfort levels and an all inclusive decision seems somewhat counter productive when the temperature falls within certain perimeters (ours is 68-75 where players have a choice, below that you wear them above that you don’t, though we have one kid who asked to always wear them pitching and we obliged).

  • Paul Lukas | March 30, 2010 at 9:53 am |

    [quote comment="383381"][quote comment="383372"]Is there somewhere we can nominate David for high school baseball coach of the year?

    But ixnay on the flag atchpay. The U.S. Flag Code, the law that codifies the proper display of and respect for the American flag, is absolutely clear: The flag should never be put on an athletic uniform. Never. To quote the U.S. Flag Code (US Code, Title 4, Section 8, subsections E and J):

    “The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.”

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.”

    Dragging the flag through dirt and mud on the ground, rubbing it on the grass, ripping it, and stepping on it are all forms of flag desecration. If you saw someone doing any of those things to the Stars and Stripes, you’d assume he hates America. Yet that’s exactly what will happen to each and every flag patch on any baseball uniform.[/quote]

    Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    The bigger problem — which I was gonna let slide, but now that the flag issue has come up — is that David’s team has their flag patches facing the wrong way.

    It’s supposed to be like this:
    http://www.worldbase...

    The blue field should always be facing forward, so it looks like the flag is fluttering back as you advance forward. That’s how the U.S. Military does it:
    http://farm1.static....

    Additional examples:
    http://farm1.static....
    http://www.flickr.co...
    http://www.nasa.gov/...
    http://upload.wikime...

  • JB Early | March 30, 2010 at 9:53 am |

    In lockstep w/all who applaud David Battafarano! Can’t wait to see that uni in action. Must have some budget – and rightly so. AND based on some of my mini-rants, I am not the only one who knows what “uniform” means. Of course, if I was on eof his players, my senior year, I don’t know how, but I’d have to tell coach, ” the neighbor’s dogs ate my uniform off the uh, yeah the clothes line…” (mine would never, natch)

  • Ry Co 40 | March 30, 2010 at 9:54 am |

    really great work, david! i love the classic look of the uniforms, and love the attention to detail! really great post, and i can’t wait to see the finished product of the throwback. i just wish they’d give you what you want though. anyway, the team looks like winners before they even throw the first pitch, you do awesome work…

    and f.y.i., i’d be PROUD to wear a flag patch on my sleeve!!!

  • chance michaels | March 30, 2010 at 10:03 am |

    [quote comment="383381"]I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    Frankly, that would be a huge improvement to the NFL’s overall aesthetic.

  • pru | March 30, 2010 at 10:05 am |

    [quote comment="383378"]Coach Dave, Nice work. Had a similar styled coach in High School and loved it. One spring practice we were all done..had our final “cirlce-up” with the Coach. He said good work, but we all need to wait while the left handed catchers run 5 more laps. We had no lefty catchers..he said we would stand and wait till the lefty catcher did his thing. Turns out one of lefty pitchers ran laps with his cap backwards…since only catchers could EVER wear their cap backwards…he made a point to let us figureout the uniform/team violation and make the offender pay.[/quote]

    I coach HS baseball as well, and we have a team rule that if you are seen wearing your team hat any direction other than “like a baseball player” you will run. This goes for outside of school activities as well.

    Love the “lefty catcher” thing…I’ll have to remember that.

  • timmy b | March 30, 2010 at 10:08 am |

    This may not matter to anyone except for uni historians and NY Jets fans, but it looks pretty certain that the one year the Jets sported real Jets on their helmets (1963), they did NOT have them on the helmets for the full season.

    The helmet for the first four games were plain white with just a single greem stripe. The green jets were added to the helmet for the 10/13 game in San Diego and stayed there for the duration of 1963.

    So, add this one to the “changes in season” list for the NFL.

  • timmy b | March 30, 2010 at 10:09 am |

    Hey nybatt,

    Good stuff, buddy!!

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment="383383"][quote comment="383378"]Coach Dave, Nice work. Had a similar styled coach in High School and loved it. One spring practice we were all done..had our final “cirlce-up” with the Coach. He said good work, but we all need to wait while the left handed catchers run 5 more laps. We had no lefty catchers..he said we would stand and wait till the lefty catcher did his thing. Turns out one of lefty pitchers ran laps with his cap backwards…since only catchers could EVER wear their cap backwards…he made a point to let us figureout the uniform/team violation and make the offender pay.[/quote]

    …and that would be the type of thing that stopped me from playing baseball after age 12. Well, that and the lack of skill.

    (We talkin bout practice? Not a game. Not a game. We’re talkin about practice…)[/quote]

    and why should that surprise us?

  • Marc | March 30, 2010 at 10:17 am |

    Well written, interesting piece. But I am not a fan of the uniforms, present or new. I like the pinstripe home, but not the road or new designs. There’s traditional, and there’s boring, and I think they fall too much under the boring category

  • Beardface | March 30, 2010 at 10:26 am |

    Maybe its just me, but I think things like ‘mandatory high cuffs’ on pants, and a strict uniform rule guide for a high school team is pushing it a bit over the top.

    IMHO, all it does is reinforce the beliefs that these are just things you do in high school, and once you’re out, you can really start to express yourselves.

    Good intentions, nonetheless, but I just don’t think it really does any good in the long-term.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 10:26 am |

    [quote comment="383392"][quote comment="383383"][quote comment="383378"]Coach Dave, Nice work. Had a similar styled coach in High School and loved it. One spring practice we were all done..had our final “cirlce-up” with the Coach. He said good work, but we all need to wait while the left handed catchers run 5 more laps. We had no lefty catchers..he said we would stand and wait till the lefty catcher did his thing. Turns out one of lefty pitchers ran laps with his cap backwards…since only catchers could EVER wear their cap backwards…he made a point to let us figureout the uniform/team violation and make the offender pay.[/quote]

    …and that would be the type of thing that stopped me from playing baseball after age 12. Well, that and the lack of skill.

    (We talkin bout practice? Not a game. Not a game. We’re talkin about practice…)[/quote]

    and why should that surprise us?[/quote]

    It shouldn’t, but I felt like saying it anyway.

    I don’t like the idea of wearing a hat while running laps at all. You get one hat for the season, let’s get it sweat-stained and nasty looking by running laps in practice. Wearing it backwards at least has the practical side of being able to wipe the sweat off your forehead while you’re running without having to take the hat off first.

    On the field, in the game, you wear the uniform properly. Running laps in practice? Who cares.

  • Geeman | March 30, 2010 at 10:27 am |

    [quote comment="383363"]What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.[/quote]

    Baylor’s colors are green and gold. But, like so many other schools, they’ve decided to wear black (or at least the women’s team has) for some strange reason. Washington, Vermont, Florida State, Miami, West Virginia, and Notre Dame, just to name a few, are all schools with two or more colors that have decided that they have to wear black. (And Notre Dame really has three colors, if you count green in addition to blue and gold.)

  • Geeman | March 30, 2010 at 10:29 am |

    Dave’s traditional home white and road grey baseball uniforms are fine. I’m a traditionalist, but traditional does not always mean white and grey. There is nothing wrong with a colored jersey once in a while. The A’s have been wearing them since the 1960s, so for them that is traditional.

  • Kevin Z. | March 30, 2010 at 10:46 am |

    [quote comment="383363"]What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.[/quote]

    The other problem is across teams the color of gold isn’t consistent either. It’s more of a yellow for basketball and metallic gold for football. Plus, no black for football, but black trim for basketball.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 10:49 am |

    Despite the apparent varying opinions of the end results (which perfectly fine)…

    Good job, Coach David.

    Now, as to the “Conformity BoogieMan”. Nothing wrong with teaching kids to take pride in how they look, and that they may, in fact, not always have a say in their “work/team” attire.

    Not everyone becomes a lawyer or a teacher or a freelance programmer. And if you end up being, say, a really great, professional UPS driver (and there are plenty of them, believe me), you don’t get to say, “I think I’ll wear my red shirt today.”

    —Ricko

  • Kevin Z. | March 30, 2010 at 10:51 am |

    Those Delcastle uniforms are nice for the most part, especially like the road stirrups, but I’m not a big fan of the white brim look. Especially not with pin-striped jerseys. It is better than solid white crowns with pinstripes, though: http://40-4d.50megs....

  • Bernard | March 30, 2010 at 10:53 am |

    [quote comment="383398"][quote comment="383363"]What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.[/quote]

    The other problem is across teams the color of gold isn’t consistent either. It’s more of a yellow for basketball and metallic gold for football. Plus, no black for football, but black trim for basketball.[/quote]

    This is my problem with them too. They need to pick a gold: old or athletic. This:

    http://images.athlon...

    Or this:

    http://i.usatoday.ne...

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 11:03 am |

    one of the issues I had before I became a head coach and could apply uni-rules was the sloppy team look of “some cuff high, some at the ankle”… most teams here in delaware go with that look. by imposing “high cuffs” I stress the TEAM concept of everyone looking the same, playing for the same cause.. not individually… this is a necessity in high school age athletes.

    i suppose its along the lines of John Wooden teaching his teams how to put on socks and tie their shoes.

    as for the sleeve issue… most pitchers (and players) prefer sleeve-less, but weather dictates what we wear. when it is below 60 (or so) we have mandatory team-wide navy blue sleeves…

    I was not the biggest fan of the white-brims, but they have grown on me..

