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

Capping Off the College Hoops Season

IMG_5289.JPG

Vince has finished tabulating the resuts for our annual NCAA bracket contest. The 10 winners will choose from the following prizes: a free Uni Watch membership, a Bruins Winter Classic tee (tagged as size XL, although it measures 21″ pit-to-pit, which means it’s really more like a large or even a very generous medium), and the eight BP caps shown above (all sized as small/medium).

The 10 winners, in order, are as follows:

1. Queensberry Street King (CoryG)
2. Mascot Would Kill Other Mascot (HarmyG)
3. Mmm Chicken (hllshwkeye)
4. A Mountain Out of a Grant Hill (The Bopper)
5. Jon’s Bracket (Green Lantern)
6. Hulks Striped Hose (MarkM)
7. Erik Morris (Erik M)
8. Pick ’Em Pro (Momentum)
9. Super Nintendo Chalmers (Brocktoon)
10. twilo thunder (ed)

All 10 winners should contact me pronto with their real names and shipping addresses. First-place winner gets his choice of prizes; second-place winner should provide two prize choices, in order of preference; third-place winner should provide three choices; and so on. Okay? Okay.

Meanwhile: New ESPN column today — the curling story, finally.

Uni Watch News Ticker: Here’s an MLB uni change I hadn’t caught: the Giants’ road NOBs are now direct-sewn instead of nameplated (excellent catch by Dave Toebner). … Completely awesome 1912 baseball uni ad here. … And here’s an even better one from 1968. … Phil found this awesome shot of Roy Face’s flocked helmet. … New mascot for William & Mary (with thanks to Tris Wykes). … Some new uni numbers for the Broncos — and note the rare use of the full-horse logo at upper right (with thanks to Ryan Hess). … “Texas Tech football will supposedly introduce a new alternate helmet this year,” reports James Kelly. “Rumor is that it will be worn for road games. Not sure about the legitimacy of the story, but my cousin’s friend took these photos while at the TTU facilities a few days ago. All things considered, I like the look.” … Jeff Ingalls wonders what’s up with this old hockey card, which was part of a supermarket sticker album around 1974. Practice jersey? Uni number airbrushed in due to lack of a licensing deal? Something else? … Looks like they left a little too much space between the “Mc” and the “Nabb” (picky-picky, Jon Solomonson). … Did you know the U.S. Census Bureau is promoting census participation by sponsoring a NASCAR car? “Greg Biffle will be driving it a half-dozen or so times this season,” reports Scott Leighty, who works for the Census Bureau. … Nice slideshow of old Brooklyn Dodgers pics here (thanks, Kirsten). … Now that’s awesome uniform (gold star for Don Kasak). … Gumball helmet king Bill Jones reports that he’s made some major additions to his Flickr gallery of helmet logo decal designs: “I’ve Added four pages of defunct hockey minor leagues, along with photos of the completed helmets (All American Hockey League 1986-89; American Hockey Association 1992-93; Atlantic Coast Hockey League 1981-87; Central Hockey League 1968-84; Continental Hockey League 1972-86; Eastern Hockey League 1979-81; North American Hockey League 1973-77; North American League 1995-96; Northeastern Hockey League 1978-79; NY-Penn Major Hockey League 1973-78; Pacific Hockey League 1977-79; Pacific Northwest Hockey League 1991-92; Pacific Southwest Hockey League 1972-95; Southern Hockey League 1973-77; Southwest Hockey League 1975-77; United States Hockey League 1961-79; Western Hockey League 1952-74; Western International Hockey League 1946-86). Also added the new Federal Hockey League (set to start in 2010 with six teams), updated the Major League Roller Hockey page to include historic teams, added NAIA Football (college) decals for 2009 (this is the first and only set of these that I am aware of), and updated the NCAA D3 set. I should be adding some baseball soon (minors, international, summer leagues), as well as all the 2010 changes to the indoor football leagues (New Arena Football League, AIFA, IFL, SIFL, and CIFL).” Phew — and you thought your life was complicated! … About a month ago I got a note from a guy named Dave Lamm, who wanted to know the exact specs and spacing on the Yankees’ pinstripes for a project he was working on. I referred him to my December 2008 column about the Yanks’ striping, and he took it from there. And what was his project? A Yankees-themed tailgating grill, as it turns out. … Stirrups vs. stirrups! That’s Gregg Zaun batting against Ubaldo Jimenez on Monday (with thanks to Alex Higley). … Remember the Oakland Police Dept. sleeve patch that the A’s wore last year? Andrew Bailey is still wearing it this year! Never seen anything like that before (great catch by Kurtiss Dilley).

 

185 comments to Capping Off the College Hoops Season

  • JAson | April 7, 2010 at 8:02 am |

    Like father
    http://farm4.static....

    Like son
    http://grfx.cstv.com...

    That’s Kevin & Cameron Seitzer with, apparently, hereditary jaw flaps.

  • dudebrotherman | April 7, 2010 at 8:10 am |

    Was walking around Wrigley Field on Monday. They are fixin up the joint. The Chicago Cubs Sign behind the bleachers looks so much better! Here is what it looks like.

    http://www.bleedcubb...

    Also, the Sports Corner Bar is finally done. It has a nice lookin roof from what I can see and looks good inside.

  • Greenie | April 7, 2010 at 8:21 am |

    Top Ten get prizes? D’oh. I took 14th.

    -Greenie

  • Joe Barrie | April 7, 2010 at 8:30 am |

    Nice picture of Pee Wee Reese. The “1952” photo is really from 1946, as is clearly stated on the scoreboard.

  • brig | April 7, 2010 at 8:38 am |

    “Rumor is that it will be worn for road games. Not sure about the legitimacy of the story, but my cousin’s friend took these photos while at the TTU facilities a few days ago. All things considered, I like the look.”

    Looks a lot like the helmet from Tubervilles last coaching job…
    http://www.replaypho...

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 8:38 am |

    From the Ticker:

    Stirrups vs.stirrups!

    From Houston:

    soccer socks vs. um…really tall socks

    if only zito would go to the proper cut

    still, i won’t complain…those soccer socks are better than pajama bottoms covering all hosiery

  • War Damn Eagle | April 7, 2010 at 8:45 am |

    Ricko might rib me for this, but I wonder where Tubs got the idea for that new helmet?

    http://farm5.static....

    Look familiar?

    http://bhnotes.files...

    He’s already announced the new “Red Raider Walk” pregame tradition, which is an Auburn tradition that existed long before he coached on the Plains.

    http://cache.daylife...

    http://media.photobu...

  • Steve Naismith | April 7, 2010 at 8:49 am |

    “Some new uni numbers for the Broncos”

    DAMN YOU – for a second, I thought the Broncos had ditched their god-awful jersey number font…

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 8:53 am |

    [quote comment=”384465″]Ricko might rib me for this, but I wonder where Tubs got the idea for that new helmet?

    http://farm5.static....

    Look familiar?

    http://bhnotes.files...

    He’s already announced the new “Red Raider Walk” pregame tradition, which is an Auburn tradition that existed long before he coached on the Plains.

    http://cache.daylife...

    http://media.photobu...

    Wait… if they’re the Red Raiders… why the hell is the logo and the jersey next to the helmet orange? Is my monitor color off or what?

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 8:54 am |

    Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.

  • divino codino | April 7, 2010 at 9:05 am |

    [quote]Mascot Would Kill Other Mascot[/quote]

    Please, in the name of all that is Diane Chambers, share the entire bracket. Thanks

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 9:13 am |

    [quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.

  • Gazzoo | April 7, 2010 at 9:17 am |

    Regarding Gary Bromley card: Most likely a retouching of a photo from when he played with the minor league Cincinnati Swords (he split the season between the two clubs), who had the same color scheme as the Sabres.

  • JamesP. | April 7, 2010 at 9:20 am |

    [quote comment=”384464″]From the Ticker:

    Stirrups vs.stirrups!

    From Houston:

    soccer socks vs. um…really tall socks

    if only zito would go to the proper cut

    still, i won’t complain…those soccer socks are better than pajama bottoms covering all hosiery[/quote]

    Milo Hamilton, long time voice of Astros Radio, actually commented when Pence came to bat saying “There’s something you don’t see that often anymore: both the pitcher and the batter with the pants legs pulled high and the tall socks. Hunter with the soccer style socks, and Zito with those nice looking Giants socks with the stripes.”

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 9:22 am |

    Re: William and Mary Mascot –

    “a griffin has the body of a lion – the king of beasts – and the head of an eagle – the king of birds”

    I’d like to know what lion they based that body off of …

    http://hamptonroads....

  • chance michaels | April 7, 2010 at 9:22 am |

    [quote comment=”384462″]Nice picture of Pee Wee Reese. The “1952” photo is really from 1946, as is clearly stated on the scoreboard.[/quote]
    Great catch.

    And his stirrups are so low, he’s dangerously close to soccer socks there…. ;)

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 9:25 am |

    [quote comment=”384473″]Re: William and Mary Mascot –

    “a griffin has the body of a lion – the king of beasts – and the head of an eagle – the king of birds”

    I’d like to know what lion they based that body off of …

    http://hamptonroads....

    The cowardly one, duh.

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 9:30 am |

    http://farm5.static....

    A concern I have looking at that picture … it didn’t take long for the behind-home-plate scrolling boards to make their way into every ball park. I don’t like them, but I understand why they’re there. Now I see an ad placed next to those in Houston.

    How many years before the entire wall surrounding the playing field from foul pole to foul pole, infield and outfield, is one continous electronic ribbon board?

  • Jeremy | April 7, 2010 at 9:34 am |

    Did you know the U.S. Census Bureau is promoting census participation by sponsoring a NASCAR car? “Greg Biffle will be driving it a half-dozen or so times this season,” reports Scott Leighty, who works for the Census Bureau.

    Nice job of still keeping Biffle’s 3M/Post-It sponsorship very visible with the Census Bureau paint scheme.

  • Joe Hilseberg | April 7, 2010 at 9:35 am |

    I finished dead last in that bracket contest and I used the same bracket in my company pool and I finished in the money….crazy

  • Chad | April 7, 2010 at 9:37 am |

    As a Butler Alumnus, I cannot defend the black uniforms for being black.

    However, they are the only road uniforms, they are not an alternate. For some reason when the school switched templates in the early 2000’s (2003 maybe) the old dark blue roadies went away and were replaced with blacks.

    I personally hope this NCAA run gets the Dawgs some new road blues for next year.

  • Ry Co 40 | April 7, 2010 at 9:38 am |

    [quote comment=”384475″][quote comment=”384473″]Re: William and Mary Mascot –

    “a griffin has the body of a lion – the king of beasts – and the head of an eagle – the king of birds”

    I’d like to know what lion they based that body off of …

    http://hamptonroads....

    The cowardly one, duh.[/quote]

    these lions:

    http://cache.daylife...

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 9:39 am |

    [quote comment=”384476″]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4499332927_ac240ee371_o.jpg

    A concern I have looking at that picture … it didn’t take long for the behind-home-plate scrolling boards to make their way into every ball park. I don’t like them, but I understand why they’re there. Now I see an ad placed next to those in Houston.

    How many years before the entire wall surrounding the playing field from foul pole to foul pole, infield and outfield, is one continous electronic ribbon board?[/quote]

    I’m a 17 game Phillies season ticket holder. It’s interesting that the boards behind home plate are “green screened” on fox broadcasts and show local ads for all other games. I wonder how long until the outfield signage does that as well.

  • marc | April 7, 2010 at 9:53 am |

    re: roy face’s flocked helmet

    can someone enlighten me as to why helmets were flocked in the first place? was it aesthetic or was it an anti-glare thing? what, mchale, what, what what?!?

