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

Colorization - Second Coat

otto 1-2-3

By Phil Hecken

Last weekend, I introduced you to some important, basic techniques to learn to change colors on uniforms. If you missed it, please check it out. Today, I’m going to teach you how to colorize black and white photographs. Since some of the techniques you will need to use today are explained in last weekend’s tutorial, if you are interested in learning to colorize black and white photos, you may want to refer back to that if you have any questions.

In just a moment, we’re going to learn how to colorize this black and white photo of Otto Graham, so if you’d like to try this tutorial, please download and save that now. But before we do that, I wanted to take a brief moment to go over some feedback I received on last weekend’s piece.

Reader Larry Torrez sent me this E-mail:

Phil,

Thought I would send a colorized pic I did a looong time ago and never finished… could never get the heinous greenish grey of the old Colosseum paint job — still ugly in the 60’s when I attended my first scRams game, back then they wore Dodger blue and white unis (sweet). They had changed from bleachers to orange plastic seats in most of the place by then. But I digress…

Been restoring and coloring pics using Photoshop (industry beast) for work (ad agency) for years and I wanted to pass on Kudos to you for supporting this lost art and in a sports related way (doubly cool) too.

I first learned how to colorize actual black and white photographs with cave tools — women’s makeup and paints — in the olden days. Same rules apply… lotsa practice.

I hope that the Uni Watch Universe gets into the act and puts some color to some of the best photography of the past century.

Larry Torrez

Indeed. Thank you Larry. I realize we’ve come a long way since the “cave tools” days. I also received some feedback and tips on colorizing from The Jeff, who wanted to add this to last weeks tutorial:

Well, if we’re sticking to black & white, the method you’re using works fairly well. In fact, I use the same basic method when dealing with some colored images myself. (turning the Chargers pants from blue to yellow – colorization tool; seeing how the Browns would look with orange jerseys & brown pants – coloring a new layer) The only major drawbacks are that it doesn’t work particularly well on things like helmet glare – you end up drawing over the glare and it becomes much more subdued than the original, and it doesn’t work for changing colors to other colors.

I do have a few small tips though:

1. If you weren’t aware, the selection tool has multiple modes – you may want to set it on “Add” rather than the default of “Replace” – so you can make multiple small selections and chain them all together into one big selection, then filling, instead of the “select, fill, select, fill” that you used in the tutorial.

1a. Alternatively, because you’re working on a separate layer, you can just use the max zoom and free-hand the coloring with the paintbrush tool. I find that to be a little bit quicker sometimes.

2. Instead of just playing with transparency, set your layer to “Multiply”. This will allow you to use brighter colors without losing the underlying details.

3. A bit of a cheat – if at all possible, start with a larger image than what you actually need – when you resize it down, it can hide some minor mistakes or overlaps you might have made.

I think you’ll also want to make sure to remind people that it’s not a quick process, especially doing a full black & white photo. Patience is a very important virtue.

Feel free to ask anything else you want to know… I’ll try to help to the best of my abilities. I’m just as self-taught as you are though, so I don’t know everything yet. :)

– The Jeff

And thank you, Jeff. Any and all tips are greatly appreciated.

And finally, someone who actually used last week’s tutorial and tried it out. This comes from Derek Milleville:

I was messing around with that program you talked about in your post yesterday and I came up with these. They are the greatest cause it is my first time ever doing something like this. I just thought I’d share it with you.

Great — BFBS Buffalo Bills. I’ve created a monster. (I kid, I kid). Nice job on those Derek. Keep at it.

~~~

Now then, lets move on to black and white colorization. As with last week, the tutorial I created will speak for itself, so there won’t be much I can add in this article. If you’ve already downloaded and saved the picture of Otto Graham, you can begin with the thumbnail tutorial. Simply click on “Detail” to bring up the larger images, and then click on each individual image (they are numbered 1-24) and follow the steps.

I cannot stress enough the importance of creating a new layer with each new section. This is important because the opacity of each layer may (and likely will) need to be different — if you want to click through the tutorial before starting, you’ll notice the orange elements (jersey, helmet, sock stripe and pants stripe) each have a different strength of layer color. The same applies to the brown you’ll be adding to the uniform. For this tutorial, I have only given you instructions for working with the orange and the brown. Obviously, you can keep on colorizing as much of the photograph as you’d like, including fleshtones and the helmet mask, the football, etc. You may also wish to colorize other players and the grass.

It all depends on your level of patience. Sometimes, it looks cool simply to colorize a single image in a photo, or a pair of figures, leaving the rest of the background black and white. Other times (if you have plenty OF time and patience), you may wish to colorize an entire photograph. But beware, sometimes you may bite off more than you can chew. That photograph probably took me six or seven hours to colorize.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy the tutorial and will give it a try. Colorizing photos is a wonderful hobby (albeit one that may become a time-straining obsession). Hopefully, as Larry Torrez noted above, the Uni Watch community can begin building a wonderful colorized library of some of the great black and white photographs of the past.

Thanks for indulging me, and as always, if anyone has any questions, suggestions or thoughts, please shoot me an E-mail. Good luck, and happy colorizing!

~~~~~~~~~~

news corpNo Baseball, Football for me

I know this has nothing to do with uniforms, but quite frankly, it needs to be mentioned, at least in passing. Due to a dispute between News Corp and my cable provider, Cablevision, I am unable to watch the Fox network. Normally, this would be no big deal, but it means that last night, I was unable to view the Phillies vs. Giants NLCS playoff game, and, unless something drastic happens, today I won’t be able to watch the Fox portion of the NFL. And that, quite frankly, is bullshit.

Normally, I’m no fan of the Dolans, who own Cablevision (and also the Knicks, Rangers, Madison Square Garden, several cable networks and a portion of my soul), but in this instance, I’m completely blaming this on News Corp. Others agree with me. According to this article, “Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation (Nasdaq: NWSA) is using the media domination it developed under the friendly oversight of the Bush Administration to extract more than double the amount of fees from local cable television provider, Cablevision – new funds that will likely help secure the election of more friendly elected officials.”

Now, sure, that’s an op-ed piece and not straight news reporting, but basically that’s the deal. The article continues, “The ability of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, owner of Fox Television, to hold Cablevision subscribers hostage during the MBL playoffs and World Series (it is extorting an $80 million increase in the fees to Cablevision, now at $70 million) is another example of the gross mistake (or rather the calculated strategy) that the Bush Administration made requiring broadcast to go digital, therefore requiring viewers to have a subscription to a profit-making cable company or satellite company.”

Now, the Bush-bashing aside, the point in that graf is clear: News Corp wants to charge my cable provider MORE THAN DOUBLE what it is currently charging them now, and in fact, that amount is more than ABC, NBC and CBS combined are receiving. Even if my cable company caves and pays, do you think they’re going to eat that? Hell no…I can see my already outrageous bill going up again. And since I live in a condo, I can’t get any of the satellite providers, so that’s not an option.

Here’s what really bothers me. News Corp has REFUSED to submit to independent, third-party arbitration. Cablevision has, offering to show Fox programming (including the NLCS and NFL) until the dispute can be settled. What kind of good faith is that?

Last evening, someone on the boards mentioned “The entire affair is despicable, but News Corp has a point with the arbitration thing. Based on their past practices it sounds like Cablevision holds out of negotiating until the contract enters its arbitration period, which is more likely to favor the local cable company, rather than the larger network. That is a bad faith tactic.”