    I toyed with the idea of “reversing field” on the flag patches, but honestly feel that should be military only.. I also understand the argument about never having a flag on any clothing (especially as a US History and Civics teacher), but I am comfortable showing a little patriotism on our unis even if it is ‘breaking’ some norms.

    I respect the opinion of breaking out a solid color jersey sometimes, but will not do that for a simple reason.. almost every other team in the state of delaware has a solid jersey for both home and road… there might be 3 or 4 (out of 45) who have home white or road grey uniform jersey and pants. I like to be unique.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment="383399"]Despite the apparent varying opinions of the end results (which perfectly fine)…

    Good job, Coach David.

    Now, as to the “Conformity BoogieMan”. Nothing wrong with teaching kids to take pride in how they look, and that they may, in fact, not always have a say in their “work/team” attire.

    Not everyone becomes a lawyer or a teacher or a freelance programmer. And if you end up being, say, a really great, professional UPS driver (and there are plenty of them, believe me), you don’t get to say, “I think I’ll wear my red shirt today.”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we have to have this argument again? Let’s just say that enforcing arbitrary dress codes can easily lead to kids that resent it, which of course leads to the issue we have in the majors now where the long pants are the style of choice for most. I actually agree that having the stirrups/socks showing is a better look – but surely there’s ways to get the kids to realize that without being a dress code Nazi.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 11:07 am |

    [quote comment="383401"][quote comment="383398"][quote comment="383363"]What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.[/quote]

    The other problem is across teams the color of gold isn’t consistent either. It’s more of a yellow for basketball and metallic gold for football. Plus, no black for football, but black trim for basketball.[/quote]

    This is my problem with them too. They need to pick a gold: old or athletic. This:

    http://images.athlon...

    Or this:

    http://i.usatoday.ne...

    Yeah, you’d think at least the two basketball teams would wear the same gold.

    And I was saying yesterday that you’d expect maybe the gold should match the football team, too…then I remembered that UCLA does the same thing…mixing it up, that is. Metallic gold for football, athletic gold for basketball.

    Or Notre Dame. Remember the John Shumate-era athletic gold hoops unis…with matching athletic gold SOCKS, even (and kelly shoes, too)?

    Doesn’t make it right, just that different golds from football to basketball isn’t unheard of.

    Anyone think of any others?

    —Ricko

  • Fight | March 30, 2010 at 11:09 am |

    Hey all, didn’t see this in the comments – but Darren Rovell just tweeted about a rather sweet track jacket Mitchell & Ness will be selling. It is the track jacket the ’81 Phils wore to celebrate the ’80 World Series win.

    http://blog.mitchell...

  • Geeman | March 30, 2010 at 11:09 am |

    [quote comment="383401"][quote comment="383398"][quote comment="383363"]What is Uniwatch’s official stance on Baylor? Personally, I am frustrated. The men’s basketball team wears green and yellow, but the women’s team wears green, gold, and sometimes black. Please advise.[/quote]

    The other problem is across teams the color of gold isn’t consistent either. It’s more of a yellow for basketball and metallic gold for football. Plus, no black for football, but black trim for basketball.[/quote]

    This is my problem with them too. They need to pick a gold: old or athletic. This:

    http://images.athlon...

    Or this:

    http://i.usatoday.ne...

    A lot of teams over the years have varied in this regard. I think UCLA still does. The gold on the basketball uniforms is different than the gold on the football uniforms, for example (and looks better in each instance). Navy does the same thing. I can tolerate that. Notre Dame used to do it (bright gold for basketball unis but old gold for football) but has since standardized things.

    What I can’t stand is adding a black uniform. Why in the world does Notre Dame have black basketball uniforms when it can choose from green, navy blue, or gold?

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 11:11 am |

    [quote comment="383403"][quote comment="383399"]Despite the apparent varying opinions of the end results (which perfectly fine)…

    Good job, Coach David.

    Now, as to the “Conformity BoogieMan”. Nothing wrong with teaching kids to take pride in how they look, and that they may, in fact, not always have a say in their “work/team” attire.

    Not everyone becomes a lawyer or a teacher or a freelance programmer. And if you end up being, say, a really great, professional UPS driver (and there are plenty of them, believe me), you don’t get to say, “I think I’ll wear my red shirt today.”

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do we have to have this argument again? Let’s just say that enforcing arbitrary dress codes can easily lead to kids that resent it, which of course leads to the issue we have in the majors now where the long pants are the style of choice for most. I actually agree that having the stirrups/socks showing is a better look – but surely there’s ways to get the kids to realize that without being a dress code Nazi.[/quote]

    Ooooo…the mean man made me wear stirrups for one baseball season. Scarred me for life, I’m sure.

    And the Yankees made Johnny Damon shave off his beard.
    Sooner or later he’ll no doubt become violent, lash out against society. Or at least need psychiatric care.

    —Ricko

  • Kek | March 30, 2010 at 11:17 am |

    [quote comment="383405"]Hey all, didn’t see this in the comments – but Darren Rovell just tweeted about a rather sweet track jacket Mitchell & Ness will be selling. It is the track jacket the ’81 Phils wore to celebrate the ’80 World Series win.

    http://blog.mitchell...
    Oh, Morris Levin, that has your name written all over it!

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 11:19 am |

    [quote comment="383403"]
    Do we have to have this argument again? Let’s just say that enforcing arbitrary dress codes can easily lead to kids that resent it … but surely there’s ways to get the kids to realize that without being a dress code Nazi.[/quote]

    what argument?

    you seem to have a policy to rebel against everything anyone would ever ask of you

    that’s fine…i won’t begrudge you that, but is wearing a uniform properly (or even improperly, if that’s what the coach dictates) really going to lead you to become the next jeff dahmer?

    it seems many of us actually respect the “team” concept, something which you obviously do not

    and you wonder why you never played ball after the age of 12

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 11:19 am |

    [quote comment="383403"]…dress code Nazi.[/quote]
    Well, The Jeff, you had me then you lost me. I though maybe, just maybe, you were going to make a salient point. Instead, you resorted to the laziest debate tactic known to man.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    OK, I know it doesn’t need to be said, but that “worst NBA logo” feature is a complete pile of garbage.

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 11:20 am |

    Damn.

    “…I *thought* maybe…”

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 11:21 am |

    [quote comment="383407"]
    And the Yankees made Johnny Damon shave off his beard.
    Sooner or later he’ll no doubt become violent, lash out against society. Or at least need psychiatric care.[/quote]
    Even worse: sign with Detroit.

  • scott | March 30, 2010 at 11:24 am |

    Those are some awfully rigid rules. So there’s even a rule that everyone must have the same long- or short-sleeve undershirt? No individual choice as to weather it’s too cold for short sleeves or too warm for long sleeves?

    Yeah, the uniforms look OK, but they could use a splash of color or two. They look a little too much like the Yankees for my taste.

  • interlockingtc | March 30, 2010 at 11:25 am |

    Way to go, Dave Battafarano! Based on your writing and your aesthetics and commitment to doing things the right way, I bet you’re a pretty good Social Studies teacher.

    As a life long Bengals fan, it warmed my heart to watch footage from the 1982 playoff game vs. Buffalo. Great memory. (Loved the simple tv graphics… the utilitarian Riverfront stadium…and the broadcast team of Dick Enberg and the late Merlin Olsen–he really seemed egoless).

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 11:31 am |

    [quote comment="383413"]Those are some awfully rigid rules. So there’s even a rule that everyone must have the same long- or short-sleeve undershirt? No individual choice as to weather it’s too cold for short sleeves or too warm for long sleeves?

    Yeah, the uniforms look OK, but they could use a splash of color or two. They look a little too much like the Yankees for my taste.[/quote]
    School colors are blue and gray. What other color(s) would you suggest?

  • Dante | March 30, 2010 at 11:33 am |

    I don’t think Jeff is saying that being forced to blouse your pants is going to lead to a serial killer. In that case, the argument is being taken to a ridiculous extreme. I think the point he’s making (Jeff, correct me if I’m wrong) is that the idea of making everybody wear the same style uniform with such rigid rules is what may be what produces the styles seen on the Big League playing field. If players associate high socks and bloused pants with the lower levels of baseball, they may not want to wear this style once they’ve “made it.” Jeff, if this is the point you are trying to make, I agree.

  • RS Rogers | March 30, 2010 at 11:34 am |

    [quote comment="383381"]Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    According to both the U.S. Flag Code and to more than 200 years of custom and tradition, anything that looks like the American flag is the American flag. That lapel pin on your suit jacket? That’s an “actual” American flag, just like the quarter-acre Stars & Stripes flying in the wind above your local all-night diner or car dealership. All flags are “actual” flags. (All flags are also equally “graphic representations,” which is to say, symbols.)

    And yes, the NFL and MLB are massive offenders here. It may be unintentional, but it’s still flag desecration.