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 9:53 am |

    [quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 9:54 am |

    Whoa … changing the look of Wrigley Field as I type this …

    http://www.cubworld....

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 9:54 am |

    [quote comment=”384482″]re: roy face’s flocked helmet

    can someone enlighten me as to why helmets were flocked in the first place?[/quote]

    So they’d look more like caps. Simple as that.

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 9:54 am |

    [quote comment=”384479″]As a Butler Alumnus, I cannot defend the black uniforms for being black.

    However, they are the only road uniforms, they are not an alternate. For some reason when the school switched templates in the early 2000’s (2003 maybe) the old dark blue roadies went away and were replaced with blacks.

    I personally hope this NCAA run gets the Dawgs some new road blues for next year.[/quote]

    That’s interesting. Almost like the Navy’s “service dress blue uniforms,” which are really black.

  • Andy | April 7, 2010 at 9:57 am |

    [quote comment=”384464″]From the Ticker:

    Stirrups vs.stirrups!

    From Houston:

    soccer socks vs. um…really tall socks

    if only zito would go to the proper cut

    still, i won’t complain…those soccer socks are better than pajama bottoms covering all hosiery[/quote]

    To be fair, the stripes on soccer socks would be right below the knee, like, right below it, as in, Zito’s pant would cover the stripes on a soccer sock. Zito’s stripes are in the middle of his shin, but because of where the pants blouse, they do not reside halfway between the pant cuff and the shoetop, like they do on the stirrup version, which looks better. Hence, Zito’s socks deserve their own term: soccerups.

  • Andy | April 7, 2010 at 10:00 am |

    Here is a photo, for clarification. Some soccer socks are different, more like Zito’s, maybe, but this is the traditional version.

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 10:01 am |

    [quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    I tolerate the flyers black as it is actually one of their colors (even though the orange sweater, in any form, is totally superior) the eagles black jersey on the other hand is totally embarrassing; sixers finally ditched black this year, but I’m not sure anyone noticed or cared.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 10:03 am |

    Fpr the GENERAL KNOWLEDGE BASE Department…

    Last last night someone ripped on the Prez for saying “Cominsky”.

    I responded, then asked Chicagoan rpm if he could support that. His reply came about 4 a.m. EST, so thought I’d repost a bit of the exchange.

    Starting here…

    Nope, can’t lay that one on him. If anything, shows he IS a Sox fan. That’s a Chicago thing. I’ve known truly DOZENS of Chicagoans who call it “Cominskey”.

    rpm, you around to corroborate?

    —Ricko

    sorry, long studio day. yes, i can back you up on that ricko, cominsky is common vernacular believe it or not, a born chicagoan, and bred sox fan on my softball team says it, drives me nuts. shicawgoans have a way about their speech, we had/still have the same curious mistakes in bawlmer, like long “a” before “o”, which makes it gao ao’s, or wudder instead of water, and the german practice of “v” pronounced “b”. i could go on about pronounciation, but to be honest though, who cares if he just plain got it wrong, it means nothing, i would hope he has more important things to concern himself with. and as far as wearing a hat that isn’t being played that day, really?!!!? while i wouldn’t wear a sox hat into weeghman if the sox were not playing because i am not a jerk for jerk’s sake, as a non cubs fan, why wouldn’t i wear my orioles hat? who the hell cares? it’s a baseball game. besides, he was throwing out the first pitch for baseball, not the natinals for corn’s sake, and he is “from” chicago, good golly. sometimes i wonder about people mr. rick.

    —Ricko

  • marc | April 7, 2010 at 10:04 am |

    [quote comment=”384485″][quote comment=”384482″]re: roy face’s flocked helmet

    can someone enlighten me as to why helmets were flocked in the first place?[/quote]

    So they’d look more like caps. Simple as that.[/quote]

    think that’s what manny was trying to do here?

  • FormerDirtDart | April 7, 2010 at 10:10 am |

    Mets porn???
    Perhaps the greatest desktop wallpaper of all time
    http://newyork.mets....

  • scott | April 7, 2010 at 10:10 am |

    [quote comment=”384484″]Whoa … changing the look of Wrigley Field as I type this …

    http://www.cubworld....

    Not a good look…

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 10:11 am |

    [quote comment=”384489″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    I tolerate the flyers black as it is actually one of their colors (even though the orange sweater, in any form, is totally superior) the eagles black jersey on the other hand is totally embarrassing; sixers finally ditched black this year, but I’m not sure anyone noticed or cared.[/quote]

    Obviously if it’s one of your colors, it’s fine to wear an alternate black jersey. I kind of like the Eagles’ black jersey, because it goes well with the green, and their only other color is white. It’s when teams like West Virginia (navy blue and gold) or Dayton (red and blue) wear black that I get annoyed. And, of course, the Mets.

  • scott | April 7, 2010 at 10:13 am |

    [quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Oh yeah, that’ll teach ’em, only making it to the championship game.

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 10:13 am |

    Sorry to disagree, but the Eagles black jersey is a travesty

  • Bernard | April 7, 2010 at 10:14 am |

    [quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 10:15 am |

    [quote comment=”384488″]Here is a photo, for clarification. Some soccer socks are different, more like Zito’s, maybe, but this is the traditional version.[/quote]

    I think the point is that Zito’s socks certainly are far less like baseball socks and far more in the general direction of soccer socks.

    “Soccerups” works for me. Cuz that sure as hell isn’t a baseball look. Not from the CVE , anyway (Common Visual Era, meaning advent TV), nor the decades immediately preceding it.

    I know things get updated. Hell, that’s part of the fun. But U of Missouri’s doing it far, far better (stripes on sans-stirrup socks, that is). Their look is good to see, and harks to the history of the correct sport (that would be baseball).

    (Missouri photos were posted last week; can’t go looking for them just now).

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 10:16 am |

    [quote comment=”384494″]I kind of like the Eagles’ black jersey, because it goes well with the green, and their only other color is white. [/quote]

    well, if you don’t count charcoal & silver as their fourth and fifth colors

    ;)

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 10:20 am |

    [quote comment=”384498″] But U of Missouri’s doing it far, far better (stripes on sans-stirrup socks, that is). Their look is good to see, and harks to the history of the correct sport (that would be baseball).
    [/quote]

    like this?

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 10:20 am |

    [quote comment=”384499″][quote comment=”384494″]I kind of like the Eagles’ black jersey, because it goes well with the green, and their only other color is white. [/quote]

    well, if you don’t count charcoal & silver as their fourth and fifth colors

    ;)[/quote]

    Okay, fair point. For some reason I still like the black.

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 10:22 am |

    [quote comment=”384497″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    wow, that’s super heinous

    I can’t think of any bfsob jerseys with any redeeming value

    Eagles, Tennessee, UGA, the Mets, Puke, the Lions, Ravens, Jags, who am I missing?

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 10:22 am |

    [quote comment=”384497″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    That’s just pure ugly. But the black trim on the regular orange and white uniforms is okay. Tennessee wore black jerseys back in the 1920s, so there is some history there, but pairing them with orange pants is, well, Halloweenish scary (and they wore those on Oct. 31).

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 10:22 am |

    “I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white.”

    If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.

    “Help! Can’t figure out how to make a good looking uni with one-color and white. Can I add black? Please-please-please? It’s just too harrrrrrrrrd without it.”

    (And, once and for all, black linework in a logo does NOT make it a school, or team, color. If it does, we’d say Superman’s costume was red, blue, yellow and black. And, frankly, I don’t think I’ve EVER heard anyone say that.)

    —Ricko

  • chance michaels | April 7, 2010 at 10:23 am |

    [quote comment=”384494″]Obviously if it’s one of your colors, it’s fine to wear an alternate black jersey. I kind of like the Eagles’ black jersey, because it goes well with the green, and their only other color is white. It’s when teams like West Virginia (navy blue and gold) or Dayton (red and blue) wear black that I get annoyed. And, of course, the Mets.[/quote]
    Well, except for the silver.

    And what exactly is different between the Eagles and Mets? Both added black relatively recently in their histories, not coincidentally just as merchandising became a much larger part of the sport.

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 10:24 am |

    [quote comment=”384502″][quote comment=”384497″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    wow, that’s super heinous

    I can’t think of any bfsob jerseys with any redeeming value

    Eagles, Tennessee, UGA, the Mets, Puke, the Lions, Ravens, Jags, who am I missing?[/quote]

    The Ravens are not bfbs and the Jags & Lions don’t actually have black jerseys anymore.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 10:26 am |

    [quote comment=”384500″][quote comment=”384498″] But U of Missouri’s doing it far, far better (stripes on sans-stirrup socks, that is). Their look is good to see, and harks to the history of the correct sport (that would be baseball).
    [/quote]

    like this?[/quote]

    Player on the right, yes.
    Was a shot of a bunch of players swinging bats (posted by JTH, maybe?) where all but one of them looked just great.

    Need a fair amount of the base color showing ABOVE the stripes, too. That’s all I’m saying. From a design standpoint, it’s just out of whack otherwise. For baseball, that is.

    —Ricko

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 10:26 am |

    BFSOB jerseys…

    might make a good topic for a day

    can we find out who started it and is responsible for this madness…?

    maybe we can predict the glorious time of its future disappearance as well

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 10:28 am |

    [quote comment=”384507″][quote comment=”384500″][quote comment=”384498″] But U of Missouri’s doing it far, far better (stripes on sans-stirrup socks, that is). Their look is good to see, and harks to the history of the correct sport (that would be baseball).
    [/quote]

    like this?[/quote]

    Player on the right, yes.
    Was a shot of a bunch of players swinging bats (posted by JTH, maybe?) where all but one of them looked just great.

    Need a fair amount of the base color showing ABOVE the stripes, too. That’s all I’m saying. From a design standpoint, it’s just out of whack otherwise. For baseball, that is.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    no…paul posted it

    here

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 10:31 am |

    [quote comment=”384508″]BFSOB jerseys…

    might make a good topic for a day

    can we find out who started it and is responsible for this madness…?

    maybe we can predict the glorious time of its future disappearance as well[/quote]

    Agreed. I think it all started with the Chicago White Sox in 1991, tell you the truth, even though I like those uniforms. I remember going out and buying a new Sox cap even though I’m not a Sox fan because I liked it. (That was the time when the “X” caps for Malcom were popular too.)

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 10:34 am |

    [quote comment=”384504″]”I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white.”

    If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.

    “Help! Can’t figure out how to make a good looking uni with one-color and white. Can I add black? Please-please-please? It’s just too harrrrrrrrrd without it.”

    (And, once and for all, black linework in a logo does NOT make it a school, or team, color. If it does, we’d say Superman’s costume was red, blue, yellow and black. And, frankly, I don’t think I’ve EVER heard anyone say that.)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I agree with your overall point … but, for the record, I don’t see any black anywhere on this outfit …

    http://images.google...

  • JIm | April 7, 2010 at 10:39 am |

    Rest easy, America. Orlando Hudson has his front uni number now like the rest of the Twins squad.

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 10:40 am |

    [quote comment=”384510″][quote comment=”384508″]BFSOB jerseys…

    might make a good topic for a day

    can we find out who started it and is responsible for this madness…?

    maybe we can predict the glorious time of its future disappearance as well[/quote]

    Agreed. I think it all started with the Chicago White Sox in 1991, tell you the truth, even though I like those uniforms. I remember going out and buying a new Sox cap even though I’m not a Sox fan because I liked it. (That was the time when the “X” caps for Malcom were popular too.)[/quote]

    Nah, the Sox were followers. The LA Kings went from Lakers colors to Raiders colors in 1988. The Atlanta Falcons switched to black jerseys in 1990.