Lets for a minute accept that that is true. How is that a bad faith tactic? When a contract agreement can’t be met, how is it that independent third party arbitration is bad? Even if that arbitration sides with the cable company (which I would dispute, but whatever), at least the consumer isn’t screwed out of what used to be FREE TV in the process. And if the cable company doesn’t have to pay the rates the provider is asking, how is that possibly BAD for the consumer?

Anyway, I was upset last evening after being denied the baseball playoffs. If I don’t get football today, I’ll be more than livid. Sorry for venting to you readers, but I really couldn’t let this pass without some kind of mention.

Anyone else affected by this? What do you think?

~~~~~~~~~~

all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks

Slowly making it thought the tweak backlog, but keep them coming. If you have a tweak, change or concept for any sport, send them my way. OK? OK! Here’s what’s on tap for today.

Those who’ve already sent in tweaks, they’re fine the way they are, but in the future, because many of you seem to enjoy elaborate write ups, can you possibly try to keep them to 50 words tops per team? (Every one I’ve received since I asked for the ~50 limit has complied so far!) Thanks!

~~~

Starting off the show is Terry Duroncelet, who really took me literally on the 50 word limit. That’s per TEAM, not per post, but I appreciate it nonetheless:

Hey, Phil. Via your request, I’ll TRY to keep it under 50 words.

White Sox

Steelers

Lakers Home

Lakers Road

Lakers Sunday Whites

The Douchebag Dirty Birds

Dolphins

Dodgers

Colts

Chargers

Football Cardinals

A’s

49ers

And my best work yet, the Bengals

Enjoy…

~~~

And finishing our tweaks this week is Bowen Hobbs, who has seven NFL concepts you have to see:

Hi Phil

I have a few more NFL concepts for you, most of which have appeared in my blog, 44th & Goal:

49ers: I made the sleeve stripes fit, used a new number font to match the wordmark, and added brown instead of black.

Bengals: I developed a tiger-striping design around the shoulders and switched the orange jersey to the primary jersey.

Buccaneers: I created a design that echoes the ragged nature of the flag in the logo. I also added an orange alternate jersey.

Chargers: I darkened the powder blue and ditched the navy. I also found a new way to incorporate the lightning bolts. And then there’s the strikethrough on the numbers.

Jaguars: I’ve always wanted to see the Jags incorporate a spotted pattern, and this does just that. I also swapped out the teal for green because the Dolphins are Florida’s teal team.

Rams: I went back to royal and athletic gold, since the Edward Jones dome is pretty dimly lit. I also tweaked the helmet by adding white highlights to match the logo.

Seahawks: This one is a compromise of old and new. The blue is halfway between the slate and navy they currently have. The green is slightly darker, and the helmets are a blueish-silver. The design is supposed to mimic the blue/green split of the seahawk’s neck.

Thanks,

Bowen Hobbs

Great stuff today fellas. That’s it for today. Check back next week for more.

~~~~~~~~~~

uni tracking header 12010 Season Uni Tracking

Now that the 2010 Season has concluded it’s time for all of you who have tracked your team through the entire season to send me your final tweaks. When I have a few spare hours, I plan on compiling them and adding them to the Uni Watch Archives, to be a part of the permanent record.

So, if you’ve been doing your due diligence with your team, send me your end-of-season tracking reports, and I’ll post them as a “sub article” on the weekends. OK? OK! And I promise they’ll make it into the UW archives before the year is out. Please feel free to accompany your tracking with a write up, especially if your team had any interesting trends or patterns.

~~~

Today, we have Brandon Davis, who tracked the Oakland A’s this past season. Let’s hear from him now:

Hi Phil,

Not much to say about the A’s at the end of the season, they finished .500. They played well at home, where they wore white about 2/3 of the time at home and played even better in black (especially compared to last year), which they wore about a third of the time. Rumor is that the black will be replaced by a gold alternate next season though. The A’s still haven’t phased out the old helmet decal, and it kept creeping back every once in a while. Other than that, here’s the list.

Brandon Davis

Thanks Brandon. Any other trackers out there? If you have been doing the due diligence, I’d love to feature your efforts on here. And to those who’ve already sent me your final season wrap-ups, I thank you.

~~~~~~~~~~

2010-playoffs-alex rockleinTracking The Playoffs

At Uni Watch, we certainly have a dedicated band of obsessed folks, there is no denying that. And we do like to track teams in a variety of ways.

Alex Rocklein has come up with a really neat playoff tracker. He not only tracks the teams wins & losses, but he also tracks the teams by uniform! Awesome. It’s not only cool, but it’s a great way to look at the uni matchups from a graphical perspective:

Looking, for example, at the Braves vs. Giants matchup, we not only see the Giants won games 1, 3 and 4, but we can also see that the Braves wore a different top for all 4 games. Over on the AL side of the ledger, we see that Texases never wore their white top in an entire five game series, while the Rays wore their blue softball tops in 4 of their five games. Very interesting.

Alex sent me that yesterday, before the Yanks lost and (I think) the Giants won (if I had Fox, I would know that), so it’s updated as of Friday’s games.

Said Alex a week ago, before the divisional series’ had been decided:

Phil,

Every year for the playoffs I roll out a playoff tree that I use for my desktop wallpaper. This year I added a new twist—adding each team jersey for each game played. I’ve attached a preview of what I use. I’m not too thrilled about the yellow but I took it from the World Series logo. Its an ongoing design project that I seem to change after each round. (The Giants/Braves is an assumption but I don’t see them going in any other direction).

Alex

He updated it for me after the first round. I look forward to showing you another update again next weekend. Thanks Alex!

~~~~~~~~~~

vilk 5 & 1 b 5 & 1

And now, the part of the post you’ve all been waiting for: The 5 & 1. Jim really had some tough choices yesterday, but in the end, he got the Number One game correct, and really, isn’t that all that matters? I think so. Let’s see what else he got:

~~~

Honorable mention to FCS schools Villanova/Maine — I love double blue, so this was right up my alley.

5. Kansas State/Kansas — Because you don’t want to make this guy unhappy.

4. Iowa/Michigan — Iowa calls it old gold, UM calls it maize…I just say, “I’d wear that.”

3. SMU/Navy — Great matchup, and great end zones as well.

2. Iowa State/Oklahoma — A blowout on the scoreboard, but a tie when it comes to the unis.

1. Ole Miss/Alabama — Numbers one and two are interchangeable in my opinion, so I gave the nod to Bama’s helmet numbers.

And my worst pick, Illinois/Michigan State — Goofy font + swirly stripes + a lot of white = a matchup that narrowly beat out Boise State/San Jose State.

~~~

Very nicely done this week Jim. Of course I don’t agree with all your selections, but you nailed the important one.

~~~~~~~~~~

OK, boys and girls, that will do it for this Sunday. If you’re wondering where Michael Princip’s Duck Tracker is…well, the Ducks were idle this week, so there is nothing to update. I believe he’ll be working on a pretty nice update for next weekend, however, so be sure to check back Saturday, as Team Nike will be summarily destroying UCLA in the Thursday Night ESPN game this week.

Over in the league where they play for pay, the Stillers are supposed to wear their sweet throwbacks today, which also marks the return of Benjamin Todd Roethlisberger. Lets see what kind of reception he gets.

Paul’s enjoying a weekend out of town, so if you guys can help us out with any good MMUW grabs or information, please post them directly into the comments or shoot me an E-mail, in addition to sending them to the usual UW address. I’ll try to help our fearless leader to compile everything so when he returns later this evening, he’ll be able to put it all together for a nice Monday package. OK? OK!