  • Alan #44 | March 30, 2010 at 11:35 am |

    Great job Coach. You make us all proud. The last line in your handout sums it up…Attention to detail makes good teams great”. There is a kid on my sons baseball team now who rips holes in the bottom of his pants and tucks his cleat into them. I was about to say something like “dress like a ballplayer”, but unfortunately thats exactly what he does.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 11:43 am |

    [quote comment="383416"]I don’t think Jeff is saying that being forced to blouse your pants is going to lead to a serial killer. In that case, the argument is being taken to a ridiculous extreme. I think the point he’s making (Jeff, correct me if I’m wrong) is that the idea of making everybody wear the same style uniform with such rigid rules is what may be what produces the styles seen on the Big League playing field. If players associate high socks and bloused pants with the lower levels of baseball, they may not want to wear this style once they’ve “made it.” Jeff, if this is the point you are trying to make, I agree.[/quote]

    Raise your hand if you actually were around for the time of the entire trend toward the pajama pants look.

    It is not some kind of revolution. Didn’t spring from an anti-establishment sentiment or rejection of the horrid images of lower level baseball.

    Of course, you can want to write an “after-the-fact” scenario that suits you, fine. But it’s a kind of reverse engineering that, in that this case, is leading to conclusion so absurd that it’s laughable.

    Pajama pants evolved because, as high and medium cut cleats came into the game, players realized that, though they were perhaps more comfortable, they looked bad with stirrups and were kind of clunky looking even if the pants covered the stirrups. The solution? Lower the pants to cover most of the top of the higher shoes.

    Barry Bonds’ long Giants pants accomplished essentially the same purpose as Lenny Moore’s taped white spats with the Colts.

    Now, you can write whatever post-dated theory you choose. But that’s essentially how it what happened. I know. I watched it happen. And that was the order of things.

    —Ricko

  • pflava | March 30, 2010 at 11:49 am |

    Outstanding job, David Battafarano. Outstanding!

  • RS Rogers | March 30, 2010 at 11:49 am |

    [quote comment="383385"]The bigger problem — which I was gonna let slide, but now that the flag issue has come up — is that David’s team has their flag patches facing the wrong way.

    It’s supposed to be like this:
    http://www.worldbase...

    The blue field should always be facing forward, so it looks like the flag is fluttering back as you advance forward. That’s how the U.S. Military does it:
    http://farm1.static....

    Additional examples:
    http://farm1.static....
    http://www.flickr.co...
    http://www.nasa.gov/...
    http://upload.wikime...

    Since we’re indulging my flag-respect extremism, Paul here expresses a common misperception. Common, but wrong.

    First, there is no correct way to display the flag on the right sleeve of a baseball jersey. It’s like debating the “right” or “wrong” way to steal your neighbor’s newspaper.

    Second, the Flag Code expressly states that the flag must always have the Union (the blue bit with the stars) on the viewer’s left. Also, when worn on clothing (as a lapel pin, for example), the flag should always be as close to the heart as possible. So the flag should be on the left, not the right, sleeve, where the Union will naturally appear on the left. And if worn on the right sleeve, the Union must still be on the left, even though that puts the Union toward the back of the sleeve.

    The military made an exception for itself in the 1990s, based on the silly conceit that a soldier must always advance toward the enemy. Which is a ridiculous statement even in a military context (and was widely ridiculed in the military when the rule was first announced a generation ago) and obviously inapplicable to civilians or athletes. Say a fly ball is hit behind an outfielder wearing a reversed flag patch on his right arm; should the outfielder be required to turn his back to the plate to run to the ball? Because if he simply steps backwards to back up, the flag will be “flying” in the wrong direction.

    But that’s a moot point, because no matter whether the stars are on the left or the right, a flag patch on a sports uniform is always wrong.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 11:50 am |

    [quote comment="383416"]I don’t think Jeff is saying that being forced to blouse your pants is going to lead to a serial killer. In that case, the argument is being taken to a ridiculous extreme. I think the point he’s making (Jeff, correct me if I’m wrong) is that the idea of making everybody wear the same style uniform with such rigid rules is what may be what produces the styles seen on the Big League playing field. If players associate high socks and bloused pants with the lower levels of baseball, they may not want to wear this style once they’ve “made it.” Jeff, if this is the point you are trying to make, I agree.[/quote]

    That’s part of it, yes.

    Seriously, teenagers are rebellious by nature. It’s part of being a teenager. Trying to force them to do anything is going to lead to some resentment and resistance. Convincing them to do something because it’s in their own best interests is a much better option than forcing it on them. If they’re wearing stirrups because THEY HAVE TO, then, yeah, when they hit the majors and get the choice, they stop. If they’re wearing them because THEY WANT TO, they may just keep it up.

  • Ry Co 40 | March 30, 2010 at 11:52 am |

    [quote comment="383417"][quote comment="383381"]Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    According to both the U.S. Flag Code and to more than 200 years of custom and tradition, anything that looks like the American flag is the American flag. That lapel pin on your suit jacket? That’s an “actual” American flag, just like the quarter-acre Stars & Stripes flying in the wind above your local all-night diner or car dealership. All flags are “actual” flags. (All flags are also equally “graphic representations,” which is to say, symbols.)

    And yes, the NFL and MLB are massive offenders here. It may be unintentional, but it’s still flag desecration.[/quote]

    “massive offenders” and “flag desecration”

    wow, maybe we could take the symbolism in context? i put a flag sticker on my hockey helmet, and i “desecrating” it, or am i just proud to be an american?

    lighten up a bit on this one…

  • Fight | March 30, 2010 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment="383409"][quote comment="383403"]
    Do we have to have this argument again? Let’s just say that enforcing arbitrary dress codes can easily lead to kids that resent it … but surely there’s ways to get the kids to realize that without being a dress code Nazi.[/quote]

    what argument?

    you seem to have a policy to rebel against everything anyone would ever ask of you

    that’s fine…i won’t begrudge you that, but is wearing a uniform properly (or even improperly, if that’s what the coach dictates) really going to lead you to become the next jeff dahmer?

    it seems many of us actually respect the “team” concept, something which you obviously do not

    and you wonder why you never played ball after the age of 12[/quote]
    If I may weigh in on the topic – I was both a player and a coach and had rigid rules to follow as far as uniform. When I played, we were not allowed to have facial hair (our captain had to dry shave with a dull razor before our first game as an example) and we had to wear our socks pulled up (I liked that, as our socks looked like the Bears’ just red and black). As a coach, I enforced the dress code, all players had to have the same color socks (I coached freshman ball, so I didn’t have to worry too much about facial hair – plus I had a beard, didn’t want to be a hypocrite) and had to have team-issued gloves and wristbands.

    As far as I know (other than my unhealthy obsession with uniforms) I turned out okay and so did the kids I coached. Bravo Coach! Love the uniforms and the uniformity, keep it up.

  • Christopher | March 30, 2010 at 11:54 am |

    [quote comment="383385"][quote comment="383381"][quote comment="383372"]Is there somewhere we can nominate David for high school baseball coach of the year?

    But ixnay on the flag atchpay. The U.S. Flag Code, the law that codifies the proper display of and respect for the American flag, is absolutely clear: The flag should never be put on an athletic uniform. Never. To quote the U.S. Flag Code (US Code, Title 4, Section 8, subsections E and J):

    “The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in any way.”

    “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.”

    Dragging the flag through dirt and mud on the ground, rubbing it on the grass, ripping it, and stepping on it are all forms of flag desecration. If you saw someone doing any of those things to the Stars and Stripes, you’d assume he hates America. Yet that’s exactly what will happen to each and every flag patch on any baseball uniform.[/quote]

    Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    The bigger problem — which I was gonna let slide, but now that the flag issue has come up — is that David’s team has their flag patches facing the wrong way.

    It’s supposed to be like this:
    http://www.worldbase...

    The blue field should always be facing forward, so it looks like the flag is fluttering back as you advance forward. That’s how the U.S. Military does it:
    http://farm1.static....

    Additional examples:
    http://farm1.static....
    http://www.flickr.co...
    http://www.nasa.gov/...
    http://upload.wikime...

    I’m curious if other countries do this? Anyone know?

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 11:57 am |

    [quote comment="383419"]
    Pajama pants evolved because, as high and medium cut cleats came into the game, players realized that, though they were perhaps more comfortable, they looked bad with stirrups and were kind of clunky looking even if the pants covered the stirrups. The solution? Lower the pants to cover most of the top of the higher shoes.

    Barry Bonds’ long Giants pants accomplished essentially the same purpose as Lenny Moore’s taped white spats with the Colts.[/quote]

    ricko’s right, of course

    bonds didn’t start out wearing pajamas, but once he went to those incredibly stupid looking high tops, he dropped trou

    again…he didn’t START that way

    hightops should NEVER be worn with baseball uniforms (this is just a personal observation)…and if you wear them with rups you look like a douchebag of the highest order…which is why guys like bonds, and eric davis and darryl strawberry started wearing the pajama bottoms

    look here for the proper way to dress (excluding the header pixture — that was birthday gag photo)

  • markw | March 30, 2010 at 11:58 am |

    Waving Flag Patch? Google has them in under a minute.

    http://www.flagpatch...

  • Kek | March 30, 2010 at 12:05 pm |

    [quote comment="383426"][quote comment="383419"]
    Pajama pants evolved because, as high and medium cut cleats came into the game, players realized that, though they were perhaps more comfortable, they looked bad with stirrups and were kind of clunky looking even if the pants covered the stirrups. The solution? Lower the pants to cover most of the top of the higher shoes.