    In any case, we’ve had the BFBS thing for over 20 years… it’s not going anywhere.

  • Frank from Bmore | April 7, 2010 at 10:41 am |

    [quote comment=”384476″]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4032/4499332927_ac240ee371_o.jpg

    A concern I have looking at that picture … it didn’t take long for the behind-home-plate scrolling boards to make their way into every ball park. I don’t like them, but I understand why they’re there. Now I see an ad placed next to those in Houston.

    How many years before the entire wall surrounding the playing field from foul pole to foul pole, infield and outfield, is one continous electronic ribbon board?[/quote]

    It already has precedent, as the EPL uses advertsing ribbon boards across the field at their stadiums.

  • Bill S | April 7, 2010 at 10:43 am |

    Regarding the hockey ‘card…’

    As a pre-kindergartener growing up in Erie, Pennsylvania, my Mom took me grocery shopping each week. At the Loblaws chain of grocery stores, you received a perforated tape of these hockey ‘coupons’ the length of which depended on how much you spent. They could then be separated from each other along the perforations. If I’m not mistaken, about every tenth coupon or so had a “74/75” or “75/76” and the “Loblaws” logo on the back. The rest had backs that were blank. I still have mine in a storage container somewhere. I will try to locate them and send in an image or two. Most now have worn and rounded edges – not like the straight, sharp ones shown on this image. I was 3 or 4 years old at the time, took them everywhere with me, and pretty much learned to read using them. I bet I was the only 3 year old who knew who Cesare Maniago was! Most of mine sustained ‘water’ damage because they blew out of my hand coming in from the car during a blizzard that winter. I can still picture my Mom trying to chase these little coupons all over the driveway! From what I can remember there was no logo copyright issue. Most displayed the teams in their normal game worn attire. The only exceptions were the Kansas City Scouts who were only shown in yearbook-photo style from the shoulders up.

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 10:46 am |

    also we need to find out who started the trend of leaving labels on baseball caps. that might even look more ridiculous than an eagles black jersey.

  • concealed78 | April 7, 2010 at 10:50 am |

    (Homer Simpson voice:) “I hope Sansituk learns to keep his big mouth shut.”

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 10:53 am |

    [quote comment=”384511″][quote comment=”384504″]”I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white.”

    If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.

    “Help! Can’t figure out how to make a good looking uni with one-color and white. Can I add black? Please-please-please? It’s just too harrrrrrrrrd without it.”

    (And, once and for all, black linework in a logo does NOT make it a school, or team, color. If it does, we’d say Superman’s costume was red, blue, yellow and black. And, frankly, I don’t think I’ve EVER heard anyone say that.)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    I agree with your overall point … but, for the record, I don’t see any black anywhere on this outfit …

    http://images.google...

    Hey, hey, I said “black LINEwork”, as in “drawn in a comic book”. Y’know, appearing to have been inked first and color added later? ;)

    (I forget not everyone uses art/illustrator/designer/printer terms. Sorry.)

    —Ricko

  • Bill S | April 7, 2010 at 10:55 am |

    Upon closer inspection…if you look very closely at the picture, the 28 appears to be on some sort of bib that is attached to the white part of the jersey. Notice above the 2 and above and to the left of the 2. As another gentleman mention in an earlier post, it may have been to cover up a logo of Bromley’s minor league team if the Sabres didn’t actually have a Buffalo jersey waiting for him for his call-up.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 10:57 am |

    [quote comment=”384508″]BFSOB jerseys…

    might make a good topic for a day

    [/quote]

    it’s actually something i’d considered…for a future poll

    hmmmmm

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 11:04 am |

    One of my earliest recollections of noticing BFBS was TOSU football, as early as Howard “Hopalong” Cassady in, what, ’54 or ’55? Buckeye football teams may have done it even before that.

    Also UCLA about that same time was introducing shoulder loops with a kind of navy-royal around gold loop on the whites, but the really cool ornate numbers were black.

    Likewise, LSU’s numbers were black at the end of the Billy Cannon era (’59) and for years afterward (and don’t start arguing with me on this because you’ve seen “throwbacks” with purple numbers…those are wrong; the real numbers were BLACK, period, and still were, I believe, as late as Bert Jones’ time at LSU or even after).

    –Ricko

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 11:09 am |

    [quote comment=”384520″][quote comment=”384508″]BFSOB jerseys…

    might make a good topic for a day

    [/quote]

    it’s actually something i’d considered…for a future poll

    Cool, another positive from trading McNabb, is that perhaps the fans who bought a black #5 jersey will no longer wear them. Any fewer amount of black jerseys at the stadium is a positive.

    hmmmmm[/quote]

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 11:09 am |

    Cool, another positive from trading McNabb, is that perhaps the fans who bought a black #5 jersey will no longer wear them. Any fewer amount of black jerseys at the stadium is a positive.

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 11:15 am |

    [quote comment=”384513″][quote comment=”384510″][quote comment=”384508″]BFSOB jerseys…

    might make a good topic for a day

    can we find out who started it and is responsible for this madness…?

    maybe we can predict the glorious time of its future disappearance as well[/quote]

    Agreed. I think it all started with the Chicago White Sox in 1991, tell you the truth, even though I like those uniforms. I remember going out and buying a new Sox cap even though I’m not a Sox fan because I liked it. (That was the time when the “X” caps for Malcom were popular too.)[/quote]

    Nah, the Sox were followers. The LA Kings went from Lakers colors to Raiders colors in 1988. The Atlanta Falcons switched to black jerseys in 1990.

    In any case, we’ve had the BFBS thing for over 20 years… it’s not going anywhere.[/quote]

    You’re right about the Kings. The Falcons, though, just returned to black jerseys, which they had worn in the 1960s and early 1970s.

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 11:15 am |

    [quote comment=”384479″]As a Butler Alumnus, I cannot defend the black uniforms for being black.

    However, they are the only road uniforms, they are not an alternate. For some reason when the school switched templates in the early 2000’s (2003 maybe) the old dark blue roadies went away and were replaced with blacks.

    I personally hope this NCAA run gets the Dawgs some new road blues for next year.[/quote]

    When a Nike team makes the Final Four, that puts them in their ELITE class.

    This usually means that they will receive their High End unis for the next season, which will hopefully mean S.O.D. and not the Cuse, MSU, Duke style with the embedded graphics.

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 11:16 am |

    [quote comment=”384525″][quote comment=”384479″]As a Butler Alumnus, I cannot defend the black uniforms for being black.

    However, they are the only road uniforms, they are not an alternate. For some reason when the school switched templates in the early 2000’s (2003 maybe) the old dark blue roadies went away and were replaced with blacks.

    I personally hope this NCAA run gets the Dawgs some new road blues for next year.[/quote]

    When a Nike team makes the Final Four, that puts them in their ELITE class.

    This usually means that they will receive their High End unis for the next season, which will hopefully mean S.O.D. and not the Cuse, MSU, Duke style with the embedded graphics.[/quote]

    Plus, they will be available at retail outlets such as Eastbay.

  • Broadway Connie | April 7, 2010 at 11:16 am |

    [quote comment=”384504″]”I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white.”

    If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.

    “Help! Can’t figure out how to make a good looking uni with one-color and white. Can I add black? Please-please-please? It’s just too harrrrrrrrrd without it.”

    (And, once and for all, black linework in a logo does NOT make it a school, or team, color. If it does, we’d say Superman’s costume was red, blue, yellow and black. And, frankly, I don’t think I’ve EVER heard anyone say that.)

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Ricko is, I believe, referring to the original DC Comics Superman, where every character is outlined in black, and where black is frequently used as a separator of color A and color B.

    This black uni issue just won’t go away. One terrible truth is that many kids these days positively like black jackets and black hoodies and black jerseys and black caps. We have a house full of Mets fans, but I’m the only one who likes no-black-allowed blue-and-orange. [By, the way, does anyone the origins of the Mets blue and orange? Just kidding!]

    Even a narrow-minded mossback traditionalist like me can dig black sometimes. I used to live in Amherst, Mass., and I came to like the way black was used (with white) to offset Amherst College’s single color of purple.

    Ditto Harvard. The Crimson’s color is crimson, period. Most of the time, the default contrast color has been white. Not at all bad (see Alabama). But back in the 1910s, and ever since the mid-1960s, both white and black have been used to offset the crimson. Also not at all bad. Distinctive, even.

    So, dammit, I would love to hate black everywhere and every time, but I just can’t. I even kinda like those Falcon jerseys.

  • sj32 | April 7, 2010 at 11:23 am |

    The Tampa Bay Rays have switched their home jerseys from double-knits to Cool Base

    http://cache2.asset-...

    The only Cool Base jerseys the Rays (and Devil Rays) wore before this season were their alts – the homes and roads have been double-knit before this season.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 11:33 am |

    connie,

    no one (i don’t think) is arguing against black, even used sparingly (such as to outline numbers)…that doesn’t make BFBS…but those extra black stipes? BFBS

    if you’re the raiders or the saints or the falcons…that’s not BFBS…

    most of us on here, who detest the BFBS, is the introduction of it as a substitute for white or gray

    sometimes…black is added where it didn’t previously exist … or did it???

    it’s a tough call on the reds…they once had it as an accent color, and they brought it back…

    but is this BFBS???

    had they gone this route…there’s no question that would be a yes

    some teams actually look good in black, but to simply add a BFBS third jersey?

    that’s where we need to draw the line

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 11:40 am |

    [quote comment=”384516″]also we need to find out who started the trend of leaving labels on baseball caps. that might even look more ridiculous than an eagles black jersey.[/quote]

    http://www.flipflopf...

  • UmpLou | April 7, 2010 at 11:43 am |

    what happened to the ‘wallpaper link’??

  • TommyD | April 7, 2010 at 11:47 am |

    [quote comment=”384530″][quote comment=”384516″]also we need to find out who started the trend of leaving labels on baseball caps. that might even look more ridiculous than an eagles black jersey.[/quote]

    http://www.flipflopf...

    fabulous! if it was only the “younger generation” who didn’t remove the sticker…

    I’m embarrassed to say it took me quite some time to figure out this, as well as a factory-straight brim, was just a means to facilitate shop-lifting…

    it’s a scary world

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 11:48 am |

    [quote comment=”384529″]connie,

    no one (i don’t think) is arguing against black, even used sparingly (such as to outline numbers)…that doesn’t make BFBS…but those extra black stipes? BFBS

    if you’re the raiders or the saints or the falcons…that’s not BFBS…

    most of us on here, who detest the BFBS, is the introduction of it as a substitute for white or gray

    sometimes…black is added where it didn’t previously exist … or did it???

    it’s a tough call on the reds…they once had it as an accent color, and they brought it back…

    but is this BFBS???

    had they gone this route…there’s no question that would be a yes

    some teams actually look good in black, but to simply add a BFBS third jersey?

    that’s where we need to draw the line[/quote]

    I really hope I’m not the only person thinking of Captain Picard after reading this.

    THE LINE MUST BE DRAWN HERE! This far and no further!