Enjoy the games today, and for those of you who are screwed out of the Fox games and the Phillies game…well…there’s gotta be something else on TV, right?

~~~

Longtime Terps fan. One word for the new black bball unis – “Ghetto” — Jerry “Taxman” Adams

 

234 comments to Colorization – Second Coat

  • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 7:44 am |

    I meant that refusing to attempt one-on-one negotiations until a crisis happens and then forcing arbitration on the grounds that viewers are losing their programming, which is what Cablevision did in the earlier dispute with Disney, is bad faith. It used the pulled programming as a lever to get the arbitrator to side against Disney. Unless the earlier contract specifically allows arbitration without prior good faith negotiations, refusing to negotiate and then insisting on arbitration is bad faith.

    Fox is stupid, not just greedy for holding out the sports programming. They’re going to lose a lot of ad revenue by not showing two very popular programs in two of the country’s biggest media markets, especially since Philly is losing home teams in both sports. It’s to their advantage to give the concession during negotiations.

  • Alex35332 | October 17, 2010 at 8:24 am |

    Now I don’t have Cablevision, but what is happening there is CLEARLY WRONG. But I would love to know what MLB and the NFL think about this situation. The Giants and Yankees going un-watched in the NYC market, if I were Goodell I would be looking to cancel my contract with Fox.

    F-newscorp.

  • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 8:28 am |

    Phil,

    I had a problem with DirecTV last year and Versus. Missed all of college football season and most of the hockey season so I do feel your pain.

    • Matt B | October 17, 2010 at 9:54 am |

      We got hosed here in Philadelphia. Cal alumni met at a bar to watch Cal-USC, but Fox is also in a pissing contest with DirecTV, so the game was not available. Fortunately one of the guys had a slingbox set up so he could get the feed from his family’s house in CA.

  • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 8:32 am |

    I have a question about personal jersey. What is the rule about wearing a jersey to a game if that team is not playing in the game.

    Last night in the Coyotes/Wings game there was a guy sitting behind the bench wearing a Quebec jersey like this: http://m2.wnymedia.n...

    Is this right or wrong?

    • Matt B | October 17, 2010 at 9:57 am |

      Back when I had college season tix, it was generally accepted that any hockey jersey from any league was pretty much acceptable. (As long as it wasn’t the visiting team’s.)

      • Alec | October 17, 2010 at 10:25 am |

        This happens at Coyote games all the time, where folks are wearing Russian league or even more obscure sweaters. It’s a sign of geekery, like a “I’m more punk rock than thou” kind of thing.

        • Rob S | October 18, 2010 at 11:23 am |

          A former team jersey? And the successor team (Colorado) is not involved in the game? That’s just a little weird. But I’d take a Nordiques jersey at a Wings-Coyotes game over, say, a Capitals jersey at a Pens-Isles tilt.

    • StLMarty | October 17, 2010 at 10:04 am |

      “There ain’t no wrong. There ain’t no right. There’s only pleasure and pain.” -P. Farrel

      If seeing an outsider jersey at a sporting event causes someone pain, then that person deserves it.

      • Ricardo Leonor | October 17, 2010 at 10:45 am |

        I wear Giant’s Jerseys to Panther games and Knicks or Nets Jerseys to Bobcat games…..even if they are playing other teams…….

        • StLMarty | October 17, 2010 at 11:08 am |

          People should be able to wear whatever jersey they want to wear. I can’t believe that it would bother anybody. Even if it’s the opposing team.
          I refuse to wear red to a Cardinals game.

    • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 11:47 am |

      I don’t care either way but I thought it was an off shoot of our discussion yesterday.

  • The Jeff | October 17, 2010 at 8:33 am |

    Just for the fun of it, here’s a more colorized version of that Browns picture.

    I don’t know who the other team actually was, but I thought they looked good as Detroit.

    http://img829.images...

    I did rush it a little bit. Also used a different method, which will probably be explained on here at a later date.

  • Mike | October 17, 2010 at 8:47 am |

    Any tips on doing human skin? I can’t seem to get it even close to right.

    • The Jeff | October 17, 2010 at 8:54 am |

      Without changing methods…

      Set the layer on multiply, use a fairly dark shade of brown and make the layer highly transparent.

  • Joey | October 17, 2010 at 8:56 am |

    I just want to comment on Bowen Hobbs’s Chargers re-design. That is absolutely one of the best re-designs I’ve seen on this site so far (including the actual contests) and I really wish the Chargers front office would get their hands on that and seriously consider it. Great job.

    • Paul Barrett | October 17, 2010 at 12:59 pm |

      LOVED the Hobb’s redesigns today. Particularly the Chargers and Rams. With the news of Nike taking over in ’12, my initial thoughts were visions of redesigns like these. Teams going back to their roots (colors) but experimenting in modern design (template).

      Great day of “tweaks” all around, the A’s and Dodgers were great from Duroncelet, as well as his Arizona Cardinals (love the pants).

      • Terry D. | October 17, 2010 at 10:42 pm |

        Thank you =)

  • Mike | October 17, 2010 at 9:13 am |

    I guess I don’t see what’s so nefarious about the Fox/Cablevision thing. I get how it sucks, especially for sports fans (I dealt with the Versus/DirecTV thing as well), but I don’t get how it’s wrong or evil.

    Fox has decided to charge X for their product. That may be arrogant or pig-headed, but it’s not evil. Cablevision thinks that’s too high. If Cablevision customers are unwilling to continue their subscription without Fox products (or unwilling to continue at the higher rates necessary to keep Fox), they can cancel. As far as I can tell, no one has a gun to their head.

    Let’s just remember that access to Fox isn’t an inalienable right. Go to a bar for the Giants game and be grateful that a portion of your cable bill is no longer going to a man you so despise.

    I just look forward to the day when television is Internet based and customers can directly purchase the channels they want to consume rather than going through cable or satellite providers.

    (PS: using an Examiner op-ed to support your argument is insanely weak.)

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 9:28 am |

      using an Examiner op-ed to support your argument is insanely weak.

      i wasn’t using it to support my argument (although i will concede it probably appears so); rather, the two grafs quoted summed up the conflict fairly well; i don’t agree with the bush-bashing either…the author clearly has an agenda on that end

      my point, or at least what i thought my point was, is that news corp refuses to even submit the matter to an independent, third party for arbitration, keeping the channel on the air while the two players attempt to work something out

      news corp has REFUSED to do that, in essence, taking their ball and going home; whether or not cablevision is also in the wrong here is irrelevant — they are willing to keep the channel on the air and not penalize subscribers while the dispute continues

      but, like most things, two mega-corporations engage in a pissing contest and of course, the consumer loses

      can i go to a bar and watch fox? sure…i could also switch providers, but why the hell should i? and it’s not like i can just snap my fingers and make that happen…i also happen to have my interwebs and phone through the cable company, so changing providers is not just a matter of flipping a switch; AND, for as much as i pay (which is a lot), im pretty happy with my service

      /still not getting FOX this morning…so im still pissed

      • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 9:55 am |

        I wasn’t saying News Corp is innocent, I was saying that Cablevision is in the wrong too, and ought to come out behind as a matter of law even though its strong arm tactic will likely win over News Corp’s, because they can make themselves look like the underdog and New’s Corp’s tactic looks worse to the public.

        Don’t forget that one of the bases for the dispute is that Cablevision is paying itself $160M a year to broadcast two channels that it owns when you’re thinking about how it’s gonna raise your rates.

      • Mike | October 17, 2010 at 10:12 am |

        I may be conflating your position with the position of the op-ed, and if so, I apologize. If you’re just ranting about a shitty situation, that’s fine (and I mean that sincerely). I’d be pissed too. Again, I was there with Versus and DirecTV. It was hard to even find a bar that had Versus, since any sports bar worth its salt carries DirecTV for NFL Sunday Ticket. I do feel your pain.