    Barry Bonds’ long Giants pants accomplished essentially the same purpose as Lenny Moore’s taped white spats with the Colts.[/quote]

    ricko’s right, of course

    bonds didn’t start out wearing pajamas, but once he went to those incredibly stupid looking high tops, he dropped trou

    again…he didn’t START that way

    hightops should NEVER be worn with baseball uniforms (this is just a personal observation)…and if you wear them with rups you look like a douchebag of the highest order…which is why guys like bonds, and eric davis and darryl strawberry started wearing the pajama bottoms

    look here for the proper way to dress (excluding the header pixture — that was birthday gag photo)[/quote]
    I never liked the looks of high tops in baseball, but I’m not going to knock someone for wanting more ankle support. As a person that suffered bad injuries in both ankles, I can sympathize. I never went with high tops though, just wore my ankle braces.

    The pic of Bonds in the old Pirates grays with the hightops shows a look I’m OK with though. The pants are still snug. The baggy pants are the problem moreso than guys going high or low if you ask me.

  • Broadway Connie | March 30, 2010 at 12:06 pm |

    [quote comment="383410"][quote comment="383403"]…dress code Nazi.[/quote]
    Well, The Jeff, you had me then you lost me. I though maybe, just maybe, you were going to make a salient point. Instead, you resorted to the laziest debate tactic known to man.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    OK, I know it doesn’t need to be said, but that “worst NBA logo” feature is a complete pile of garbage.[/quote]

    Terrible!

    [quote comment="383417"][quote comment="383381"]Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    According to both the U.S. Flag Code and to more than 200 years of custom and tradition, anything that looks like the American flag is the American flag. That lapel pin on your suit jacket? That’s an “actual” American flag, just like the quarter-acre Stars & Stripes flying in the wind above your local all-night diner or car dealership. All flags are “actual” flags. (All flags are also equally “graphic representations,” which is to say, symbols.)

    And yes, the NFL and MLB are massive offenders here. It may be unintentional, but it’s still flag desecration.[/quote]

    RS is inarguably correct as to flag codes, but the sad truth is that flag codes are so widely disregarded these days (especially by idiot “patriots”) that they have lost effective force. Myself, I don’t think flags belong on athletic uniforms because I don’t think nationalist symbols belong on any athletic uniforms other than national teams competing against other national teams. Flags on unis, once rare, is now commonplace, and it’s damn shame.

  • mike 2 | March 30, 2010 at 12:07 pm |

    “The most notable of these brands is Coca-Cola, which makes Kosher for Passover Coke each spring — a godsend for foodies who believe cane sugar results in a crisper, fresher product than corn syrup. (Mexican and Canadian Coke are prized year round for the same reason.)…”

    I’m not sure where the story got started that Canadian Coke is made with cane sugar but its not true. The ingredient list says “sugar/glucose-fructose” which is another term for HFCS.

    (so no point in heading for Canada for a cane sugar fix)

  • Kek | March 30, 2010 at 12:08 pm |

    [quote comment="383426"][quote comment="383419"]
    Pajama pants evolved because, as high and medium cut cleats came into the game, players realized that, though they were perhaps more comfortable, they looked bad with stirrups and were kind of clunky looking even if the pants covered the stirrups. The solution? Lower the pants to cover most of the top of the higher shoes.

    Barry Bonds’ long Giants pants accomplished essentially the same purpose as Lenny Moore’s taped white spats with the Colts.[/quote]

    ricko’s right, of course

    bonds didn’t start out wearing pajamas, but once he went to those incredibly stupid looking high tops, he dropped trou

    again…he didn’t START that way

    hightops should NEVER be worn with baseball uniforms (this is just a personal observation)…and if you wear them with rups you look like a douchebag of the highest order…which is why guys like bonds, and eric davis and darryl strawberry started wearing the pajama bottoms

    look here for the proper way to dress (excluding the header pixture — that was birthday gag photo)[/quote]
    Post was eaten, let me try again.

    You’re right about high tops. I don’t like the look. I would never harp on someone for wanting more support, especially as I’ve had injuries in both ankles (I opted for braces rather than high tops). If you’re going to wear high tops, high cuffs are not the move.

    The pic of Bonds in the old road grays of the Pirates shows a look I’m ok with because the pants are still snug. I have more of a problem with the baggy pants than guys going high or low with the cuffs if you ask me.

  • Steve May | March 30, 2010 at 12:14 pm |

    Haven’t seen this mentioned – but CBC just aired a 2-part mini-series on the hockey career of Don Cherry (you gotta love this country). They did a tre-men-dous job of capturing the look, feel and accuracy of the uniforms and equipment
    http://www.cbc.ca/do...
    Here’s a clip from the movie
    http://www.youtube.c...

    I hope US uni-watchers get a chance to see this.

  • Bernard | March 30, 2010 at 12:20 pm |

    [quote comment="383429"][quote comment="383410"][quote comment="383403"]…dress code Nazi.[/quote]
    Well, The Jeff, you had me then you lost me. I though maybe, just maybe, you were going to make a salient point. Instead, you resorted to the laziest debate tactic known to man.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    OK, I know it doesn’t need to be said, but that “worst NBA logo” feature is a complete pile of garbage.[/quote]

    Terrible!

    [quote comment="383417"][quote comment="383381"]Hmmm… how would you feel about a t-shirt with a picture of a US flag on it? That would obviously be susceptible to the same kind of damage you describe above.

    I could be wrong, but I think the distinction is you’re not fastening an ACTUAL US flag, or part of one, to an athletic uniform. It’s a graphic representation.

    Or is that the same thing? If it is, the NFL better get to work with a razor blade on the back of everyone’s helmets (except LT, of course).[/quote]

    According to both the U.S. Flag Code and to more than 200 years of custom and tradition, anything that looks like the American flag is the American flag. That lapel pin on your suit jacket? That’s an “actual” American flag, just like the quarter-acre Stars & Stripes flying in the wind above your local all-night diner or car dealership. All flags are “actual” flags. (All flags are also equally “graphic representations,” which is to say, symbols.)

    And yes, the NFL and MLB are massive offenders here. It may be unintentional, but it’s still flag desecration.[/quote]

    RS is inarguably correct as to flag codes, but the sad truth is that flag codes are so widely disregarded these days (especially by idiot “patriots”) that they have lost effective force. Myself, I don’t think flags belong on athletic uniforms because I don’t think nationalist symbols belong on any athletic uniforms other than national teams competing against other national teams. Flags on unis, once rare, is now commonplace, and it’s damn shame.[/quote]

    I’ve always considered “desecration” to be burning, spitting on, tearing up, kicking, chewing, wiping nose with, that kind of thing. I had no idea that wearing with pride = desecration and a damn shame. Maybe it’s an old guy/young guy thing?

    Anyhoo, does anyone have any thoughts on how the Packers should wear their socks with their new alternate jerseys?

  • Glenn | March 30, 2010 at 12:22 pm |

    That handout that David gave his kids about uniforms should be a poster in every major league, clubhouse, along with a diagram on how to wear the uniform. The NFL enforces uniform details, and has similar posters in their locker rooms. I just don’t understand why major league baseball turns their head and allows their players to look like total crap.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 12:27 pm |

    [quote comment="383433"]

    Anyhoo, does anyone have any thoughts on how the Packers should wear their socks with their new alternate jerseys?[/quote]

    Uh…they’re solid blue socks. Regardless of the historical inaccuracy of that, there aren’t exactly a lot of options for how to wear them. The only question is whether or not Al Harris’ dumbass is going to cut the brown pants off like biker shorts and wear blue halfway up his thighs like an idiot or not.

  • Kek | March 30, 2010 at 12:36 pm |

    has anyone in the states had that Pepsi throwback? It’s made with real sugar, not sure if it’s the same as kosher, but it was really good.

  • muddlehead | March 30, 2010 at 12:37 pm |

    coach dave et al… am i the only one who dislikes team name on front of football jersey? in my world of designing fb jersey/uni, number only on jersey front works just fine.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 12:43 pm |

    [quote comment="383436"]has anyone in the states had that Pepsi throwback? It’s made with real sugar, not sure if it’s the same as kosher, but it was really good.[/quote]

    Yes, it’s awesome and I’m currently angry at Pepsi for making it a limited time thing rather than using it to replace the regular stuff. If they’d keep it out full time I’d consider forgiving them for dropping Pepsi Blue.

  • JimWa | March 30, 2010 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment="383436"]has anyone in the states had that Pepsi throwback? It’s made with real sugar, not sure if it’s the same as kosher, but it was really good.[/quote]

    I had the Mountain Dew throwback. It tasted better as I was drinking it – but after the fact, I wondered – if someone walked into my office and handed me a glass of MD, would I have the faintest clue which I one I was drinking? Probably not.

    Pepsi should put this to the test … going city to city to see which tastes people prefer … filming the results … it could be some kind of enormous challenge done for the sake of marketing …

    … or not.