    (…you broke your little ships)

  • mike 2 | April 7, 2010 at 11:49 am |

    [quote comment=”384515″]Regarding the hockey ‘card…’

    As a pre-kindergartener growing up in Erie, Pennsylvania, my Mom took me grocery shopping each week. At the Loblaws chain of grocery stores, you received a perforated tape of these hockey ‘coupons’ the length of which depended on how much you spent. They could then be separated from each other along the perforations. If I’m not mistaken, about every tenth coupon or so had a “74/75” or “75/76” and the “Loblaws” logo on the back. The rest had backs that were blank. I still have mine in a storage container somewhere. I will try to locate them and send in an image or two. Most now have worn and rounded edges – not like the straight, sharp ones shown on this image. I was 3 or 4 years old at the time, took them everywhere with me, and pretty much learned to read using them. I bet I was the only 3 year old who knew who Cesare Maniago was! Most of mine sustained ‘water’ damage because they blew out of my hand coming in from the car during a blizzard that winter. I can still picture my Mom trying to chase these little coupons all over the driveway! From what I can remember there was no logo copyright issue. Most displayed the teams in their normal game worn attire. The only exceptions were the Kansas City Scouts who were only shown in yearbook-photo style from the shoulders up.[/quote]

    I have the same book from Loblaws. It sounds like mine is in a little better shape, no water damage.

    Here’s an example of the sticker strip

    http://cgi.ebay.ca/1...

    And another ebay sale with the Gary Bromley sticker included:

    http://cgi.ebay.ca/N...

    I retrieved the book from my Mom’s house last fall after she passed away. I don’t think I’d actually seen the book in 30 years, but when I was going to clean out her house it was one of the very few things I hoped would still be there. Posting some scans is on my “to do” list for the spring.

    The stickers came out in 1974, so both the Kansas City Scouts and the Washington Capitals (the 2 expansion teams that year) were all head shots and fakes.

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 11:56 am |

    The Cardinals are complaining again because the Reds’ equipment manager has slippery balls.

    http://sports.yahoo....

  • Beardface | April 7, 2010 at 12:11 pm |

    [quote comment=”384476″]How many years before the entire wall surrounding the playing field from foul pole to foul pole, infield and outfield, is one continous electronic ribbon board?[/quote]
    I wouldn’t have any issue with it, not at all.

    Would actually be pretty cool. The things you could do with a Home Run celebration are endless with a ribbon board around the entire outfield wall.

  • Squiddie | April 7, 2010 at 12:13 pm |

    Superman did wear a BFBS uni. It was after the whole death of Superman thing in 1992. The S logo was silver just to complete the whole Oakland Raider look.

  • DJ | April 7, 2010 at 12:14 pm |

    JimWa said:

    Whoa … changing the look of Wrigley Field as I type this …

    http://www.cubworld….

    Not a good look…

    The large live-action posters of current Cub players will only be up for the first week of the season.

  • Beardface | April 7, 2010 at 12:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”384529″]connie,

    no one (i don’t think) is arguing against black, even used sparingly (such as to outline numbers)…that doesn’t make BFBS…but those extra black stipes? BFBS

    if you’re the raiders or the saints or the falcons…that’s not BFBS…

    most of us on here, who detest the BFBS, is the introduction of it as a substitute for white or gray

    sometimes…black is added where it didn’t previously exist … or did it???

    it’s a tough call on the reds…they once had it as an accent color, and they brought it back…

    but is this BFBS???

    had they gone this route…there’s no question that would be a yes

    some teams actually look good in black, but to simply add a BFBS third jersey?

    that’s where we need to draw the line[/quote]
    Once again, its not BFBS when black is one of the official colors of the franchise.

    Teams exempt from BFBS:

    Philadelphia Flyers
    Carolina Hurricanes
    Carolina Panthers
    Baltimore Ravens
    Colorado Rockies
    etc

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 12:24 pm |

    [quote comment=”384538″]JimWa said:

    Whoa … changing the look of Wrigley Field as I type this …

    http://www.cubworld….

    Not a good look…

    The large live-action posters of current Cub players will only be up for the first week of the season.[/quote]

    I read that, too … I’m thinking trial balloon … if it works, they’ll ask the city for more – and permanent versions – of the same. Frankly, as a traditionalist Cub fan, I really like it! In all honesty, the outside of the park has never had a great deal of visual appeal to me. I love being at the park, I love the way I feel when I walk around (a couple years ago driving by while in Chicago during a Cubs roadtrip, just because I could). This adds to the look without taking away from the park.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 12:26 pm |

    re: BFBS

    The examples I cited from football in the ’50s truly are BTA (black trim added) and it’s really no big deal.

    BFBS to me has a very simple definition: Wearing a black garment (hat, jersey, sleeves, socks, helmet) when black isn’t one of your team colors, even if you’ve previously done BTA.

    re: Reds logos. That’s the kind of art I’m talking about, gang. Art that was originally done in B&W and the color added later…like a comic strip/book. That, btw, is the way EVERY logo was created before computers; someone drew it BY HAND. They may have turned the line art to red, or blue or green, etc., when printed/sewn…but it began in black and white.

    For example, use of THIS logo on the Redlegs’ roads in ’56 (a ’57 card, yes) does NOT make black a team color, and doesn’t even justify black trim, for that matter. It’s just a line art logo.
    http://www.checkoutm...

    That would be like justifying the black and gold on the Celtics’ unis because “those colors are in the Leprechaun logo.” Riiiiight.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”384541″]For example, use of THIS logo on the Redlegs’ roads in ’56 (a ’57 card, yes) does NOT make black a team color, and doesn’t even justify black trim, for that matter. It’s just a line art logo.
    http://www.checkoutm...
    [/quote]

    so…is this cap black (or dark blue)? i honestly can’t tell…but if it is black, is it BFBS?

  • Andy | April 7, 2010 at 12:36 pm |

    [quote comment=”384500″][quote comment=”384498″] But U of Missouri’s doing it far, far better (stripes on sans-stirrup socks, that is). Their look is good to see, and harks to the history of the correct sport (that would be baseball).
    [/quote]

    like this?[/quote]

    Well, 2’s got it right, but 11 is wearing the soccerups.

  • Andy | April 7, 2010 at 12:38 pm |

    [quote comment=”384502″][quote comment=”384497″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    wow, that’s super heinous

    I can’t think of any bfsob jerseys with any redeeming value

    Eagles, Tennessee, UGA, the Mets, Puke, the Lions, Ravens, Jags, who am I missing?[/quote]

    Personally, I think the Ravens should rock black full-time (with white pants, of course).

  • Bob Loblaw | April 7, 2010 at 12:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”384482″]re: roy face’s flocked helmet

    can someone enlighten me as to why helmets were flocked in the first place? was it aesthetic or was it an anti-glare thing? what, mchale, what, what what?!?[/quote]
    What ‘s this, a McHale’s Navy reference?
    Are you Ricko in disguise ????

  • Vincent | April 7, 2010 at 12:51 pm |

    85 comments and no mention of that Yankees tailgating grill? That thing is sick!

  • Andy | April 7, 2010 at 12:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”384529″]connie,

    no one (i don’t think) is arguing against black, even used sparingly (such as to outline numbers)…that doesn’t make BFBS…but those extra black stipes? BFBS

    if you’re the raiders or the saints or the falcons…that’s not BFBS…

    most of us on here, who detest the BFBS, is the introduction of it as a substitute for white or gray

    sometimes…black is added where it didn’t previously exist … or did it???

    it’s a tough call on the reds…they once had it as an accent color, and they brought it back…

    but is this BFBS???

    had they gone this route…there’s no question that would be a yes

    some teams actually look good in black, but to simply add a BFBS third jersey?

    that’s where we need to draw the line[/quote]

    Using Duke as the example, the uniform would be worse if the only black on it was the outline on the numerals. At least they created a cohesive garment (from a design perspective) by adding black trim throughout. I don’t really like it, personally, but in a vacuum, it’s not a terrible uniform for a school whose colors are blue and black. The problem is the principle of adding a color that is not a school color to your uniform when it is not needed.

    I’d prefer Tennessee stick to their official orange and white, but one could argue that black trim is needed for Tennessee uniforms because orange and white are not legible together.

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 12:56 pm |

    ESPN column is up:
    http://sports.espn.g...

  • Brian D | April 7, 2010 at 12:56 pm |

    [quote comment=”384502″][quote comment=”384497″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    wow, that’s super heinous

    I can’t think of any bfsob jerseys with any redeeming value

    Eagles, Tennessee, UGA, the Mets, Puke, the Lions, Ravens, Jags, who am I missing?[/quote]
    UGA’s colors are red and black, so not BFSOB.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 12:57 pm |

    [quote comment=”384539″]
    Once again, its not BFBS when black is one of the official colors of the franchise.

    Teams exempt from BFBS:

    Philadelphia Flyers
    Carolina Hurricanes
    Carolina Panthers
    Baltimore Ravens
    Colorado Rockies
    etc[/quote]

    oh…ok

    so then the mets aren’t BFBS

    i mean, it’s an official color of the franchise

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 12:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”384542″][quote comment=”384541″]For example, use of THIS logo on the Redlegs’ roads in ’56 (a ’57 card, yes) does NOT make black a team color, and doesn’t even justify black trim, for that matter. It’s just a line art logo.
    http://www.checkoutm...
    [/quote]

    so…is this cap black (or dark blue)? i honestly can’t tell…but if it is black, is it BFBS?[/quote]

    That hat is navy blue. Until 1956 Reds colors were, I believe, Red and Navy (look through Okkonen/Dressed to the Nines). They brought back the navy in ’61 or so when they dropped the wishbone “C” for a navy outlined oval “C”. That lasted until ’68 or so when they again eliminated it, and stopped wearing the vests.

    The recent addition of black garments for the Reds most certainly was BFBS. Had they gone with navy instead, there’d been a TON of team history with it.

    (P.S. You’ll often see photos of the ’56 vests with the navy hat. If you look closely, you’ll see those all are from ’56 spring training. The Redlegs either had a lot of leftover navy hats to use up, or saved the new red hats for Opening Day.)

    —Ricko

  • Bob Loblaw | April 7, 2010 at 1:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”384534″][quote comment=”384515″]Regarding the hockey ‘card…’

    As a pre-kindergartener growing up in Erie, Pennsylvania, my Mom took me grocery shopping each week. At the Loblaws chain of grocery stores, you received a perforated tape of these hockey ‘coupons’ the length of which depended on how much you spent. They could then be separated from each other along the perforations. If I’m not mistaken, about every tenth coupon or so had a “74/75” or “75/76” and the “Loblaws” logo on the back. The rest had backs that were blank. I still have mine in a storage container somewhere. I will try to locate them and send in an image or two. Most now have worn and rounded edges – not like the straight, sharp ones shown on this image. I was 3 or 4 years old at the time, took them everywhere with me, and pretty much learned to read using them. I bet I was the only 3 year old who knew who Cesare Maniago was! Most of mine sustained ‘water’ damage because they blew out of my hand coming in from the car during a blizzard that winter. I can still picture my Mom trying to chase these little coupons all over the driveway! From what I can remember there was no logo copyright issue. Most displayed the teams in their normal game worn attire. The only exceptions were the Kansas City Scouts who were only shown in yearbook-photo style from the shoulders up.[/quote]

    I have the same book from Loblaws. It sounds like mine is in a little better shape, no water damage.

    Here’s an example of the sticker strip

    http://cgi.ebay.ca/1...

    And another ebay sale with the Gary Bromley sticker included:

    http://cgi.ebay.ca/N...

    I retrieved the book from my Mom’s house last fall after she passed away. I don’t think I’d actually seen the book in 30 years, but when I was going to clean out her house it was one of the very few things I hoped would still be there. Posting some scans is on my “to do” list for the spring.

    The stickers came out in 1974, so both the Kansas City Scouts and the Washington Capitals (the 2 expansion teams that year) were all head shots and fakes.[/quote]
    thanks for the memories guys… great stuff. I also have tons of hockey cards from the ’69 thru ’80 seasons buried in my parents ‘ basement. They’re selling this spring so I’ll be looking for all those and other baseball & basketball and football cards from the same era. Bittersweet stuff indeed.
    On a sidenote: is that early to mid 70’s Blues’ home jersey w/ the yellow/blue/yellow waist striping NOT the most awesomest?