        But if you’re accusing News Corp. of doing something morally wrong, that’s different. If News Corp. firmly believes that Fox is worth X and are unwilling to accept less, why should they enter into third party arbitration? Cablevision can either pay the rate or not. Why wait, and in the process give Cablevision the best Fox has to offer (MLB playoffs and NFL football) at what News Corp. deems to be far too low prices? For the sake of Cablevision customers? News Corp. is legally obligated to operate in the best interests of their shareholders.

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 10:37 am |

          perhaps i am buying too much into cable’s argument, but i believe i am stating the facts when i say this: what newscorp is asking is MORE than what they are also asking verizon FiOs (their most direct competition) AND are asking cable for MORE than what cable paying CBS, NBC & ABC combined. yes…it’s a free market economy and they should ask what they feel the market will bear…again, not arguments i really care about last evening and today

          what i care about is, unless i go out of my way…far out of my way, actually, to “get” (either through switching providers, buying a $60+ digital antenna, or going to a bar) the channel i want to watch, i, and millions like me, are being screwed by two billion-dollar corporations playing a game of chicken…even if news corp is 100% in the right to charge what they feel is fair, right now…at this moment…there is only ONE side that is willing to put the matter up for arbitration and put the programming on the air until this is settled…and that side is NOT news corp

          let them fight it out, let me decide who is right, and maybe i’ll figure out cable truly is the one at fault…again, not my argument

          i just want to watch the playoffs and football without dealing with this shit

          it’s like people who feel *sorry* for baseball players…it’s hard to feel sorry for millionaires employed by billionaires…but when they strike…we, as a collective nation…are the ones who get screwed

          and right now, i’m the one being screwed…i pay my damn bill every month, on time…and believe me, it’s not a small expense…it’s a conscious choice on my behalf and all i know is that, through no fault of my own…news corp (even if they are 100% in the right on their own argument) is 100% wrong in my book in depriving me of the right to watch the games; all im asking is that they put the programming on the air and work something out…don’t pull this pissing contest shit

          the taylor law ought to cover this, but of course, it doesn’t

      • Bruce | October 17, 2010 at 2:28 pm |

        You could also go out and buy a $10 antenna to watch FOX over the air. Part of their contract with the NFL is based on the requirement that local teams have all of their games broadcast over the air in their local market, so you’d get to watch all the Giants games on FOX that way.

        I ditched cable in favor of over the air and internet streaming, couldn’t be happier and the networks still make money with commercials.

    • The Jeff | October 17, 2010 at 9:31 am |

      Please correct me if I’m wrong… but the last time I checked, Fox was still broadcast locally in most places. You can watch it for FREE with an antenna & a digital tuner (which any new-ish TV has built-in) The channels people are actually *losing* access to are crap like Fox News or Fox Sports Net or whatever, which no one really watches anyway.

      • Komet17 | October 17, 2010 at 10:58 am |

        “which no one really watches anyway”? I believe Fox News is the #1 rated cable channel in the evening–so “no one” is a bit of a reach, don’t you think?

        • The Jeff | October 17, 2010 at 11:11 am |

          I find that to be incredibly scary and disturbing.

          :(

        • union jack | October 17, 2010 at 1:04 pm |

          You’re correct, it should be “no one with a brain watches, anyway.”

        • Tony | October 17, 2010 at 5:32 pm |

          Yes, Fox news is the #1 cable news channel…that’s like saying they are the tallest person at a little person convention.
          Maybe around 2,000,000 max on a weeknight. Usually around 1 mil. More people watch Jersey Shore. That many people watching either one is a pretty scary thought.

    • Matt B | October 17, 2010 at 10:05 am |

      It sucks because cable subscribers are caught in the middle. 1) We might be stuck in contracts with who we’ve got so we can’t just switch. 2) Many places only have a couple of options (depending on who the municipality gave franchises to) so you can’t shop around. 3) If you’re in a rental building you probably have zero choice.

      If cable/satellite providers and networks would just let us have a la carte pricing, we could simply pick and choose the channels based on the networks’ rates and we wouldn’t be in this mess.

      Of course if you have broadband there are any number of ways to receive any game, so you do have that option.

      • johnj | October 17, 2010 at 10:32 am |

        Just to clear a few things up for those not in the area:

        -Alot of places in and around New York can’t really get any other service so its this or nothing

        -Even if you have the digital antenna you’re not going to be recieving FOX so thats a no go

        -The reason NEWSCORP is at fault is because they are aware of Cablevision and its subscribers lack of options. Its one thing to charge extra because of high demand but its another thing to double your price, Especialy when we’re talking about 10’s of millions of dollars.

        It really isnt a case where NEWSCORP believes FOX is worth $X and cablevision won’t pay. Its that both sides agree FOX is worth $X and NEWSCORP is looking to charge $2X

        • cdk | October 17, 2010 at 10:23 pm |

          1. There’s RCN, Time Warner, and Verizon FiOS last time I checked.

          2. You most certainly CAN receive FOX on a digital antenna. FOX is an OVER THE AIR station.

  • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 9:17 am |

    I was watching the Iowa-Michigan game yesterday and all I could think (besides four year olds tackle better that Michigan) is there is a jersey (Iowa) that Nike got right.

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 3:32 pm |

      Largely, I suspect, because Nike wasn’t given permision to screw around with it. Same could be said for LSU and Auburn and a few others (but for the annoyingly common issue of truncation, of course).

      —Ricko

  • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:34 am |

    There’s still free TV, just so you know.
    http://www.bestbuy.c...
    You just need a different antenna.

    The only reason I don’t have one is because I’m grandfathered in with DirecTV to get local channels only (plus their free religious/C-Span/NASA channels). I’m holding out until there’s a la carte programming (don’t snicker – there’s building momentum for that). It would come sooner if more people would stop paying too much to receive 500 channels when they only watch ten.

    It’s business, not evil. I’m not saying I like it, and if you don’t, play hardball right back at them. Cancel your cable. If enough people do it, they’ll cave.

    • Ricardo Leonor | October 17, 2010 at 9:58 am |

      Right now they are screaming in New York, mostly the Bronx and Brooklyn ( the other boros get Time Warner. If I still lived in NY and couldnt see the Giants or the World Series, I would be down in Penn Plaza leading the revolution!!

      But look at the bright side, come Nov. 1st it will not only be New York but the whole country. What isn’t being mentioned is that Fox’s contract with Dish Network is up on Oct.31st.

      So at the end of the day, who is the big winner here:

      DirecTV!!

      I know that it isn’t really Evil…but fans will screwed twice. They will miss some games and then don’t think for a minute that Dolan and friends will just eat the difference! It will get passed right along to the folks that can least afford to pay it, right to NY’s 2 poorest boros, BX & BK.

      Most NYC Housing projects do not allow DirecTV or Fios or anthing else. They have all been wired for Cablevision…..the poor folks living there scrape by to pay for basic cable…

    • johnj | October 17, 2010 at 10:22 am |

      yes free but no on the service…

      I live in a cablevision dominated area (think middle of the woods nowhere, aka satellite no man’s land) We had to switch over to digital signals, and I went with the box but alot of people just got the digital adapter. Even so, theyre still missing out on FOX (lol @ at the thought of MISSING OUT on FOX)

      Its kind of upseeting cause when this happened with ABC it was over quick and all we were “missing” was the oscars or something.

      Lucky for me the JETS play on CBS :):):)

    • RS Rogers | October 17, 2010 at 10:35 am |

      I’m holding out until there’s a la carte programming (don’t snicker – there’s building momentum for that).