  • Kek | March 30, 2010 at 12:49 pm |

    [quote comment="383438"][quote comment="383436"]has anyone in the states had that Pepsi throwback? It’s made with real sugar, not sure if it’s the same as kosher, but it was really good.[/quote]

    Yes, it’s awesome and I’m currently angry at Pepsi for making it a limited time thing rather than using it to replace the regular stuff. If they’d keep it out full time I’d consider forgiving them for dropping Pepsi Blue.[/quote]
    I’m still seeing it pretty regularly at Sheetz and Get Go stores in Pittsburgh and Johnstown. I gave up pop for lent so I bought a little supply for post-Easter.

    I’m more upset about Crystal Pepsi and Josta than Pepsi Blue, but I still feel your pain!

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 12:49 pm |

    [quote comment="383435"][quote comment="383433"]

    Anyhoo, does anyone have any thoughts on how the Packers should wear their socks with their new alternate jerseys?[/quote]

    Uh…they’re solid blue socks. Regardless of the historical inaccuracy of that, there aren’t exactly a lot of options for how to wear them. The only question is whether or not Al Harris’ dumbass is going to cut the brown pants off like biker shorts and wear blue halfway up his thighs like an idiot or not.[/quote]

    You got that right. No fighting city hall. Solid blue is what the team’s issuing, solid blue is what they’ll wear.

    Perfect, I suppose, would have been socks with the bottom area white (as with most NFL regular socks). Then the white would show on some players, not on others, pretty much how it was in 1929.

    What the hell, though, the bigger issue remains that rabbit turd of a helmet. LOL

    —Ricko

  • Jet | March 30, 2010 at 12:52 pm |

    Great job David B! Great to see someone who “gets it” on a level that can inspire kids. Especially love the white eyelets on the caps!!

    -Jet

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 12:53 pm |

    [quote comment="383433"]
    I’ve always considered “desecration” to be burning, spitting on, tearing up, kicking, chewing, wiping nose with, that kind of thing. I had no idea that wearing with pride = desecration and a damn shame. Maybe it’s an old guy/young guy thing?[/quote]
    Think about it this way. Say you have a flag patch on your football uniform. What is the likelihood of that patch being dragged through the dirt/mud/across the turf, stepped on by another player, etc.? Pretty damn high.

    On a baseball jersey sleeve, the chances are probably nowhere near as good, but there could still be a collision where one or both players get knocked to the ground right on said flag patch.

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 12:56 pm |

    muddlehead… when I designed our HS football uni I purposely went with a much smaller lettering size. it is actually sewn right into our jerseys!

    the reason we stayed with it, and I think its a valid point, is that your team is easily recognizable in newspaper photos where captions are frequently wrong or incorrect. sticking with the newspaper idea, most pics of HS sports in the papers are in black and white, making it harder to pick out who was playing…

  • Frank from B-more | March 30, 2010 at 12:57 pm |

    I love that the team dresses as a team. Not many of these young men will make it to the majors (or probably even the minors) but teaching them how to interact as a member of a team and follow procedures and guidelines will greatly increase their ability to succeed in life. They will always have to work for a boss and they should learn that the boss may have rules that, even if they don’t agree with, they must follow. Great job coach, and great unis.

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 1:01 pm |

    [quote comment="383440"][quote comment="383438"][quote comment="383436"]has anyone in the states had that Pepsi throwback? It’s made with real sugar, not sure if it’s the same as kosher, but it was really good.[/quote]

    Yes, it’s awesome and I’m currently angry at Pepsi for making it a limited time thing rather than using it to replace the regular stuff. If they’d keep it out full time I’d consider forgiving them for dropping Pepsi Blue.[/quote]
    I’m still seeing it pretty regularly at Sheetz and Get Go stores in Pittsburgh and Johnstown. I gave up pop for lent so I bought a little supply for post-Easter.

    I’m more upset about Crystal Pepsi and Josta than Pepsi Blue, but I still feel your pain![/quote]
    I never got the cotton candy comparison with Pepsi Blue. To me, it was more like a blue Slurpee type of a flavor.

    And sadly, it was doomed to failure from the get-go:
    Pepsi Blue was promoted after New York Mets games during the summer of 2002, where the color blue was one of the symbolic colors of the ball club.

  • Giancarlo | March 30, 2010 at 1:03 pm |

    [quote comment="383374"]
    As far as the Kosher Coke is concrened, I always stock up on it – it is definitely crisper and less heavy. No matter Coke/Pepsi might say, I truly believe there is a real connection with the HFCS explosion and the coinciding explosion of obesity. HFCS simply does not satisfy certain needs as well as regular cane sugar. When Coke puts out the Kosher Coke, or when Pepsi periodically puts out ‘throwback’ Pepsi/Mt Dew/Dr Pepper, there a noticeable less need to guzzle a whole 2 liter bottle to try to satisfy ones sweet urges. HFCS does nothing but push more Coke and or Pepsi sales, as one is not totally ‘refreshed’ by just one serving.
    [/quote]
    Here’s why I’m skeptical about this claim: the country with the highest per capita consumption of Coke in the world is… Mexico, where cane sugar reigns supreme. I think all sugar, including HFCS, is an addicting thing & perhaps the overall presence of it in everything we eat, including bread, is contributing to the obesity epidemic (together with physical sloth, fewer people walking etc.). Maybe future studies will solve this question of how bad HFCS really is.

    Oh, unis.. how did that factoid about the ’63 NY Jets’ helmets get discovered?

  • Ben Fortney | March 30, 2010 at 1:04 pm |

    Re: Baylor Green/Gold

    I had actually been collecting pics from my local HS teams to illustrate the problem with gold in unis.

    There is no consistency at all between the golds used by the various teams, let alone the color schemes – the track team is predominantly black, soccer uses metallic/dazzle colors, football a flat yellow/gold, etc. Up until the mid 90′s when I was there, the green was kelly instead of forrest, that was slowly phased out, without any official edict from up high.

    Also, this all came about when looking at a pic of the basketball team (Long Island Class A Champs!) I noticed that the uni actually said “Westbury Basketball” on it. The girls uni does as well. Anybody else seen the sport itself thrown onto the uni like that before? It’s a new development in the past couple years.

    That baseball pic is of the uni I wore in the 90′s, it’s on my DIY to-do list.

    Finally, Huzzah for the Crystal Pepsi reference!

  • Bob A | March 30, 2010 at 1:06 pm |

    It’s just piling on at this point but I couldn’t let today’s entry go past without adding my kudos to Dave for a job well done. I love the road unis especially and I got a big kick out of the ‘uniform manifesto’!

  • muddlehead | March 30, 2010 at 1:13 pm |

    nybatt/coach dave…
    understood. get that 100%. agree to disagree. i’m old enough to still be into the old school anonymity is very cool kinda thing. good luck to you and your teams.

  • Bernard | March 30, 2010 at 1:37 pm |

    [quote comment="383443"][quote comment="383433"]
    I’ve always considered “desecration” to be burning, spitting on, tearing up, kicking, chewing, wiping nose with, that kind of thing. I had no idea that wearing with pride = desecration and a damn shame. Maybe it’s an old guy/young guy thing?[/quote]
    Think about it this way. Say you have a flag patch on your football uniform. What is the likelihood of that patch being dragged through the dirt/mud/across the turf, stepped on by another player, etc.? Pretty damn high.

    On a baseball jersey sleeve, the chances are probably nowhere near as good, but there could still be a collision where one or both players get knocked to the ground right on said flag patch.[/quote]

    Yeah, I get that James. I was being (somewhat) facetious. Although, I don’t think it should be okay for baseball, but NOT for football, based solely on the likelihood of the flag being soiled/ripped/whatever. Those things can happen in baseball too (albeit less frequently).

    Ultimately, my position is what it was in my first post on the topic – to me, a flag patch isn’t a flag, and should be okay to wear on a uniform.

  • rpm | March 30, 2010 at 1:49 pm |

    david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 1:51 pm |

    Exactly. All those rules are for the flag, specifically.
    A flag patch is no more an actual flag than decorative patriotic bunting is.

    If anything with red and white stripes and white stars on a blue background is a flag then, or example, the Harlem Globetrotters and Captain America are in serious violation of flag protocol.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 1:51 pm |

    [quote comment="383452"]

    Ultimately, my position is what it was in my first post on the topic – to me, a flag patch isn’t a flag, and should be okay to wear on a uniform.[/quote]

    Regardless of flag codes, why should one be on a uniform anyway? Do you typically forget what country you’re from? In an international competition, yes there should be flags. That’s a no-brainer. But when a team from Florida is playing a team from Texas… why? If it’s about being proud of your country… then shouldn’t a Japanese pitcher have a Japanese flag or the Australian NFL kicker an Aussie flag? That obviously doesn’t happen. Flags on a uniform are just unnecessary clutter.

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 1:53 pm |

    [quote comment="383452"][quote comment="383443"][quote comment="383433"]
    I’ve always considered “desecration” to be burning, spitting on, tearing up, kicking, chewing, wiping nose with, that kind of thing. I had no idea that wearing with pride = desecration and a damn shame. Maybe it’s an old guy/young guy thing?[/quote]
    Think about it this way. Say you have a flag patch on your football uniform. What is the likelihood of that patch being dragged through the dirt/mud/across the turf, stepped on by another player, etc.? Pretty damn high.