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 1:02 pm |

    [quote comment=”384545″][quote comment=”384482″]re: roy face’s flocked helmet

    can someone enlighten me as to why helmets were flocked in the first place? was it aesthetic or was it an anti-glare thing? what, mchale, what, what what?!?[/quote]
    What ‘s this, a McHale’s Navy reference?
    Are you Ricko in disguise ????[/quote]

    Discussion of flocked helmets early in the day Saturday or Sunday. Don’t remember which. Squiddie found a couple good Pirates photos, too.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 1:07 pm |

    [quote comment=”384550″][quote comment=”384539″]
    Once again, its not BFBS when black is one of the official colors of the franchise.

    Teams exempt from BFBS:

    Philadelphia Flyers
    Carolina Hurricanes
    Carolina Panthers
    Baltimore Ravens
    Colorado Rockies
    etc[/quote]

    oh…ok

    so then the mets aren’t BFBS

    i mean, it’s an official color of the franchise[/quote]

    Really? Listed in the media guide after “Team Colors” an’ everything?
    If it is, nobody’s got a bitch about the black hats and jerseys.
    Your bitch would be about who changed the team colors…and why.

    —Ricko

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 1:20 pm |

    Did the D-Backs ever wear this cap on-field?

    http://ep.yimg.com/c...

    And here’s one for Paul, grey bill and all:

    http://www.myfitteds...

  • Broadway Connie | April 7, 2010 at 1:22 pm |

    [quote comment=”384529″]connie,

    no one (i don’t think) is arguing against black, even used sparingly (such as to outline numbers)…that doesn’t make BFBS…but those extra black stipes? BFBS

    if you’re the raiders or the saints or the falcons…that’s not BFBS…

    most of us on here, who detest the BFBS, is the introduction of it as a substitute for white or gray

    sometimes…black is added where it didn’t previously exist … or did it???

    it’s a tough call on the reds…they once had it as an accent color, and they brought it back…

    but is this BFBS???

    had they gone this route…there’s no question that would be a yes

    some teams actually look good in black, but to simply add a BFBS third jersey?

    that’s where we need to draw the line[/quote]

    Agree wholeheartedly.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 1:29 pm |

    This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 1:35 pm |

    [quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.

  • pru | April 7, 2010 at 1:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”384546″]85 comments and no mention of that Yankees tailgating grill? That thing is sick![/quote]

    After reading the buildup story, I honestly expected more. Dont get me wrong, I think it’s cool (even though its Yankees), but I wouldnt shell out the kind of money/time it would take to do that for a grill on a grill.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 1:41 pm |

    Illustrating a point I’ve made here many times about how color photos were rare and often outdated, this is a September, 1957 issue of SI. The photo, though, likely is from Spring Training of 1956, making it almost a year-and-a-half old. How do we know this? It’s the 1956 road uni (only year with Ol’ Red on the chest; the homes had a big wishbone “C”) with a hat last worn in the regular season in 1955.
    http://cache3.asset-...

    It was a real different world if you were watching unis. As you can see, major publications didn’t even think people knew the difference.

    —Ricko

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 1:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”384558″][quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.[/quote]

    Lions list it as official color? Reds? Not arguing, just asking. Because if teams ARE adding it as a team color they’d I’d say it’s with every intent to clear the road for black garments on the field.

    —Ricko

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 1:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”384558″][quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.[/quote]

    The Mets history is wrong about the alternate blue jersey. The Mets wore one from 1982-85 (in addition to having home and away batting practice jerseys).

  • Harmy G | April 7, 2010 at 1:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”384469″][quote]Mascot Would Kill Other Mascot[/quote]

    Please, in the name of all that is Diane Chambers, share the entire bracket. Thanks[/quote]

    http://tournament.fa...

    and here’s the list of mascots: http://bit.ly/9ThdZa

  • Geeman | April 7, 2010 at 1:52 pm |

    [quote comment=”384549″][quote comment=”384502″][quote comment=”384497″][quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    This doesn’t bother you as much?

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    wow, that’s super heinous

    I can’t think of any bfsob jerseys with any redeeming value

    Eagles, Tennessee, UGA, the Mets, Puke, the Lions, Ravens, Jags, who am I missing?[/quote]
    UGA’s colors are red and black, so not BFSOB.[/quote]

    Interesting that two schools — Maryland and Georgia — have played down black in their uniforms even though black is a school color. Georgia’s worn black football jerseys only two or three times. Same with Maryland and black basketball uniforms.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 1:56 pm |

    Checked a couple teams…

    Black IS an official color of Reds (since ’99, apparently).
    Celtics remain “Celtic Green and White”, however.

    —Ricko

  • The Jeff | April 7, 2010 at 1:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”384561″][quote comment=”384558″][quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.[/quote]

    Lions list it as official color? Reds? Not arguing, just asking. Because if teams ARE adding it as a team color they’d I’d say it’s with every intent to clear the road for black garments on the field.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well, the Wiki page for the Lions lists the black. I don’t really know where to get an official media guide or anything though. I do seem to recall seeing a scan of a page (might’ve been on here, can’t remember) when they unveiled the new logo that indicated that the logo was to always be printed with the black outline, even when printing on a black shirt. So I’m pretty sure it’s official.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 2:00 pm |

    “Interesting that two schools — Maryland and Georgia — have played down black in their uniforms even though black is a school color. Georgia’s worn black football jerseys only two or three times. Same with Maryland and black basketball uniforms.”

    ‘Tis true.

    Tarkenton era at Georgia (late ’50s), and a few seasons thereafter, Bulldogs wore silver helmets & pants with red jerseys with silver numbers. No black at all on the unis.

    —Ricko

  • Squiddie | April 7, 2010 at 2:05 pm |
  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 2:10 pm |

    “that the logo was to always be printed with the black outline, even when printing on a black shirt.”

    That’s just a printer’s spec. Redlegs would have said same thing about Ol’ Red so he didn’t end up with big red handlebar mustache.

    Would be interesting to see a media guide.

    Which reminds me, why don’t team’s websites have easy-to-find, and use, fact sheets (general info)? Y’know, list of officers and key personnel, stadium, stadium capacity, training camp site, year franchise granted, etc., etc, usually including team colors, et al. All in one place. Guess they only do that in their printed media guides.

    So frustrating when you’re just looking for basic info.

    —Ricko

  • chance michaels | April 7, 2010 at 2:13 pm |

    [quote comment=”384566″][quote comment=”384561″][quote comment=”384558″][quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.[/quote]

    Lions list it as official color? Reds? Not arguing, just asking. Because if teams ARE adding it as a team color they’d I’d say it’s with every intent to clear the road for black garments on the field.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well, the Wiki page for the Lions lists the black. I don’t really know where to get an official media guide or anything though. I do seem to recall seeing a scan of a page (might’ve been on here, can’t remember) when they unveiled the new logo that indicated that the logo was to always be printed with the black outline, even when printing on a black shirt. So I’m pretty sure it’s official.[/quote]
    Donovan over at the Society for Sports Uniforms Research keeps lists of official colors. He gets them from the leagues themselves, you can trust him on this.

    And yes, if a pro team uses black anywhere in its scheme it becomes an official team color. Possibly because there is more than one shade of black?

    Here’s his listings for the Lions, Eagles, and Mets. As you can see, black is an official color for all of them. Doesn’t change the BFBS one bit – it was adding black to the color scheme in the first place that triggered BFBS.

    Lest anyone think that teams are this particular only with their black, check out these – the Baltimore Orioles have official versions of all the colors in their Maryland state patch and the Mariners and Brewers list the touches of red that appear only in their respective primary logos.

  • Tom V | April 7, 2010 at 2:15 pm |

    [quote comment=”384483″][quote comment=”384470″][quote comment=”384468″]Wrapping up the NCAAs:

    Just realized that Butler’s school colors are blue and white and the uniform they wore through most of the tournament is black. What a shame, serves them right.[/quote]

    Doesn’t almighty duke (puke) also sport a ‘black for the sake of black’ ensemble on occasion? Since they were a #1 seed they never wore a road uni in the dance.[/quote]

    They do. I’m not bothered as much by schools that add black when their school colors are one color and white. It really bothers me that a school with navy blue changes colors to black; why bother?[/quote]

    I’d have to disagree unless someone can post the two color/white jerseys i can think of off the top of my head and integrate black usefully. Red Wings and Yankees home.

  • Seth H | April 7, 2010 at 2:18 pm |

    “If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.”

    Even more embarrassing if your alma mater’s colors are one color and white and its nickname is the COLOR but the basketball team wears BFBS: http://www.gocrimson...

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 2:19 pm |

    [quote comment=”384570″]
    Donovan over at the Society for Sports Uniforms Research keeps lists of official colors. He gets them from the leagues themselves, you can trust him on this.

    And yes, if a pro team uses black anywhere in its scheme it becomes an official team color. Possibly because there is more than one shade of black?

    Here’s his listings for the Lions, Eagles, and Mets. As you can see, black is an official color for all of them. Doesn’t change the BFBS one bit – it was adding black to the color scheme in the first place that triggered BFBS.

    Lest anyone think that teams are this particular only with their black, check out these – the Baltimore Orioles have official versions of all the colors in their Maryland state patch and the Mariners and Brewers list the touches of red that appear only in their respective primary logos.[/quote]

    thank you chance…was gonna point to SSUR

    and also for reiterating my point about BFBS

    just because it’s an “official” color (a la the hurricanes, amongst other offenders), it’s STILL BFBS…just like the mets, royals, tennessee, reds (maybe), lions, dook, etc.

    it’s the superfluous and unnecessary adding of black to a colorscheme that constitutes BFBS…once it’s added, and becomes official, doesn’t make it any less egregious

  • chance michaels | April 7, 2010 at 2:21 pm |

    [quote comment=”384569″]”that the logo was to always be printed with the black outline, even when printing on a black shirt.”

    That’s just a printer’s spec. Redlegs would have said same thing about Ol’ Red so he didn’t end up with big red handlebar mustache.

    Would be interesting to see a media guide.

    Which reminds me, why don’t team’s websites have easy-to-find, and use, fact sheets (general info)? Y’know, list of officers and key personnel, stadium, stadium capacity, training camp site, year franchise granted, etc., etc, usually including team colors, et al. All in one place. Guess they only do that in their printed media guides.

    So frustrating when you’re just looking for basic info.

    —Ricko[/quote]
    Some teams are better than others – the Packers put the entire contents of their media guide online (including their Pantone colors, which most teams keep private). Other teams might not be so forthcoming.

  • StGeorge | April 7, 2010 at 2:24 pm |

    Got to say I love the stirrups myself. The pants to the shoes was novel when Eddie did it and now it just looks like the players are wearing pajamas. It’s an awful look. Stirrups add a bit of color and uniqueness to the baseball uniform. Not to mention the tradition. I would love to see MLB enforce a stirrup uni reg and that the pants can only be worn so low.

    Glad to see curling got its day.

  • Brandon Davis | April 7, 2010 at 2:27 pm |

    The A’s usually use the previous season’s home white jersey for photo shoots and to wear to public appearances so Bailey probably had this one put back in his locker by somebody who didn’t know better and he grabbed the wrong one.

  • bourbon soaked idiot | April 7, 2010 at 2:27 pm |

    [quote comment=”384572″]”If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.”