      All right, I’ll snicker. There’s large public demand for that, but that’s been true since the 1980s. The problem is that a la carte is unlikely to happen without legislation both enabling and requiring it. That sort of legislation just ain’t gonna happen any time soon. It’s not like Democrats have been pushing for it where they control the legislative process, and Republicans are by and large actively against it, and in a couple of weeks Republicans are going to control at least one veto point in the legislative process of the country and all but about three of the states. So no, a la carte TV pricing is not coming anytime soon.

      • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 12:05 pm |

        in a couple of weeks Republicans are going to control at least one veto point in the legislative process of the country

        it will be two veto points…better practice the phrases “speaker boehner” and “majority leader mcconnell” now

      • Stephen King | October 17, 2010 at 2:51 pm |

        This is why I am unsympathetic to cable companies about this, though I think News is asking too much. The cable companies want us as customers to buy everything to get the channels we want. As a result, they try to keep the prices on all the channels low so they can make more profit. They do not allow the channels to market directly to the consumer.

        On my cable system I am stuck with dozens of channels I never watch so that I can watch the ones I want. Cablevision (and Time Warner, and Comcast, and Charter, and Directv) are looking to protect their model of service, which is that the consumer pays lots of money for lots of channels. It is profitable for them. The powerful, heavily-watched networks (remember, News Corp owns Fox News, the far-and-away ratings leader in the news business, as well as other channels) want to increase their buck.

        If we get a la carte, Cablevision can just pass the increase to the consumer and let them decide, but they’re afraid I won’t pay for Lifetime or Cartoon Network, so they won’t do that. If I had to pay for each channel individually, things would look a lot different.

    • Rob S | October 18, 2010 at 11:38 am |

      Actually, “digital” antennas are not strictly required. Rabbit ears I bought a number of years ago work fine with my digital TV. However, this may depend on the area, too; and if you don’t already have an antenna, you might as well invest in a newer one.

      I gave up cable through my apartment to save a few bucks, and I haven’t missed it much. And my apartment complex just distributes off its own satellite dish anyway – which did cause an issue during the Winter Olympics when I still had cable, as the hockey games on MSNBC were blocked (probably because a piddly apartment complex in the middle of metro Detroit doesn’t qualify as a “preferred carrier”).

  • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:47 am |

    Last night the Clippers hosted the Jazz, but for some reason they did so on the Lakers’ floor:
    http://cache.daylife...

    See? If they would have gone with my idea of sharing the logos on the court, things like this wouldn’t happen.

    • StLMarty | October 17, 2010 at 10:24 am |

      Man, those Jazz #’s look terrible.

      • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 12:27 pm |

        Nah, man, I love the old screen print look. Same with the Sixers. Don’t want every team wearing it, but I don’t want it going away, either.

    • johnj | October 17, 2010 at 10:38 am |

      jeeze, i know its preseason but the WNBA doesn’t even get that kind of treatment… sorry Clips…

  • CraigD | October 17, 2010 at 9:54 am |

    Absolutely LOVE that Seahawks redsign by Bowen Hobbs. Its slick and unique without looking clowish. I dont know about Jim Vilk, but I’d wear that.

    • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 10:04 am |

      So would Jim Vilk!

    • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 10:04 am |

      The stripe patterns on the socks and pants look good, but the shape of the stripes on the yoke venture into sports bra territory.

      Instead of going down under the armpits, maybe just have the silver/blue continue the shape of the green line all the way around the shoulders?

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 11:02 am |

      I don’t think the Seahawks are a lost cause. I think with one relatively simple change they could keep the things that make the current uni distincitive, hark back to their roots, and brighten them up some.

      All they need to do is change nothing but the helmet and pants to silver, and wear the silver pants 100% of the time.

      —Ricko

      • The Jeff | October 17, 2010 at 11:42 am |

        Eh.

        http://img209.images...

        (horribly quick & dirty)

        I’m perfectly fine with their normal uniform, I don’t see much reason to go back to silver. Maybe if you tell the Panthers to use blue helmets or the Patriots to use white I’d be more open to another silver helmeted team.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 12:16 pm |

          I think they’re fine as they are, too.
          That “silver business” was just a thought that might appeal to those who miss the earlier uni…a sort of hybrid of the current and past unis that might pass muster for most of us.

          —Ricko

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 12:19 pm |

          And I agree with you. NFL has enough silver as it is right now.

          Yet, strangely, disproportionately few NCAA teams wear silver (as we’ve discussed).
          Ohio State, Kansas State…after that you gotta think on it a bit. Washington State, New Mexico…

          Go figure.

          —Ricko

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 12:26 pm |

          Middle Tennessee State. And when they’re not doing BFBS they pull it off quite nicely.

        • interlockingtc | October 17, 2010 at 1:52 pm |

          Now, change that sludge color into something resembling blue and turn the lime green into forest green…then the Seahawks will look good.

          No, The Jeff and Ricko, with all due respect, the Seahawks current look is not good. Distinctive, yes. Good? No. Sorry. :)

        • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:08 pm |

          Seahawks White ove White – OK
          Seahawks Blue over Blue – too much –
          Wear Blue jerseys over White pants – 10000% improvement

          And while we’re at it, NFL sock combinations and lack thereof have gone insanely downhill for quite wahile. where are the uni=police when you need them most?

  • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 10:03 am |

    Terry Duroncelet, I just got an A’s hat recently, so this
    http://farm5.static....
    would go great with it. Fantastic!

    Bowen Hobbs, I like your Chargers, and your Rams and Seahawks are better than what those teams are wearing now.

    Great stuff, guys.

    • StLMarty | October 17, 2010 at 10:26 am |

      I like how Chris Long isn’t sacking anybody.

    • Terry D. | October 17, 2010 at 10:44 pm |

      Thanks!

  • concealed78 | October 17, 2010 at 10:22 am |

    I speak upon being the 1% of people who relies on antenna TV broadcast, having done the cable thing back in the late 1990s & watched my bill go up slowly every single month & got sick of the ransom game. Luckily I haven’t missed any Bears games yet due to the local broadcast stations picking up ESPN & the NFL Network Bears games (I’m assuming it’s the local broadcast rules here) so I don’t have to deal with blackouts. Yes I only get to see about half the baseball playoffs and only about 70 games of my baseball team a season, but it’s really more than enough & I don’t need to see all 162, and all are on the radio anyway (and as a teacher once told me, “use your god damned imagination!”).

    I don’t know how things are in New York, but it maybe to time to get a backup plan to get free broadcast TV. Cable is a nice luxury item, but I really don’t need 60 channels & would rather pick & choose which channels I’d like & to pay for (and I wouldn’t pick ESPN, either).

    • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 12:15 pm |

      I’m with you. Cable is a luxury and not a right. Actually, free TV isn’t a right either, but it would be d-baggy and bad p.r. to make you pay for everything.

      The networks need to feel that you can walk away from them for any progress to be made. Otherwise, they got you. I’ll pay so much for TV, but it isn’t very much. Besides, even if I don’t get to see everything I’d like, I really wouldn’t have time anyway. I’m still trying to watch some March Madness games I taped and haven’t gotten to. Shh, don’t tell me how Northern Iowa vs. Kansas ended.

  • Andrew | October 17, 2010 at 10:32 am |

    I’m shocked the 5&1 didn’t include Nebraska/Texas. I would have put that game at number one.

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 10:49 am |

      so would robert marshall

      • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 12:00 pm |

        If Texas were at home and Nebraska wore the red pants, they’d have a shot. I know I said Texas pulls off the all-white look better than anyone, but when the opponent has white helmets and pants, too, that wasn’t enough contrast to be deemed list-worthy. At least not on a week with this many good matchups.

        • Gusto44 | October 17, 2010 at 12:50 pm |

          This may sound radical, but Texas should have the option of burnt orange pants. That would have solved the contrast issue, and made the game yesterday a little more appealing visually.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 1:17 pm |

          Or Nebraska could have gone bloodclot:
          http://sites.google....

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 3:33 pm |

          It’s difficult to tell one team from another when one wears red jerseys and the other wears white?

          —Ricko

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 4:09 pm |

          Not difficult at all. Just some combos are more visually pleasing.

          All-white vs. white helmets, red jerseys and white pants is a lot of white with the red isolated.
          http://cdn0.sbnation...
          White/burnt orange/white vs. white/white/red breaks it up a bit.
          http://tinyurl.com/2...

          Both visually appealing, but on a day with so many good matchups, it’s the little things that matter.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 4:21 pm |

          Take Texas/Oklahoma:

          In one matchup, the crimson really stands out,
          http://tinyurl.com/2...
          while in the other one, the orange and crimson are overpowered by all the white.
          http://graphics.fans...

          Again, both appealing, but one just seems better in my opinion.

  • concealed78 | October 17, 2010 at 10:36 am |

    Looking at the tweaks, is there any place that sells tube socks with stripes on them??? There is a factory site online that makes them but they want at least $20+ with S+H and that’s just too damn much.

    • Chris from Carver | October 17, 2010 at 11:52 am |
      • concealed78 | October 17, 2010 at 12:14 pm |

        That’s exactly who I was implying. Yeah I like stripes, but not for $20+ for 3 pairs.

  • Ricardo Leonor | October 17, 2010 at 10:54 am |

    I think we are pretty much at the point where Cable TV ( or Sat TV ) is ALMOST a utility…along with cellphone and internet service.

    Imagine ConEd, PSE&G, Duke Energy or whomever wanted to charge twice what it currently charges…

    I know you can not compare Electric, Gas or Water to cable TV, but for a lot of folks that can not get anything else, it almost feels that way.

    I used to live in an apartment in the Bronx, where you could not get Fios and did not allow direcTV or Dish. We were stuck with Cablevision….

    On the same note, wouldnt today be a great day to be a Fios or DirecTV door to door sales person!! Right around 1:15pm when folks tune to the Giants game and find some kind of message!

    Or how much would it suck to be Customer Care rep at Cablevision today!!!!

  • Komet17 | October 17, 2010 at 11:00 am |

    Go to atdhe.net if you want to watch any NFL football game streamed live over the Internet.

    • Komet17 | October 17, 2010 at 11:02 am |

      I especially like it when the feed atdhe.net picks up for my team (Chargers) is from Sweden–love those Swedish commercials!

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 11:09 am |

      i bookmarked that back in august…actually saw a TON of preseason NFL and still can see a bunch of college games, but over the past several weekends, i’ve tried to watch my non-local game and apparently it’s blocked; none of the NFL games came through…will try again today, but not hoping for much

      and as nice an altenative as it is to watch tv through the interwebs (and i have a 22″ monitor, so as long as i can maximize the screen, it’s not too bad)…

      im still old school enough to want to watch tv on my actual…tv

      • Komet17 | October 17, 2010 at 2:05 pm |

        Hmmmm….well, I’m watching the Chargers-Rams game right now…seems to be working just fine.

      • Bruce | October 17, 2010 at 2:45 pm |

        Do you have a newer television? If it has a HDMI port and your computer does too it will put everything on your screen on your TV, and will even send the audio to the TV too. Then just get a wireless keyboard/mouse to enjoy the awesomeness of internet TV from your couch, how its meant to be.

  • DenverGregg | October 17, 2010 at 11:10 am |

    A la carte programming would be great, though unlikely. Better yet would be an end to local cable monopolies. There were local phone monopolies for decades and only after they ended did people get better service and better pricing.

  • PhilGP | October 17, 2010 at 11:48 am |

    Concerning a la carte, it would be awesome. With stuff like ESPN3 on xbox (which I’d love to try, I’d love to watch their content in HD rather than on my PC) and access to hulu, it does appear we can move into a world where we get to pick only the content we want and weed out the 99% of other channels that add no value. I suspect, though, that doing a la carte will end up being more expensive for consumers than doing cable/satellite packages. If you end up paying something like $10/month for each channel you want, it could quickly add up (well for those like me who get the lower end packages).

  • Lee | October 17, 2010 at 12:00 pm |

    Lots to be upset about in the cable feud but I’d rather address the stupidity of someone referring to a basketball uniform as “ghetto” If I could choose one word to red card from the pop culture lexicon it would be that one.

    • Taxman | October 17, 2010 at 11:16 pm |

      That word I used is commonly used to describe an aesthetic style, and is not always derogatory. I suspect UA wants to project that aesthetic, and Maryland can do better.

      • Lee | October 18, 2010 at 9:15 pm |

        So those basketball uniforms are reminiscent of politically-sanctioned Jewish neighborhoods that functioned as prisons? Or are they related to more recent ethnic neighborhoods that are functional prisons based on criminal and economic factors? Please share a non-derogatory “ghetto”.

  • M. Sullivan | October 17, 2010 at 12:57 pm |

    REALLY liking all of Hobbs tweaks. Good work.

  • ab | October 17, 2010 at 1:03 pm |

    Add me to the list of people who like Bowen Hobbs’ Chargers/Rams/Seahawks concepts. The Rams ones especially– a great modern update to the old pre-2000 Rams designs. The white streak to the helmet actually adds a lot.

    • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:12 pm |

      Really like the Chargers and Rams tweaks – huge improvement over current outfits.

  • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 1:03 pm |

    Cribbs is wearing the arm socks again. They should make those a part of the uniform. They look better than plain sleeves.

  • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 1:14 pm |

    Minnesota football coach Tim Brewster has been fired. Hopefully the white helmets were fired with him.

  • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 1:20 pm |

    “Over in the league where they play for pay, the Stillers are supposed to wear their sweet throwbacks”

    Not watching the game, but if I were I’d say why now? Wait ’til November when the pink stuff doesn’t detract from the throwback look.

    • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 1:37 pm |

      I have that game on now. Good point Jim about waiting to wear those nice throwbacks until the pink stuff is over.

      still a good looking uni match up in the Browns Steelers.

    • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 1:38 pm |

      The Lions and the Giants are wearing no pink that I can see. I personally think it would be better instead of all the pink (I know they auction it off) to put the pink ribbon on like the 30 yard line on each side of the field. Put it on one 35 on the press box side an the other 35 on the non-press box side.

  • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 1:31 pm |

    Glad to see the other edition of the colorizing.
    Larry, Nice job on that Rams picture.

    And this one Phil is incredible. I know that did have to take a long time to do. I believe the 6-7 hours. Wow.

    http://farm5.static....

  • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 1:35 pm |

    One thing for me personally is this. I like to try and colorize pictures from eras before color pictures were taken. Or rarely taken. Only thing there is making the educated guesses as to the original colors.

    Since I have been hunting down actual old color pictures, I am mostly looking for before 1970 ones.

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 2:48 pm |

      Absolutely. Doesn’t make much sense to colorize a photo from the 1970, does it. We can find those lying around, so we wouldn’t get anything we haven’t seen before.