    On a baseball jersey sleeve, the chances are probably nowhere near as good, but there could still be a collision where one or both players get knocked to the ground right on said flag patch.[/quote]

    Yeah, I get that James. I was being (somewhat) facetious. Although, I don’t think it should be okay for baseball, but NOT for football, based solely on the likelihood of the flag being soiled/ripped/whatever. Those things can happen in baseball too (albeit less frequently).

    Ultimately, my position is what it was in my first post on the topic – to me, a flag patch isn’t a flag, and should be okay to wear on a uniform.[/quote]
    I’m pretty sure we all can agree that as long as the flag is worn with respect and in a dignified manner, then it shouldn’t be considered desecration.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 1:59 pm |

    [quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 2:00 pm |
  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 2:02 pm |

    [quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Do it! If for no other reason than because Ricko said not to. C’mon man!

    /ok, I’m done now

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 2:04 pm |

    [quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i disagree

    this rocked

  • bantell | March 30, 2010 at 2:17 pm |

    im always glad to see mentions of the Tribe here on Uni-Watch, but I guess being from Brooklyn makes everyone a little bit Jewish.

    Kosher L’Pesach Coke is one of those things I love about Pesach (matzah, on the other hand, is despicable)

    For those who are interested, in Israel, Coke is always made with sugar rather than corn syrup, so there is no issue for Pesach, and it always tastes great.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 2:36 pm |

    [quote comment="383460"][quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i disagree

    this rocked[/quote]
    [quote comment="383460"][quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i disagree

    this rocked[/quote]

    Okay, let’s have a show of hands. Who else actually SAW those ’69 or ’70 White Sox unis either live on TV or, better yet, in person? (I did both, and they looked REALLY dopey, honest; even though blue, they looked like sweaty dirty sanis just covered with dust, crud and mud…which happened to sanis…for the throng here who have never really played in them).

    Who can point to another team in all of MLB history that tried that look (okay, maybe the Giants orange sanis, but that was with white shoes)?

    Now let’s look for teams that wore white stirrups with colored stripes over white sanis. Oh, the list is plenty long, you say?

    If David is looking for a throwback vintage feel (look at the years he picked for reference), going back to a short-lived “experiment” from 1969 & 1970 isn’t being at all true to his original notion.

    And THAT was my essential point…even beyond the butt-ugliness of them. Again I ask, anyone else here actually SEE the damn things?

    Because in person is vastly different from looking at a photo.

    —Ricko

  • Bob Loblaw | March 30, 2010 at 2:40 pm |

    [quote comment="383461"]im always glad to see mentions of the Tribe here on Uni-Watch, but I guess being from Brooklyn makes everyone a little bit Jewish.

    Kosher L’Pesach Coke is one of those things I love about Pesach (matzah, on the other hand, is despicable)

    For those who are interested, in Israel, Coke is always made with sugar rather than corn syrup, so there is no issue for Pesach, and it always tastes great.[/quote]
    What tribe???? The only reference to the ‘tribe’ was Frosty’s mid 70′s Indians’ DIY ;)

  • Skycat | March 30, 2010 at 2:41 pm |

    [quote comment="383382"]Paul,

    Passover Coke is the drink of the gods! Every year, I buy around 12 bottles to use through out the year (never lasts longer than 4-6 months) but since SAM’S Club started carrying Mexican Coke it makes it easier to get the cane sweetened goodness. Oh, Coke says that there is no differance in taste because if they admitted that the cane suger sweetened soda was better, they couldn’t get away with using that damn corn syrup shit![/quote]
    A difference between Mexican Coke and Kosher for Passover Coke is the Mexican version is sold in glass bottles and I think that affects the taste (for the better).

  • Andy | March 30, 2010 at 3:20 pm |

    [quote comment="383460"][quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    i disagree

    this rocked[/quote]

    Exactly. The rarity of this look makes even better if you ask me. If David wanted his team to look like the long list of teams who wore white stirrups with white sanis, then he probably wouldn’t have opted for such a unique uniform in the first place.

    And just because a style is short lived doesn’t necessarily make it inferior to one that has lasted for decades.

  • Rich | March 30, 2010 at 3:21 pm |

    matzo brei?!?!

    Here are the big questions: ratio of egg to matzah board and do you soak the matzah or just wet it. I’ve been going with a 1/2 matzah board per egg ratio, wet the board under running could water, milk (about tablespoon per egg), and some salt and pepper.

  • scott | March 30, 2010 at 3:29 pm |

    [quote comment="383415"][quote comment="383413"]Those are some awfully rigid rules. So there’s even a rule that everyone must have the same long- or short-sleeve undershirt? No individual choice as to weather it’s too cold for short sleeves or too warm for long sleeves?

    Yeah, the uniforms look OK, but they could use a splash of color or two. They look a little too much like the Yankees for my taste.[/quote]
    School colors are blue and gray. What other color(s) would you suggest?[/quote]

    Point taken, but the style is still very much like the Yankees, from pinstripes and the logo on the left chest on the home uniforms, to the printed out name on the road jerseys.

    But I still want to know why players don’t even have a choice when it comes to wearing long or short sleeves? That seems like it’s taking rules a bit too far.

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 3:40 pm |

    [quote comment="383467"]the style is still very much like the Yankees, from pinstripes and the logo on the left chest on the home uniforms, to the printed out name on the road jerseys.[/quote]

    all the more reason to rock this rup

    and, you say “look too much like the yankees for my taste”

    that’s fine, but are you saying the yankees uni isn’t a good thing to emulate? or you just don’t like the yankees, uniform be damned

  • ASM | March 30, 2010 at 3:51 pm |

    Ive allowed my sons coach far to long to have the authority on choosing our teams uniforms. Im quit embarrassed on this years version.

    Coach I applaud you.

  • Johnny | March 30, 2010 at 3:59 pm |

    Old football photo here:

    http://farm3.static....

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 4:27 pm |

    “And just because a style is short lived doesn’t necessarily make it inferior to one that has lasted for decades.”

    Actually, it kinda does. Good/popular ideas last. Dumb/unpopular ones disappear quickly…and stay gone.

    In person that White Sox stirrup/sani combo looked, compared to all that had gone before, and since, like a football team wearing stirrups on the outside.

    Unique, sure. But just too odd for most to find workable. Want a parallel? The original Broncos socks.

    —Ricko

  • Todd | March 30, 2010 at 4:30 pm |

    Fox’s U-Bet Chocolate Syrup is the best! Bosco, Hershey’s doesn’t compare to U-Bet. With a little seltzer and some milk you get yourself a perfect egg-cream!Good stuff.

  • JTH | March 30, 2010 at 4:37 pm |

    [quote comment="383471"]“And just because a style is short lived doesn’t necessarily make it inferior to one that has lasted for decades.”

    Actually, it kinda does. Good/popular ideas last. Dumb/unpopular ones disappear quickly…and stay gone.

    In person that White Sox stirrup/sani combo looked, compared to all that had gone before, and since, like a football team wearing stirrups on the outside.

    Unique, sure. But just too odd for most to find workable. Want a parallel? The original Broncos socks.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Well, it’s just a pair of socks.

    Maybe the team can wear them and if they don’t care for the way they look, they can switch to white sanis for the road games and relegate the blue sanis to practice socks.

  • JamesP. | March 30, 2010 at 4:42 pm |

    [quote comment="383464"][quote comment="383382"]Paul,

    Passover Coke is the drink of the gods! Every year, I buy around 12 bottles to use through out the year (never lasts longer than 4-6 months) but since SAM’S Club started carrying Mexican Coke it makes it easier to get the cane sweetened goodness. Oh, Coke says that there is no differance in taste because if they admitted that the cane suger sweetened soda was better, they couldn’t get away with using that damn corn syrup shit![/quote]
    A difference between Mexican Coke and Kosher for Passover Coke is the Mexican version is sold in glass bottles and I think that affects the taste (for the better).[/quote]

    You are so right! I am able to relive my youth growing up in the South by having a coke in a glass bottle with peanuts added into the bottle.

    No Moon Pie though…those are only eaten with a bottle of RC Cola.

  • JamesP. | March 30, 2010 at 4:44 pm |

    [quote comment="383470"]Old football photo here:

    http://farm3.static....

    Yeah, that was quite a find in Paul’s Page 2 update today.

  • Andy | March 30, 2010 at 4:55 pm |

    [quote comment="383471"]“And just because a style is short lived doesn’t necessarily make it inferior to one that has lasted for decades.”

    Actually, it kinda does. Good/popular ideas last. Dumb/unpopular ones disappear quickly…and stay gone.

    In person that White Sox stirrup/sani combo looked, compared to all that had gone before, and since, like a football team wearing stirrups on the outside.

    Unique, sure. But just too odd for most to find workable. Want a parallel? The original Broncos socks.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Want a better parallel? Dark sanitaries under white stirrups lasted only a few seasons. Pajama pants have been around for almost twenty, yet dark sanitaries under white stirrups are clearly the better contribution to baseball’s sartorial history.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 5:21 pm |

    [quote comment="383476"][quote comment="383471"]“And just because a style is short lived doesn’t necessarily make it inferior to one that has lasted for decades.”

    Actually, it kinda does. Good/popular ideas last. Dumb/unpopular ones disappear quickly…and stay gone.

    In person that White Sox stirrup/sani combo looked, compared to all that had gone before, and since, like a football team wearing stirrups on the outside.