    Even more embarrassing if your alma mater’s colors are one color and white and its nickname is the COLOR but the basketball team wears BFBS: http://www.gocrimson...

    Harvard grads NEVER miss an opportunity to tell folks they went to Harvard.

  • chance michaels | April 7, 2010 at 2:28 pm |

    [quote comment=”384577″][quote comment=”384572″]”If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.”

    Even more embarrassing if your alma mater’s colors are one color and white and its nickname is the COLOR but the basketball team wears BFBS: http://www.gocrimson...

    Harvard grads NEVER miss an opportunity to tell folks they went to Harvard.[/quote]
    You know, if they had taken me, I probably would want to remind people at every opportunity. :)

  • StGeorge | April 7, 2010 at 2:28 pm |

    Meant to comment about the Pirates flocked helmets. I believe the Pirates had two tone flocked helmets around 1970. The old gold helmet with black bill. I thought I remembered Clemente wearing one that was matte finished and not shiny.

  • divino codino | April 7, 2010 at 2:34 pm |

    [quote comment=”384577″][quote comment=”384572″]”If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.”

    Even more embarrassing if your alma mater’s colors are one color and white and its nickname is the COLOR but the basketball team wears BFBS: http://www.gocrimson...

    Harvard grads NEVER miss an opportunity to tell folks they went to Harvard.[/quote]

    A friend of mine came up with what he called ‘the Harvard test’ to id Harvard grads. Walk into a room and say “You arrogant b@st@rd!” Whoever looks up is a Harvard grad. On the other hand, that friend was a Yale man …

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 2:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”384579″]Meant to comment about the Pirates flocked helmets. I believe the Pirates had two tone flocked helmets around 1970. The old gold helmet with black bill. I thought I remembered Clemente wearing one that was matte finished and not shiny.[/quote]

    indeed…along with the face pic, i also sent this pic of manny sanguillen to paul last night…

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 2:44 pm |

    Not gonna argue.

    Guess my point was looking at it from the other end.
    BTA doesn’t mean you HAVE to add black as a third color.
    Wisconsin, for example. The offset shadow on the helmet logo doesn’t mean, “Oh, well, Wisconsin can wear black jerseys and it would be okay.”

    No, it wouldn’t. Until Wisconsin chooses to list black as an official color they’re saying, “We’re still red and white, that’s just an accent.”

    The black edge on Tennessee’s road numbers doesn’t make a black jersey okey-dokey for them, either. Ohio State would have no business wearing a black jersey, either, despite the “detailing” presence of it on their unis.

    Same as when TOSU started using black to define points of color change in around ’54. Or that little bit of black in the 49ers helmet logo not so long ago. And the black on the Eagles during the Randall Cunningham era (damn, I miss that uni).

    So, yeah, adding black willy nilly to your team colors is BFBS, and I didn’t mean to say it wasn’t. Just that it gives the teams an “out” to be trendy. Covering their asses for marketing purposes.

    My central point was that BTA doesn’t automatically make black a team color. Distinctly two different discussions.

    —Ricko

  • bourbon soaked idiot | April 7, 2010 at 2:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”384561″][quote comment=”384558″][quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.[/quote]

    Lions list it as official color? Reds? Not arguing, just asking. Because if teams ARE adding it as a team color they’d I’d say it’s with every intent to clear the road for black garments on the field.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The Devils have NEVER had a black sweater, even though they have had black as an official color for over 15 years.

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 2:58 pm |

    [quote comment=”384569″]”that the logo was to always be printed with the black outline, even when printing on a black shirt.”

    That’s just a printer’s spec. Redlegs would have said same thing about Ol’ Red so he didn’t end up with big red handlebar mustache.

    Would be interesting to see a media guide.

    Which reminds me, why don’t team’s websites have easy-to-find, and use, fact sheets (general info)? Y’know, list of officers and key personnel, stadium, stadium capacity, training camp site, year franchise granted, etc., etc, usually including team colors, et al. All in one place. Guess they only do that in their printed media guides.

    So frustrating when you’re just looking for basic info.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Damned Interwebs is good for NOTHING!

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 2:59 pm |

    [quote comment=”384581″][quote comment=”384579″]Meant to comment about the Pirates flocked helmets. I believe the Pirates had two tone flocked helmets around 1970. The old gold helmet with black bill. I thought I remembered Clemente wearing one that was matte finished and not shiny.[/quote]

    indeed…along with the face pic, i also sent this pic of manny sanguillen to paul last night…[/quote]

    Doc Ellis would still see the Pirates helmets like that.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 3:00 pm |

    [quote comment=”384583″][quote comment=”384561″][quote comment=”384558″][quote comment=”384557″]This site (which also quotes Paul’s Village Voice efforts)…
    http://www.ultimatem...
    …says black was officially added to orange and blue as a third team color in 1998.

    There ya go. Assuming that’s accurate, unless it gets changed, the black garments ain’t wrong and they ain’t goin’ anywhere.

    (That’s applying right or wrong as in “official””, not as in “should” or “shouldn’t”)

    Arguments against black garments for Oregon or West Virginia or Dayton (and others) actually are stronger than this one. Technically speaking.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    Well if we use the official color argument, then pretty much every single pro team with black is excluded from the BFBS list. They all list it as an official color once they start using it. It’s only the NCAA teams that wear it without it being an official school color.[/quote]

    Lions list it as official color? Reds? Not arguing, just asking. Because if teams ARE adding it as a team color they’d I’d say it’s with every intent to clear the road for black garments on the field.

    —Ricko[/quote]

    The Devils have NEVER had a black sweater, even though they have had black as an official color for over 15 years.[/quote]

    WHAT??? An NHL team that didn’t leap at the opportunity to wear, fully-justified, a black sweater?

    Damn.

    —Ricko

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 3:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”384585″]

    Doc Ellis would still see the Pirates helmets like that.[/quote]

    were he alive, maybe

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 3:10 pm |

    [quote comment=”384587″][quote comment=”384585″]

    Doc Ellis would still see the Pirates helmets like that.[/quote]

    were he alive, maybe[/quote]

    “Dude, your helmet’s all fuzzy.”

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 3:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”384587″][quote comment=”384585″]

    Doc Ellis would still see the Pirates helmets like that.[/quote]

    were he alive, maybe[/quote]
    [quote comment=”384581″][quote comment=”384579″]Meant to comment about the Pirates flocked helmets. I believe the Pirates had two tone flocked helmets around 1970. The old gold helmet with black bill. I thought I remembered Clemente wearing one that was matte finished and not shiny.[/quote]

    indeed…along with the face pic, i also sent this pic of manny sanguillen to paul last night…[/quote]

    Doc Ellis would still see the Pirates helmets like that.

    Notice the use of the word “would” in my statement.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 3:27 pm |

    Y’know, I keep saying, Pro coaches have to allow for players having different ways to prepare…
    http://www.huffingto...

    —Ricko

  • Skycat | April 7, 2010 at 3:28 pm |

    Forget the BFBS arguments, black is generally not a good color for even two-color uniforms. It’s simply too boring. For me, black works best when it is paired with either orange or yellow/gold.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 3:33 pm |

    [quote comment=”384589″]
    Notice the use of the word “would” in my statement.[/quote]

    heh heh…you said would

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 3:47 pm |

    [quote comment=”384592″][quote comment=”384589″]
    Notice the use of the word “would” in my statement.[/quote]

    heh heh…you said would[/quote]

    You just reminded me why I went on sabbatical from UW.

  • Bob Loblaw | April 7, 2010 at 3:48 pm |

    [quote comment=”384579″]Meant to comment about the Pirates flocked helmets. I believe the Pirates had two tone flocked helmets around 1970. The old gold helmet with black bill. I thought I remembered Clemente wearing one that was matte finished and not shiny.[/quote]
    I believe you’re right on that… Sanguillen would also don that flocked batting helmet–can’t seem to locate a pic that to corroborate that, thou :(

  • MPowers1634 | April 7, 2010 at 3:51 pm |

    On a different note, the skate shoe brand VANS has put together an opening day line.

    Here is their Padres contribution:
    http://sneakernews.c...

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 4:01 pm |

    [quote comment=”384594″]
    I believe you’re right on that… Sanguillen would also don that flocked batting helmet–can’t seem to locate a pic that to corroborate that, thou :([/quote]

    here ya go

  • Todd Peak | April 7, 2010 at 4:03 pm |

    The Dream Team’s group photo violates flag etiquette rules.

    http://a.espncdn.com...

    According to http://www.usflag.or...:

    “When displaying the flag against a wall, vertically or horizontally, the flag’s union (stars) should be at the top, to the flag’s own right, and to the observer’s left.”

    Tsk. Tsk.

  • JimWa | April 7, 2010 at 4:05 pm |

    [quote comment=”384593″][quote comment=”384592″][quote comment=”384589″]
    Notice the use of the word “would” in my statement.[/quote]

    heh heh…you said would[/quote]

    You just reminded me why I went on sabbatical from UW.[/quote]

    (glad I didn’t go with the “how much wood would Doc Ellis chuck …” comment I’d been considering making)

  • JTH | April 7, 2010 at 4:25 pm |

    Comiskey/Cominskey?

    I can’t even begin to count how many people think this is the name of the place the Bears play their home games. *sigh*
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    And yes, I did put that Mizzou pic in the comments, but as Phil pointed out, Paul posted it the main entry that day.

  • Bernard | April 7, 2010 at 4:44 pm |

    [quote comment=”384593″][quote comment=”384592″][quote comment=”384589″]
    Notice the use of the word “would” in my statement.[/quote]

    heh heh…you said would[/quote]

    You just reminded me why I went on sabbatical from UW.[/quote]

    Is that all it takes?

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

  • JamesP. | April 7, 2010 at 5:00 pm |

    More information on the Astros 1965 Throwback uniforms:

    http://footer.mlblog...

    [quote]I’ve received a lot of questions regarding the throwback jerseys the Astros will be wearing on Saturday when they Turn Back the Clock and party like it’s 1965.

    The jerseys will indeed be sold in the team shop at Minute Maid Park. They’ll be presented in “authentic” form, not “replica” form, so you’re pretty much getting the exact jersey that you’ll see players wearing that day. The cost will be $275 and they’ve ordered 156, all of which will go on sale on Saturday.

    The actual game-worn jerseys will also go on sale, beginning Sunday (April 11). Those items will be sold only at the Astros Authentics kiosk on the main concourse at Minute Maid Park. Uniform packages — cap, jersey, pants, stirrups and belts for the Astros and everything but the stirrups and belts on the Phillies side. Prices will start at $300 per uniform packages. The lower prices will be for coaches uniforms and will be higher for players.[/quote]

  • Beardface | April 7, 2010 at 5:16 pm |

    [quote comment=”384573″][quote comment=”384570″]
    Donovan over at the Society for Sports Uniforms Research keeps lists of official colors. He gets them from the leagues themselves, you can trust him on this.

    And yes, if a pro team uses black anywhere in its scheme it becomes an official team color. Possibly because there is more than one shade of black?

    Here’s his listings for the Lions, Eagles, and Mets. As you can see, black is an official color for all of them. Doesn’t change the BFBS one bit – it was adding black to the color scheme in the first place that triggered BFBS.

    Lest anyone think that teams are this particular only with their black, check out these – the Baltimore Orioles have official versions of all the colors in their Maryland state patch and the Mariners and Brewers list the touches of red that appear only in their respective primary logos.[/quote]

    thank you chance…was gonna point to SSUR

    and also for reiterating my point about BFBS

    just because it’s an “official” color (a la the hurricanes, amongst other offenders), it’s STILL BFBS…just like the mets, royals, tennessee, reds (maybe), lions, dook, etc.

    it’s the superfluous and unnecessary adding of black to a colorscheme that constitutes BFBS…once it’s added, and becomes official, doesn’t make it any less egregious[/quote]
    *sigh*

    The Hurricanes’ colors are Red, Black, and White. All three are used in equal amounts in advertising and promotions, and have been since inception. THEY ARE NOT BFBS. And that is just one of the teams that this applies to.