      —Ricko

  • Gill | October 17, 2010 at 1:35 pm |

    Best Uni tweaks ever.
    How about a dress code for NFL coaches? Amazed the league that is so tight on how things look, does not have one. KC coach in a t-shirt, Dolphins’ coach in who knows what?

    • Chris from Carver | October 17, 2010 at 1:51 pm |

      You mean this isn’t how NFL coaches are supposed to look? In his defense, when they profiled him on Chronicle, he said the reason he cut his sleeves was because of his short arms, so I can sympathize.

  • gueman | October 17, 2010 at 1:51 pm |

    NewsCorp owns there programming. Cable TV is not needed to live so it is nothing like phone or electricity. Blaming the Bush administration on this is moronic. Sorry if you do not like capitalism. Why should NewsCorp give away their programming. It is not like they are not losing add revenue in the nations biggest TV market.

  • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 2:05 pm |

    Phil, When using the lasso for the areas, I have a hard time jumping to another area without the lasso following me. The other day I would right click and hit select.

    Not sure I explained this right. What do you do to just lasso an area and stop there without dragging it all over the image??

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 5:25 pm |

      sorry for the delay in replying, lar…i was out for much of the afternoon

      shoot me an email with any questions

  • =bg= | October 17, 2010 at 2:05 pm |

    all I know is, if they pulled the plug on Fox here, I wouldn’t be able to see the Giants go up 2-love on the Phils.

    Vamos Gigantes

  • Komet17 | October 17, 2010 at 2:14 pm |

    Rams in blue jerseys and blue pants…I don’t seem to recall them in all-blue before…have I missed this before?

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 2:17 pm |

      Have said I like the Rams current unis.
      But the monotard-leotard navy blue ain’t workin’.

      Just because a team HAS a possible combination doesn’t mean they…
      a) have to wear it
      b) should wear it.

      —Ricko

      • Gusto44 | October 17, 2010 at 2:40 pm |

        Yes, the Rams have gone monochrome more than once. I believe the Chargers, Dolphins and Patriots have tried it once several years ago.

    • Skycat | October 17, 2010 at 3:22 pm |

      Rams-Chargers was once an elite matchup uniform-wise. The Rams need to go back to the gold pants. While I appreciate the Chargers’ bolt motif, it really looks forced when expressed on their jersey horizontally. I realize with the truncation of jersey sleeves these days, it would be difficult to go back to the vertical bolt stripes but the horizontal expression definitely should be abandoned.

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 3:26 pm |

        Especially because the Chargers have done about the best job of adapting their traditional uni to the current jersey cut. They aren’t the ones to throw out; they’re the ones that should be the model for other teams (you listening, Colts?)

        —Ricko

        • Skycat | October 17, 2010 at 5:48 pm |

          I agree with you about the Colts because the striping is pretty basic. The Chargers, however, incorporate three expressions of the thunderbolt (on the helmet, the jersey and the pants) and they are all anything but uniform. To me, it comes off as overkill.

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 5:37 pm |

      i don’t know if they wore that disgrace in 2009, but i vividly remember watching this mess in 2008

      if that linkie is cached, go here

  • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 2:24 pm |

    Not sure it was posted or not. I guess Tim Brewster of the Gophers was fired and done for the year.

    No more white helmets I would think. And does this mean next year a possible new look for the Gophers unis or helmets?

    http://www.myfoxtwin...

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 2:44 pm |

      Not often a college coach gets the boot mid-season. Guess that shows just how fed up folks are with the whole situation around Gopher football. An impressive new stadium housing a suckwad team is no one’s idea of a great college football experience.

      Unis? Who knows. First move would seem to be to find a coach who is a little longer on experience and less about bullshit. That, it would seem, could be said about the current unis, too.

      Brewster came in here and immediately started talking about “Gopher Nation,” to which most of replied, “There’s a Gopher Nation? Since when?” Whole thing smelled of song & dance—and doom—right from the opening press conference.

      As I pointed out here yesterday, a fellow 55+ softball player is Brewster’s neighbor, and the coach’s home as been For Sale for more than a month.

      So let’s don’t be thinking ol’ Tim was taken by surprise.

      —Ricko

      • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 2:59 pm |

        That stadium is gorgeous. I think one of college footballs best looking now. My brother and I walked around it in June. We visited a cousin in Iowa and went to see the Twins play. The next day walked around the Gophers new stadium and went over to the Bronko Nagurski complex or whatever it is called.

        I told my brother we should have looked up Ricko for a beer. But we didn’t plan that out enough.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 3:24 pm |

          Yes, you should have. Next time, just e-mail Phil or Paul. They both have my e-mail addy and phone number. But get me your phone number, too. My cell’s my only phone, so I rarely answer numbers I don’t recognize.

          I say that to any UWers who happen to wander into the Twin Cities. Even The Jeff. ;)

          —Ricko

        • LarryB | October 17, 2010 at 4:04 pm |

          At some point we want to see Ohio State play at Minnesota. we have seen all the Big Ten stadiums but Minnesota and Wisconsin. Good thing we did not waste a trip to Madison last night.

          So if and when we make it we will try and get a hold of you.

      • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 3:57 pm |

        New stadium, bad unis, bad team…you sure we’re not talking Akron here?
        http://image.cdnl3.x...
        http://www.chicagobr...

        0-7 now for rookie head coach Rob Ianello, Notre Dame’s former offensive coordinator. Last time the Zips took a coach from ND it was…hmm, didn’t we talk about him yesterday?

        If I were the basketball coach I’d be forwarding my resume and looking to move up. They need a new basketball arena more than they needed a new football stadium. Yes, the Rubber Bowl was in bad shape, but it could have been fixed. The Rhodes Arena is just not desirable at all for a Div. I team. And the basketball team has more potential – a MAC team can go far in the tournament if they’re good enough, but a football team in the MAC is basically a 1-AA wolf in 1-A sheep’s clothing.

        Don’t see how they can build a new arena when they can’t even fill the new stadium.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 10:01 pm |

          So Akron’s got zip?

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 10:08 pm |

          Zip, zilch, zero.

  • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 3:19 pm |

    The NFL’s pink towels, cleats, et al, sure get old fast, don’t they.

    Anyone ever stop to figure that if, percentage-wise, MLB devoted as much of its schedule to the same thing we’d see every team swing pink bats for 40-some games?

    Y’know, there’s a reason high schools don’t have a prom every week for a month. After the first one, it would lose its edge pretty quick.

    —Ricko

    • CraigD | October 17, 2010 at 3:41 pm |

      Man, a prom every month? That would have just given me more things NOT to do in highschool. Stupid girls.

  • pflava | October 17, 2010 at 3:30 pm |

    What a uni-turd the Rams-Chargers game is!

    Both teams need to ditch the navy pants, permanently. In the Chargers’ case, it completely throws the balance of their uniform off – the only way the dark pants would work is if their helmet were still navy.

    Generally, if you can wear gold/yellow pants, you probably should.

    • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 3:37 pm |

      Have the Chargers ever worn anything BESIDES the navy pants with the white jerseys since they did the redesign a few years ago? And does anyone in their organization realize how much better the white ones would look?

      Hell, white over powder blue wouldn’t look great, but it’d be an improvement.

      • KevinW | October 17, 2010 at 3:41 pm |

        I’m almost positive they’ve never gone all white with this uni set

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 3:49 pm |

        See “Houston Oilers, Archie Manning/Earl Campbell era”.

        • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 4:06 pm |

          *Ding*

          Apples/oranges comparison, I know, but that beats the hell out of this.

        • pflava | October 17, 2010 at 4:18 pm |