    Unique, sure. But just too odd for most to find workable. Want a parallel? The original Broncos socks.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Want a better parallel? Dark sanitaries under white stirrups lasted only a few seasons. Pajama pants have been around for almost twenty, yet dark sanitaries under white stirrups are clearly the better contribution to baseball’s sartorial history.[/quote]

    [quote comment="383476"][quote comment="383471"]“And just because a style is short lived doesn’t necessarily make it inferior to one that has lasted for decades.”

    Actually, it kinda does. Good/popular ideas last. Dumb/unpopular ones disappear quickly…and stay gone.

    In person that White Sox stirrup/sani combo looked, compared to all that had gone before, and since, like a football team wearing stirrups on the outside.

    Unique, sure. But just too odd for most to find workable. Want a parallel? The original Broncos socks.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Want a better parallel? Dark sanitaries under white stirrups lasted only a few seasons. Pajama pants have been around for almost twenty, yet dark sanitaries under white stirrups are clearly the better contribution to baseball’s sartorial history.[/quote]

    I wasn’t being as arbitrary as I sounded. Just noting the time period David references most often (Teens and ’20s), it appears that’s the era he’s most interested in harking back to. And striped white stirrups over white sanis is much more evocative of–are more true to–that era.

    Certainly moreso than 1969-1970.

    Best idea is mentioned above, I suppose. Give the navy sanis a try. If they seem too anachronistic with the “period” look of the rest of the uni, then go with the whites.

    —Ricko

  • Paul Lukas | March 30, 2010 at 5:23 pm |

    [quote comment="383466"]matzo brei?!?!

    Here are the big questions: ratio of egg to matzah board and do you soak the matzah or just wet it. I’ve been going with a 1/2 matzah board per egg ratio, wet the board under running could water, milk (about tablespoon per egg), and some salt and pepper.[/quote]

    That’s way more egg than I use. I go one egg for every two sheets. And yes, I wet them — submerged in water for about a minute.

  • Peanuts | March 30, 2010 at 5:35 pm |

    What about those little American flag toothpicks that people put on cupcakes? Should they be allowed? Which way should they face?

    Flags aren’t necessary on sports’ uniforms. Where at least you know you’re free, Greenwood.

    Strict rules regarding dress codes can be… strict. Stay bearded.

    Buy whatever socks/stirrups that you want.

  • Kev29 | March 30, 2010 at 5:37 pm |

    Holy cow! Coach Battafarano, you are the man! Very cool uniform story.

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 5:43 pm |

    a quick note on the sleeve issue scott.. most HS players have no idea how bad cold air on a sore arm is. they also have NO concept of weather or weather forecasts. my mandatory sleeve policy is actually more for arm health than uni-guidelines. when the weather is warm and sleeves aren’t mandatory some players choose to still wear them, and that’s fine by me. again, it is only for the effects of cold air on bare arms.

    as for the yankee parallels. truth is I am a yankee fan, BUT our home uni is almost an EXACT replica of the 1918 Detroit Tigers!! So, when people are quick to make sarcastic Yankee comments I point that out or tell them about the Dressed To The Nines site to check it out!!

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 5:48 pm |

    one aspect of high-cuffed pants that has not been mentioned today is the effect on the strike zone. I have used our high-cuffs in ‘discussions’ with umpire strike zones MANY times.. .. doesn’t always work, but at least the bottom of our strike zone is clearly identifiable!

    on the flip side I do make a stink when our pitchers are getting squeezed and low pitches aren’t being called.. my comments from the dugout are usually: “blue, how can you tell the bottom of the strike zone when he’s wearing pajamas??” it gets a laugh.. and also some calls!

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 5:51 pm |

    [quote comment="383482"] “blue, how can you tell the bottom of the strike zone when he’s wearing pajamas??” it gets a laugh.. and also some calls![/quote]

    is that what’s happening here? ;)

  • Lee | March 30, 2010 at 6:03 pm |

    [quote comment=\"383372\"]

    Dragging the flag through dirt and mud on the ground, rubbing it on the grass, ripping it, and stepping on it are all forms of flag desecration. [b]If you saw someone doing any of those things to the Stars and Stripes, you\’d assume he hates America.[/b] Yet that\’s exactly what will happen to each and every flag patch on any baseball uniform.[/quote]

    Ummm, no I wouldn\’t. That\’s one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

    Lee

  • Josh Petty | March 30, 2010 at 6:03 pm |

    I stock shelves in a grocery store and see the old NFL logo on Campbell’s Chunky Soup cans all of the time. The new logo is starting to show up a little more frequently in the last couple of months, however we got at least a couple of cases of Chunky Soup in last week with the old logo still on the lid. With that said, I don’t think finding the old NFL logo on Chunky Soup cans is as rare as you’d think it would or should be.

  • rpm | March 30, 2010 at 6:45 pm |

    [quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    don’t listen to this madman david.

  • rpm | March 30, 2010 at 7:04 pm |

    to all the if you are forced to do something as a teenager you will rebel and/or associate with bush league. i call BS. i had a VERY strict uniform code in high school, and non of us said boo about it. not the tie on gameday or anything else. and the 5 of us who continued to play after high school continued to wear our uniform properly. first all you are forced to dress that way to teach lessons, that is what high school is about. the lesson is you dress as a team, because you work as a team to accomplish team goals, nothing is above the team. you wear a tie because you are representing more then yourself but your team and your school. you respect those values, all of them or you don’t play on the team, that simple, case closed. some of those kids may like the look, some of them might not, those that like it will continue to do it when they have a choice. others, not because they are rebelling, but simply because they don’t like the look won’t keep it. when i was a kid my mommy told me to eat my veggies, i didn’t like it, but i had to do it, as an adult, guess what, i eat my veggies because i know it is the right thing to do. apples and oranges, fine. but the fact remains the same, you are all nuts.

  • Teebz | March 30, 2010 at 7:33 pm |

    So this is what it’s like with no hockey chatter on the UW board – socks and hosiery wars. LOL

    My day job is killing me.

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 7:35 pm |

    [quote comment="383486"][quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    don’t listen to this madman david.[/quote]

    Here’s what I’m saying…

    Figuring an average of 20 teams for 100 years, MLB teams combined have played at least 2,000 seasons. That’s probably conservative. And it doesn’t count the Negro Leagues.

    How many of those seasons were played by a team wearing white stirrups over dark sanitaries?

    Two. The other 1,998(+) were not.

    That means that, in the entire history of MLB, only maybe 50 (or so) players have ever wore that look in a regular season game.

    Just saying if someone does it, there’s absolutely no way it should be spoken of as an “old school” look. Because it isn’t. The numbers bear that out.

    A “fluke”, a virtual “one-shot”, a “trial balloon”…sure.
    Old School, historical, traditional…most certainly not.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | March 30, 2010 at 8:01 pm |

    Subject Change…

    Once you get past the frickin’ commercial,
    this is kinda…interesting.
    http://www.bing.com/...

    —Ricko

  • Miles Morningweigh | March 30, 2010 at 8:15 pm |

    Long time lurker, first time poster. Hello folks. Anyway, I was driving home when the thought popped into my mind:

    With the prevailing trend of pants to the shoes, does that mean David Wright is more out of uniform (in this case, uniform meaning everybody looking the same) than anybody else. IE: If 24 Mets wear their pants to the shoetops, but only one wears high pants with stirrups (with visible white sock), is that one Met going against the whole idea of uniformity? I mean, it almost seems like a person could complain that he is intentionally calling attention to himself, not his team.

    IDK. That just kind of popped into my head on the way home. Maybe another reason why California roads are so safe :p

  • LarryB | March 30, 2010 at 8:33 pm |

    great work David

  • nybatt | March 30, 2010 at 8:36 pm |

    I get a laugh when I look at that pic Paul ran of the ump and me in ‘discussion’. I was actually arguing a play where my catcher was bowled over in a play at the plate. that is not allowed in HS baseball.

    umpires do not like their strike zones being challenged even on the HS level!!

    On a uni-note, the umpires association in delaware approved beige/khaki shirts as an option for this season. during our last game I got a look at them for the first time… they are as shocking as the AL umps RED shirts from back in the 90′s! we got a good laugh at home plate during ground rules!

  • JGoodrich | March 30, 2010 at 8:40 pm |

    Speaking of gray Bills facemasks, their web page is showing a helmet with a gray mask.

  • JGoodrich | March 30, 2010 at 8:43 pm |

    Proving I don’t know how to add a link…

    [quote comment="383494"]Speaking of gray Bills facemasks, their web page is showing the current red helmet with a gray mask instead of white.

    [/quote]

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 9:51 pm |

    [quote comment="383489"][quote comment="383486"][quote comment="383457"][quote comment="383453"]david~
    i can get you those blue sanis, drop me a line, rpmarshallart at gmail.[/quote]

    Oh, man, don’t do it, David.

    As inventive and allegedly “old school” as you might think it is, this…
    http://farm4.static....
    …is a look worn by, in the entire history of MLB, one team for just two seasons. If dark sanis with white stirrups looked so great, don’t you think it would have lasted just a TAD longer than that? Or that maybe someone else would have picked it up? it’s an aberration, not a tradition. Of any sort whatsoever.