    Think about it this way. I’d venture to say there are a couple of questions you need to ask before labelling someone ‘BFBS’:
    1. What was the ORIGINAL color scheme of the franchise when it was formed in its current state (including drastic re-vamps of the color scheme, like what the Washington Capitals or Buffalo Sabres recently did, jersey altercations or slight modifications to color scheme do not count).
    2. Was black one of the MAIN (not trim) colors?
    3. What other color could be used for an alternate uniform?

    If black is part of answer 1, 2 is yes, and 3 does not include anything other than uniform colors that are already used, then it is not BFBS.

    Using those guidelines, teams like the following are EXEMPT:

    Carolina Panthers
    Carolina Hurricanes
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Philadelphia Flyers
    Baltimore Ravens
    Cincinnati Bengals
    etc

    Teams that are blatant BFBS:

    Tennessee Volunteers
    Duke Blue Devils
    Butler Bulldogs
    Philadelphia Eagles (transition between greens is not drastic enough to qualify)
    New York Mets

    Now, there is one team that would throw this argument into a bit of a mess. New Jersey Devils. Their original color scheme was red and green, and then switched to red and black. If they had gone with black right after the switch, then they are BFBS, but if they do it now, it has been so long, and since black is a primary color, they are exempt. Therefore, this last question is added:

    4. If black wasn’t an original color, how long has it been since it was instituted as a primary color before being used as the primary color of a jersey?

    If the answer to this is 10 years or more, they are EXEMPT.

  • Bob Loblaw | April 7, 2010 at 5:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”384596″][quote comment=”384594″]
    I believe you’re right on that… Sanguillen would also don that flocked batting helmet–can’t seem to locate a pic that to corroborate that, thou :([/quote]

    here ya go[/quote]
    ya… i know –it’s what i get for posting comments w/o reading thru first!

  • Johnny O | April 7, 2010 at 5:48 pm |

    Although Prince Fielder alluded a month or so ago the team would still un-tuck after victories… the Crew have won their past two games, and have not un-tucked.

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

  • Seth H | April 7, 2010 at 6:01 pm |

    “Seth H said:

    “If your school colors are one color and white, hello, your school colors are one color and white.”

    Even more embarrassing if your alma mater’s colors are one color and white and its nickname is the COLOR but the basketball team wears BFBS: http://www.gocrimson

    Harvard grads NEVER miss an opportunity to tell folks they went to Harvard.”

    Yeah. That’s why I did it. Because so many of you know who I am, it really pumped me up. (In my experience, Harvard grads are the least likely to name their school. the typical statement is “I went to school in Boston.”)

    So if I have relevant information I should not post it on the board to avoid offending you?

    (Let me know if you understood that or if I need to dumb it down for a general audience.)

  • pasta | April 7, 2010 at 6:07 pm |

    The Rams GM said some really stupid shit today. I’m guessing that they will be wearing their blue pants often.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 6:46 pm |

    [quote comment=”384605″](Let me know if you understood that or if I need to dumb it down for a general audience.)[/quote]

    seth, you’re arguing with a guy who goes by “bourbon soaked idiot”

    absentem laedit, qui cum ebrio litigat

  • pflava | April 7, 2010 at 6:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”384547″][quote comment=”384529″]
    I’d prefer Tennessee stick to their official orange and white, but one could argue that black trim is needed for Tennessee uniforms because orange and white are not legible together.[/quote]

    Of all the one color and white teams, the only two I can think of where they actually benefit from a dark outline on the numbers are the Vols and UNC. Tennessee’s orange, like Carolina blue, is fairly light and doesn’t show up that well on road white. Most one color teams primary shade is dominant, like Duke’s blue, Alabama’s crimson, the Celtics green, Colts blue, etc. When you add black to another dominant color, the result always looks like complete shit. And when you throw it into perfectly good TWO color schemes, like blue and orange, navy and gold, etc. it REALLY looks like shit.

  • pflava | April 7, 2010 at 6:54 pm |

    Let’s try that again…

    Of all the one color and white teams, the only two I can think of where they actually benefit from a dark outline on the numbers are the Vols and UNC. Tennessee’s orange, like Carolina blue, is fairly light and doesn’t show up that well on road white. Most one color teams primary shade is dominant, like Duke’s blue, Alabama’s crimson, the Celtics green, Colts blue, etc. When you add black to another dominant color, the result always looks like complete shit. And when you throw it into perfectly good TWO color schemes, like blue and orange, navy and gold, etc. it REALLY looks like shit.

  • Kek | April 7, 2010 at 7:16 pm |

    Pirates in black alts, a first for a Wednesday.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 7:30 pm |

    [quote comment=”384612″]Pirates in black alts, a first for a Wednesday.[/quote]

    and so it begins…

    mets in their official home unis tonight (blue caps, snow whites)

    fish in their black tops

  • Brian | April 7, 2010 at 7:34 pm |

    Stirrups vs.stirrups!
    What the heck? Why couldn’t Zaun wear stirrups when he was with the Rays? I’ve been waiting impatiently for years for a (Devil) Ray to wear proper hosiery in the majors.

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 7:37 pm |

    [quote comment=”384576″]The A’s usually use the previous season’s home white jersey for photo shoots and to wear to public appearances so Bailey probably had this one put back in his locker by somebody who didn’t know better and he grabbed the wrong one.[/quote]

    Nope. A’s equipment manager just e-mailed to tell me that Bailey kept a jersey from last year and chose to wear it again this year because he won Rookie of the Year. Steve’s having the OPD patch removed from it.

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 7:42 pm |

    [quote comment=”384614″]Stirrups vs.stirrups!
    What the heck? Why couldn’t Zaun wear stirrups when he was with the Rays?[/quote]

    He did, at least a few times. I specifically recall it, plus it’s referenced in this comment from last September:
    http://www.uniwatchb...

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 7:45 pm |

    Hanley Ramirez is wearing light-aqua cleats and also has aqua webbing in his black glove.

  • Brian | April 7, 2010 at 8:03 pm |

    [quote comment=”384616″][quote comment=”384614″]Stirrups vs.stirrups!
    What the heck? Why couldn’t Zaun wear stirrups when he was with the Rays?[/quote]

    He did, at least a few times. I specifically recall it, plus it’s referenced in this comment from last September:
    http://www.uniwatchb...
    Well I’ll be… How did I miss that? There has to be a pic out there somewhere.

  • James P. | April 7, 2010 at 8:05 pm |

    Andy Pettit has a shout out to long time Yankees trainer Gene Monahan on his cap tonight. “Geno” is in the hospital apparently.

  • LI Phil | April 7, 2010 at 8:17 pm |

    [quote comment=”384618″]
    Well I’ll be… How did I miss that? There has to be a pic out there somewhere.[/quote]

    ask…and ye shall receive

  • interlockingtc | April 7, 2010 at 8:44 pm |

    Forgive me if this has been mentioned, but Black For Black’s Sake was born in 1981, when the North Stars inexplicably ruined their illustrious green and gold uniforms by adding black stripes.

    I still am more appalled by that than by their move to Dallas. ;)

  • KT | April 7, 2010 at 9:38 pm |

    Can’t believe I’m the first to post this one (if I am):

    http://content.usato...

  • Sam D. | April 7, 2010 at 9:42 pm |

    Has anyone noticed that the Astros now wear red undersleeves with their alternate white jerseys? They used to wear black.

  • Paul Lukas | April 7, 2010 at 9:45 pm |

    [quote comment=”384619″]Andy Pettit has a shout out to long time Yankees trainer Gene Monahan on his cap tonight. “Geno” is in the hospital apparently.[/quote]

    Where on his cap was this written?:
    http://scores.espn.g...

  • JTH | April 7, 2010 at 10:03 pm |

    People refer to Harvard as being in Boston? It’s in Cambridge, though. Right? Or is Cambridge a borough or something?

    (I’m not being a wiseass this time.)

  • JAson | April 7, 2010 at 10:39 pm |

    [quote comment=”384617″]Hanley Ramirez is wearing light-aqua cleats and also has aqua webbing in his black glove.[/quote]

    Best picture, so far…

    http://scores.espn.g...

  • scott | April 7, 2010 at 10:49 pm |

    Is this as bad as the Nationals jerseys from last year?:
    http://sports.espn.g...

  • James P. | April 7, 2010 at 10:51 pm |

    [quote comment=”384624″][quote comment=”384619″]Andy Pettit has a shout out to long time Yankees trainer Gene Monahan on his cap tonight. “Geno” is in the hospital apparently.[/quote]

    Where on his cap was this written?:
    http://scores.espn.g...

    [quote comment=\”384624\”][quote comment=\”384619\”]Andy Pettit has a shout out to long time Yankees trainer Gene Monahan on his cap tonight. \”Geno\” is in the hospital apparently.[/quote]

    Where on his cap was this written?:
    http://scores.espn.g...

    Hard to see, but it is on the back of the cap to the right of the MLB logo.

  • Ricko | April 7, 2010 at 10:53 pm |

    [quote comment=”384627″][quote comment=”384617″]Hanley Ramirez is wearing light-aqua cleats and also has aqua webbing in his black glove.[/quote]

    Best picture, so far…

    http://scores.espn.g...

    Appear to be gray with aqua and black trim.
    Not disputing, just examining closely.

    —Ricko

  • nathan | April 7, 2010 at 11:13 pm |

    One of the San Francisco Giants players had San Francisco misspelled on his jersey in tonight’s game http://sports.espn.g...

  • Tom | April 7, 2010 at 11:26 pm |

    [quote comment=”384632″]One of the San Francisco Giants players had San Francisco misspelled on his jersey in tonight’s game http://sports.espn.g...

    Here’s a link to a photo of Velez with the misspelling:

    http://www.boston.co...

  • =bg= | April 8, 2010 at 12:00 am |

    [quote comment=”384604″]Although Prince Fielder alluded a month or so ago the team would still un-tuck after victories… the Crew have won their past two games, and have not un-tucked.

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

    Whatever. They look like slobs. And if Fielder pulls that celebration stunt @ home plate against the Giants again, we’ll hit him in the regular season just like Zito did in Arizona.

    Look and act like you’ve been there before, Prince.

  • Buckeye Mike | April 8, 2010 at 12:06 am |

    [quote comment=”384486″][quote comment=”384479″]As a Butler Alumnus, I cannot defend the black uniforms for being black.

    However, they are the only road uniforms, they are not an alternate. For some reason when the school switched templates in the early 2000’s (2003 maybe) the old dark blue roadies went away and were replaced with blacks.

    I personally hope this NCAA run gets the Dawgs some new road blues for next year.[/quote]

    That’s interesting. Almost like the Navy’s “service dress blue uniforms,” which are really black.[/quote]

    Don’t know if this had been said, but Butler will get new a new uni next year. As a Nike school making the Final Four, they will get the “elite” status. Just like tOSU, Duke, UNC, etc.

  • Teebz | April 8, 2010 at 12:11 am |

    [quote comment=”384513″]
    Nah, the Sox were followers. The LA Kings went from Lakers colors to Raiders colors in 1988. The Atlanta Falcons switched to black jerseys in 1990.

    In any case, we’ve had the BFBS thing for over 20 years… it’s not going anywhere.[/quote]

    Just to shed a little historical perspective on the NHL…

    – The Anaheim Mighty Ducks went with a black alternate in 2003.

    – Buffalo went black-red-and-silver in 1996.

    – The Calgary Flames introduced a black alternate in 1998.

    – Chicago introduced a black alternate in 1996.

    – The Minnesota North Stars changed from green to black in 1991.

    – Philly introduced the black alternate in 1997.

    – Phoenix started with a black road jersey in 1996.

    – San Jose joined the black uniform culture in 2001.

    – Washington threw a black alternate into the mix in 1997.

  • mtjaws | April 8, 2010 at 12:20 am |

    [quote comment=”384613″][quote comment=”384612″]Pirates in black alts, a first for a Wednesday.[/quote]

    and so it begins…

    mets in their official home unis tonight (blue caps, snow whites)

    fish in their black tops[/quote]

    Nice to see the Mets in blue hats two games in a row! That must be a new record!

    I know they are alts, but I like the Marlins’ black shirts on the road. Matches the hat and normal numbers, so I don’t mind it as much as others that do BFBS.

    Now, if only the dang bullpen could hold a lead. grrr. Nolasco deserved that win.

  • Teebz | April 8, 2010 at 12:27 am |

    [quote comment=”384602″]
    *sigh*

    The Hurricanes’ colors are Red, Black, and White. All three are used in equal amounts in advertising and promotions, and have been since inception. THEY ARE NOT BFBS. And that is just one of the teams that this applies to.

    Think about it this way. I’d venture to say there are a couple of questions you need to ask before labelling someone ‘BFBS’:
    1. What was the ORIGINAL color scheme of the franchise when it was formed in its current state (including drastic re-vamps of the color scheme, like what the Washington Capitals or Buffalo Sabres recently did, jersey altercations or slight modifications to color scheme do not count).
    2. Was black one of the MAIN (not trim) colors?
    3. What other color could be used for an alternate uniform?

    If black is part of answer 1, 2 is yes, and 3 does not include anything other than uniform colors that are already used, then it is not BFBS.

    Using those guidelines, teams like the following are EXEMPT:

    Carolina Panthers
    Carolina Hurricanes
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Philadelphia Flyers
    Baltimore Ravens
    Cincinnati Bengals
    etc

    Teams that are blatant BFBS:

    Tennessee Volunteers
    Duke Blue Devils
    Butler Bulldogs
    Philadelphia Eagles (transition between greens is not drastic enough to qualify)
    New York Mets

    Now, there is one team that would throw this argument into a bit of a mess. New Jersey Devils. Their original color scheme was red and green, and then switched to red and black. If they had gone with black right after the switch, then they are BFBS, but if they do it now, it has been so long, and since black is a primary color, they are exempt. Therefore, this last question is added:

    4. If black wasn’t an original color, how long has it been since it was instituted as a primary color before being used as the primary color of a jersey?

    If the answer to this is 10 years or more, they are EXEMPT.[/quote]

    Your rules are complete BS because they are YOUR rules.

    When did black become a colour? If it’s not a colour – and it’s not – then it cannot be part of a colour scheme. But that a philosophical question.

    The Hurricanes have silver/gray in their colour scheme. In fact, they have a lot of it considering they weave the colour into their jersey’s neckline and hem stripes. Just because you can’t see if clearly doesn’t mean it ain’t there. It’s there, and is featured just as prominently as the black is throughout their jerseys and logo.

    Therefore, they went black to follow a trend. Thanks for being sheep, they’re BFBS, and they suck balls for doing so.

    Other teams that have done so? Philly, San Jose, Washington, Calgary, Minnesota North Stars, and Buffalo as an example.

    Alternate jerseys that are black are BFBS BY DEFINITION because they are alternate jerseys. Otherwise, Carolina should have gone with black as their main road uniform colour when they moved. Then there would be no argument about their colour scheme.

  • LI Phil | April 8, 2010 at 12:32 am |

    [quote comment=”384637″]
    Now, if only the dang bullpen could hold a lead. grrr. Nolasco deserved that win.[/quote]

    nolasco was gassed, but you’re right

    a win’s a win tho mike

  • pasta | April 8, 2010 at 12:34 am |

    [quote comment=”384568″]Some more of the batting helmet photos

    Which of these pirates is holding a helmet?

    Detroit Tigers

    Yankees

    Roger Maris

    Is the logo coming off?[/quote]
    Which of these pirates is holding a helmet?
    Jon Olerud

  • mtjaws | April 8, 2010 at 12:58 am |

    [quote comment=”384639″][quote comment=”384637″]
    Now, if only the dang bullpen could hold a lead. grrr. Nolasco deserved that win.[/quote]

    nolasco was gassed, but you’re right

    a win’s a win tho mike[/quote]

    Of course. Especially over the Mets!

  • Johnny O | April 8, 2010 at 1:11 am |

    [quote comment=”384634″][quote comment=”384604″]Although Prince Fielder alluded a month or so ago the team would still un-tuck after victories… the Crew have won their past two games, and have not un-tucked.

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

    Whatever. They look like slobs. And if Fielder pulls that celebration stunt @ home plate against the Giants again, we’ll hit him in the regular season just like Zito did in Arizona.

    Look and act like you’ve been there before, Prince.[/quote]

    I don’t want to defend Prince and his home run celebration, but what if Kung Fu Panda his a walk off job when competing for a playoff spot toward the end of a season? My strong guess is that you would love it. Prince, and the other Brewers, have stated the home run celebration was not intended to “show up” anyone on any team at any time. You can believe them or not, but they said that wasn’t the case.

    On the flip side of the coin, Hoffman doesn’t really like the fact that the Brewers have a countdown sign at Miller Park counting down to his 600th save. (He did give the approval though). He says it is more bulletin board material for other teams.

    http://milwaukee.bre...

  • Johnny O | April 8, 2010 at 1:17 am |

    [quote comment=”384633″][quote comment=”384632″]One of the San Francisco Giants players had San Francisco misspelled on his jersey in tonight’s game http://sports.espn.g...

    Here’s a link to a photo of Velez with the misspelling:

    http://www.boston.co...

    Here is another screen grab:
    http://cdn2.sbnation...

    h/t – SB Nation

  • divino codino | April 8, 2010 at 2:25 am |

    [quote comment=”384625″]People refer to Harvard as being in Boston? It’s in Cambridge, though. Right? Or is Cambridge a borough or something?

    (I’m not being a wiseass this time.)[/quote]

    [quote comment=\”384625\”]People refer to Harvard as being in Boston? It\’s in Cambridge, though. Right? Or is Cambridge a borough or something?

    (I\’m not being a wiseass this time.)[/quote]

    The college and many of the graduate schools are in Cambridge. Harvard Square and Harvard Yard are in Cambridge. Some of the graduate schools are in Boston, being (generally speaking) south of the Charles river.

  • JTH | April 8, 2010 at 2:43 am |

    [quote comment=”384644″]The college and many of the graduate schools are in Cambridge. Harvard Square and Harvard Yard are in Cambridge. Some of the graduate schools are in Boston, being (generally speaking) south of the Charles river.[/quote]
    Thanks.
    [quote comment=”384636″]
    Just to shed a little historical perspective on the NHL…
    – Chicago introduced a black alternate in 1996.
    [/quote]
    Don’t you mean 1927?

    (I am being a wiseass this time.)

  • JTH | April 8, 2010 at 2:59 am |

    Just realized something: under Beardface’s rules, I guess this is red for red’s sake.

  • Jeff P | April 8, 2010 at 3:15 am |

    [quote comment=”384638″][quote comment=”384602″]
    *sigh*

    The Hurricanes’ colors are Red, Black, and White. All three are used in equal amounts in advertising and promotions, and have been since inception. THEY ARE NOT BFBS. And that is just one of the teams that this applies to.

    Think about it this way. I’d venture to say there are a couple of questions you need to ask before labelling someone ‘BFBS’:
    1. What was the ORIGINAL color scheme of the franchise when it was formed in its current state (including drastic re-vamps of the color scheme, like what the Washington Capitals or Buffalo Sabres recently did, jersey altercations or slight modifications to color scheme do not count).
    2. Was black one of the MAIN (not trim) colors?
    3. What other color could be used for an alternate uniform?

    If black is part of answer 1, 2 is yes, and 3 does not include anything other than uniform colors that are already used, then it is not BFBS.

    Using those guidelines, teams like the following are EXEMPT:

    Carolina Panthers
    Carolina Hurricanes
    Chicago Blackhawks
    Philadelphia Flyers
    Baltimore Ravens
    Cincinnati Bengals
    etc

    Teams that are blatant BFBS:

    Tennessee Volunteers
    Duke Blue Devils
    Butler Bulldogs
    Philadelphia Eagles (transition between greens is not drastic enough to qualify)
    New York Mets

    Now, there is one team that would throw this argument into a bit of a mess. New Jersey Devils. Their original color scheme was red and green, and then switched to red and black. If they had gone with black right after the switch, then they are BFBS, but if they do it now, it has been so long, and since black is a primary color, they are exempt. Therefore, this last question is added:

    4. If black wasn’t an original color, how long has it been since it was instituted as a primary color before being used as the primary color of a jersey?

    If the answer to this is 10 years or more, they are EXEMPT.[/quote]

    Your rules are complete BS because they are YOUR rules.

    When did black become a colour? If it’s not a colour – and it’s not – then it cannot be part of a colour scheme. But that a philosophical question.

    The Hurricanes have silver/gray in their colour scheme. In fact, they have a lot of it considering they weave the colour into their jersey’s neckline and hem stripes. Just because you can’t see if clearly doesn’t mean it ain’t there. It’s there, and is featured just as prominently as the black is throughout their jerseys and logo.

    Therefore, they went black to follow a trend. Thanks for being sheep, they’re BFBS, and they suck balls for doing so.

    Other teams that have done so? Philly, San Jose, Washington, Calgary, Minnesota North Stars, and Buffalo as an example.

    Alternate jerseys that are black are BFBS BY DEFINITION because they are alternate jerseys. Otherwise, Carolina should have gone with black as their main road uniform colour when they moved. Then there would be no argument about their colour scheme.[/quote]

    Oh, they’re just his rules. That makes them totally invalid of course. Just like all the BFBS ‘rules’ this has come up with are universal laws handed down by God.

    Silver has always been a trim Color for the Hurricanes. This has been pointed out to you a billion times by myself and others actually familiar with the team and not just ranting about it’s existence while frozen indoors at your computer in Winnipeg. The Hurricanes are red and Black- look at the damned logo. Red is their ‘main’ color. There is almost exactly the same amount of black.

    Whether black is a ‘color’ or not is rather irrelevant. If black isn’t one, then gray and white aren’t either. So why don’t you go tell a few raiders fans that their team doesn’t have a color scheme or identity? I’ll wait with the stretcher.

    If the devils have a legitimate claim to black as mentioned earlier, then the Hurricanes have one as well. Both of their logos have about the same amount of black as they do red. The team and league lists their colors as Red, Black, White, Silver. White and silver are trim. And before you try the “they have a white jersey” thing like you have in the past, every team has a white jersey. It’s a neutral background element.

    To take this another way, let’s say the oilers want to make an orange jersey, pretending for a moment they never had one during the WHA years. Say they break out an orange. Would it make sense for you to claim that it’s Orange for Orange’s sake? No, Orange has been their secondary color for their entire existence, minus a few years spent wandering in the darkness searching for light and hope. Arguing for the Hurricanes using silver as their secondary is like arguing that the Oilers should make their thirds in the same red that used to border the copper stripes on their uniforms. It’s flat out incorrect.