    Your plan to use white sanis with your white striped stirrups will give you a general “look” worn by a far, far greater number of teams over the game’s history.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    don’t listen to this madman david.[/quote]

    Here’s what I’m saying…

    Figuring an average of 20 teams for 100 years, MLB teams combined have played at least 2,000 seasons. That’s probably conservative. And it doesn’t count the Negro Leagues.

    How many of those seasons were played by a team wearing white stirrups over dark sanitaries?

    Two. The other 1,998(+) were not.

    That means that, in the entire history of MLB, only maybe 50 (or so) players have ever wore that look in a regular season game.

    Just saying if someone does it, there’s absolutely no way it should be spoken of as an “old school” look. Because it isn’t. The numbers bear that out.

    A “fluke”, a virtual “one-shot”, a “trial balloon”…sure.
    Old School, historical, traditional…most certainly not.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    here’s what we’re saying:

    IT’S HIGH SCHOOL

    if it were a look for the bigs, that’d be different

    let them have some fun with their hose instead of ALWAYS WEARING A GODDAM BP JERSEY and PAJAMAS or some other nonsense

    they’re wearing pinstripe homes, road grays and you’re bitching about hosiery

    you know i love you rick, but i think that look would be fun to try…if it doesn’t work, then they go back to blue hose and white sanis

  • Curtis | March 30, 2010 at 9:56 pm |

    Good to see representation from the DE prep ranks. I’m an A.I. duPont alum myself.

  • JimV19 | March 30, 2010 at 10:13 pm |

    [quote comment="383497"]Good to see representation from the DE prep ranks. I’m an A.I. duPont alum myself.[/quote]

    Snuck a peak at your blog, Curtis. I like your idea for rebranding UMBC:
    http://80minutesofre...

    [quote comment="383491"]Long time lurker, first time poster. Hello folks. Anyway, I was driving home when the thought popped into my mind:

    With the prevailing trend of pants to the shoes, does that mean David Wright is more out of uniform (in this case, uniform meaning everybody looking the same) than anybody else. IE: If 24 Mets wear their pants to the shoetops, but only one wears high pants with stirrups (with visible white sock), is that one Met going against the whole idea of uniformity? I mean, it almost seems like a person could complain that he is intentionally calling attention to himself, not his team.

    IDK. That just kind of popped into my head on the way home. Maybe another reason why California roads are so safe :p[/quote]

    I was wondering that myself. Not that I like the pajama pants look – I don’t – but you make a good point. Now BP jerseys, on the other hand, I don’t have a problem with those.

    /logs off computer and runs out door before the UW army comes after me…

  • Alec | March 30, 2010 at 10:18 pm |

    Dave B,

    Love the look, to solve the white brim perhaps down the line you could sub out white for gray and go White-navy-gray on the D to make it pop.

  • Alec | March 30, 2010 at 10:23 pm |

    Teebz,

    If you want your chocolate & peanut butter mixed together goto photobucket and search alecpappas and take a gander at the potential hockey ‘rups. Need input, especially to the Philly choice

  • Patrick in MI | March 30, 2010 at 10:29 pm |

    [quote comment="383488"]So this is what it’s like with no hockey chatter on the UW board – socks and hosiery wars. LOL

    My day job is killing me.[/quote]

    So you gonna do a guest column for the Frozen Four?

    Speaking of kosher, Pepsi also has a kosher version out for Passover. My girlfriend bought a 2-liter but we have yet to crack it open. She lives in a predominately Jewish area and I live in a predominately Hispanic area so there’s never any shortage of “real” soda.

  • Shannon plue | March 30, 2010 at 10:42 pm |

    http://www.ecseller....

    small selection of NHL socks… Some nice striping!!

  • flip | March 30, 2010 at 10:59 pm |

    Enjoyed the Michigan State Web site. Good work, Eric.

  • Alec | March 30, 2010 at 10:59 pm |

    That’s the thing that blows about hockey socks, they look great but have no function beyond keeping your shinpads on unless you’re going for a legwarmers look.

    My other dream would be to get an NHL licence and make soccer shorts that look like breezers. Guys gotta wear something to the gym and what wouldn’t look better than Ranger pants or the Blackhawks throwbacks? Of course too many teams have gone lame-o with solids, but it’s a wide open opportunity. Just add a little pocket for your ID & locker key and you’re off.

    I’m looking to do something else, but that’s just me.

  • MNH | March 30, 2010 at 11:13 pm |

    Is Ruby Red Squirt kosher?
    That shit is good.

  • The Jeff | March 30, 2010 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment="383495"]Proving I don’t know how to add a link…

    [quote comment="383494"]Speaking of gray Bills facemasks, their web page is showing the current red helmet with a gray mask instead of white.

    [/quote][/quote]

    That’s not a gray mask on the red helmet. There’s no pure white anywhere on it – the mask is the same color as the outline on the logo, definitely not as dark as the actual gray mask on the white helmet.

  • LI Phil | March 30, 2010 at 11:31 pm |

    [quote comment="383505"]Is Ruby Red Squirt kosher?
    That shit is good.[/quote]

    shit yea marty

  • rpm | March 30, 2010 at 11:33 pm |

    [quote comment="383500"]Teebz,

    If you want your chocolate & peanut butter mixed together goto photobucket and search alecpappas and take a gander at the potential hockey ‘rups. Need input, especially to the Philly choice[/quote]
    i sent those to him the day you sent them to me.

  • rpm | March 30, 2010 at 11:37 pm |

    alec~
    and the one you came up with first is the perfect philarup!

  • yikes | March 30, 2010 at 11:49 pm |

    what a fat, racist, prick.

  • MNH | March 30, 2010 at 11:54 pm |

    Alec,
    I scanned through some photos after the hockey socks. Did I see a picture of Beatle Bob?
    I also thought I saw a Parkway Central hat?

  • Teebz | March 31, 2010 at 12:05 am |

    [quote comment="383500"]Teebz,

    If you want your chocolate & peanut butter mixed together goto photobucket and search alecpappas and take a gander at the potential hockey ‘rups. Need input, especially to the Philly choice[/quote]

    What kind of input? I really like the NY Americans look! WOO!

  • Teebz | March 31, 2010 at 12:06 am |

    [quote comment="383509"]alec~
    and the one you came up with first is the perfect philarup![/quote]

    I have to admit that those are awesome beyond words.

    I’m also fond of the Maple Leafs stripes on those ‘rups, but I hate the Leafs with a passion. LOL

  • Teebz | March 31, 2010 at 12:10 am |

    [quote comment="383510"]what a fat, racist, prick.[/quote]

    The grammar is way off. Overuse of punctuation kills the message, and the emphasis on the commas ruins the sentence’s flow.

    That, and it’s totally meaningless to any discussion that might be happening.

    Mark: F
    Recommendations: Stop trying.

  • LI Phil | March 31, 2010 at 12:33 am |

    [quote comment="383514"][quote comment="383510"]what a fat, racist, prick.[/quote]

    The grammar is way off. Overuse of punctuation kills the message, and the emphasis on the commas ruins the sentence’s flow.

    That, and it’s totally meaningless to any discussion that might be happening.

    Mark: F
    Recommendations: Stop trying.[/quote]

    actually, teebz, it’s proper to use a comma to denote separate coordinate adjectives (see rule #5) so your analysis is incorrect

    recommendation: don’t feed the troll

  • Teebz | March 31, 2010 at 12:43 am |

    [quote comment="383515"][quote comment="383514"][quote comment="383510"]what a fat, racist, prick.[/quote]

    The grammar is way off. Overuse of punctuation kills the message, and the emphasis on the commas ruins the sentence’s flow.

    That, and it’s totally meaningless to any discussion that might be happening.

    Mark: F
    Recommendations: Stop trying.[/quote]

    actually, teebz, it’s proper to use a comma to denote separate coordinate adjectives (see rule #5) so your analysis is incorrect

    recommendation: don’t feed the troll[/quote]

    I disagree. “Prick” in this case is the noun. Therefore, no comma before it.

    I’m trolling. It’s all I’ve been reduced to. :o(

  • Ski U Mah Gopher | March 31, 2010 at 12:53 am |

    Let’s hear some props for the popover. One of my favorite passover foods.

  • JA | March 31, 2010 at 5:24 am |

    I once reffed a soccer game similar to the Angels Vs. Angels little league game. The only difference between the two jerseys was the badge, which of course is about the size of an index card.

    The coaches didn’t have anything they could put over and asked me to just learn the team names and try to figure it out, so instead of yelling ‘red’ after the ball rolled out I had to yell the team name.

    Easily the most confusing task of my life.

  • james | March 31, 2010 at 6:32 am |

    no NCAA court in Tucson next year?

    http://azstarnet.com...

  • Don Love | March 31, 2010 at 1:03 pm |

    Coach Dave? who is coach dave…I thought that was Kenny Powers?!?

  • Chaim Mattis Keller | April 1, 2010 at 5:00 pm |

    Just for the sake of accuracy: corn syrup is not actually “chametz.” That name is attached only to leavened foods made from wheat, barley, rye, oats and spelt. Corn (as well as rice and most legumes) belong to a category of foods known in Hebrew as “kitniyot”, which Ashkenazic Jews (those whose ancestors came from Eastern and Central Europe) have a tradition not to eat on Passover in addition to actual chametz.