          No, the Oilers could pull that off for the same reason the Dolphins still can – their “dark” pants are light hues.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 4:24 pm |

          Zactly.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 4:25 pm |

          Let’s keep in mind that members of the Geek Squad wear white shirts and really dark pants.

          Just, y’know, sayin’. ;)

          —Ricko

      • Gusto44 | October 17, 2010 at 4:26 pm |

        Yes, the Chargers have worn powder blue jerseys with white pants in 2008. It does like the Bolts are wearing the dark blue/white jersey too often. I wouldn’t mind seeing them in all white.

        • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:20 pm |

          Totally agree. The Chargers have yet to wear the White jerseys without the Navy pants since their uni update in 2008 (?).

          The Chargers have worn White-at-Home a few times early in the regular season since their uni update(ostensibly for temperature advantage. But What is the point in wearing White-at-Home for any temperature advantage if you are them going to wear Navy pants?

          The Chargers’ Navy pants look bad, and they offer nothing to an NFL uniform. Go ahead, Chargers, and adopt Gold pants, or just go White-over-White. Be done with it!

    • KevinW | October 17, 2010 at 3:39 pm |

      The Chargers don’t look nearly as bad as they are playing. How I wish baseball had the balls to go against the NFL and schedule an afternoon playoff game so I could ignore this garbage.

  • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 3:59 pm |

    64 and sunny? Thank heavens the officials have thoseblack pants for such brutal conditions.

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 4:04 pm |

      Time for my almost-weekly question.
      And no one will give me answer because apparetnly no one knows.

      Do individual NFL officiating crews make the decision on which pants they wear?
      Because it seems to me most guys would prefer to wear the black pants, both for comfort and looks.

      —Ricko

      • KevinW | October 17, 2010 at 6:31 pm |

        Just like baseball socks issue, it easier so it must be better, right?

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:01 pm |

          Didn’t say that.

          Just said I could understand their thinking. Besides, officials are supposed to be, relatively speaking, invisible, and the dark pants do push them, visually speaking, farther back into the landscape.

          —Ricko

      • Mark K | October 17, 2010 at 7:26 pm |

        Yes, it’s a crew choice. And it depends on the referee on how much say he wants to give the rest of the crew.

        My college crew knows my philosophy in advance- I prefer the white knickers and may choose to wear them in cold but “nice” weather.

        To me, properly worn white knickers and striped socks is what separates us from intramural flag football refs.

        Or Foot Locker employees.

        That said, the guys generally prefer the black pants in terms of comfort and ease of laundering.

  • Graf Zeppelin | October 17, 2010 at 4:11 pm |

    White over white; white pants in all 6 games so far. Hopefully a good sign.

  • pflava | October 17, 2010 at 4:22 pm |

    Awful pink accessories aside, I don’t think there’s a better looking game today than the 49ers-Raiders battle of the bay.

  • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 4:22 pm |

    ARRRGH.

    Yes, its overcast here right now, but after just watching games on a sunny October Sunday in Green Bay and Chicago, watching the Cowboys and Vikings play indoors really bites.

    —Ricko

    • interlockingtc | October 17, 2010 at 11:09 pm |

      Ricko, I’m out of the loop and just don’t pay close attention to Minnesota news, but is there no way for the Gophers and Vikings to share that new stadium?

      • concealed78 | October 18, 2010 at 9:54 am |

        TC, from what I’ve read (specifically at Field of Schemes), the new Gophers stadium is not NFL worthy to the Vikings, and I mean this in terms of luxury suites, sponsorships, seating capacity & overall generating revenue. The Vikings as of last year, were ranked 32nd in overall revenue largely due to the Metrodome. The Vikings ownership is hellbent on getting their own mega-generating revenue stadium.

        Logically the Vikings could share the stadium, but greed is the main factor.

        • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:24 pm |

          You would think that the Vikings and Gophers might have thought this throgh prior to breaking ground on stadia. Now, you’ll end up with a Gopher stadium used seven times per year at most, a Vikings stadium used twelve times a year at most, and a Hubert Humphrey Dome empty in the middle of a city. Genius.

          The Vikings and Gophers should have worked this out and saved the region HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars. Pity.

  • Ben | October 17, 2010 at 4:23 pm |

    I’m sitting at my desk at UConn right now, and from there I have a pretty good view of the football practice field. RIght now they have a white team and a blue team (offense and defense) and unlike in the sprig games, the white team is wearing white helmets. I dont know if this means they might wear white helmets in the future.
    Is these anyone that might be able to photoshop what that might look like? I think it might look good, especially since one of UConn’s official colors is white.

  • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 4:28 pm |

    Anyone else noticed that if a WR wanted to be really different and stand out these days he WOULD choose a number in the 80s?

    —Ricko

    • Gusto44 | October 17, 2010 at 4:53 pm |

      What about a WR with 0 or 00? I saw a CFL player wearing 0, think he plays for Winnipeg.

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 5:33 pm |

        Well, they couldn’t wear O or OO, according to NFL rules.

        My point was that so many are now wearning numbers in the teens that an 80-something actually stands out more.

        —Ricko

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 7:47 pm |

          Well, even when they could wear 0 and 00, they couldn’t wear O or OO. Just sayin’…

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 10:26 pm |

          what aboot jim otto?

        • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:25 pm |

          I believe the Tiger-Cats actually have a LB that wears “0”.

  • Mike Engle | October 17, 2010 at 4:32 pm |

    Guess who might get a fine over a shoe violation?
    http://i.cdn.turner....

    • George | October 17, 2010 at 6:32 pm |

      They look to be the pink and black “breast cancer” cleats. And since the NFL is still on the breast cancer kick, why would he get fined……?

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:03 pm |

        Yeah, I don’t think they’re accessing many fines for uni violations during the “Pink Period.”

        Wonder if uni cops like Greg Coleman are still getting paid this month.

        —Ricko

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 8:08 pm |

          Greg Coleman’s a uni cop? I remember him punting for the Vikes when Rick Danmeier was the last or next-to-last straight-on kicker.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:52 pm |

          Well, he was for years, so I assume he still is.

          Does that while also serving as the sideline (and post-game locker room) reporter on the Vikings radio broadcasts.

          Always wondered how that went. “Listen, I know I zapped you for 10-grand for your high white socks last week, Antoine, but how about a post-game chat?”

          —Ricko

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:56 pm |

          Danmeier had to be at least next-to-last, because Mark Moseley was the last. For the Browns after his years with the Redskins.

          Moseley wore, like, five pair of socks on his kicking foot. Kicking shoe was about two sizes bigger than the one on his plant foot.

          You you see in photos his right ankle looks like it’s in a cast.

          —Ricko

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:54 pm |

          That’s right, Rick was gone by the time Moseley was with the Browns.

          Got my eye on my library’s book on placekicking and punting, authored by Danmeier, Matt Bahr and Dave Jennings. If they put that in the book sale rack I want it.

        • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:29 pm |

          If I’m not mistaken, Greg Coleman was the sideline reporter on yesterday’s Vikings/Cowboys radio broadcast on the Vikings network (I listened to it on Sirius/XM) – maybe they found another uni-snitch that can’t see below the players’ knees (to report and correct the horrid NFL sock themes and combos).

          Former KC Chiefs/USFL safety Gary Barbaro is the Saints home game NFL uni snitch – but he continues to allow the Saints’ horrid sock/leotard/insanity combos week after week.

  • Ben | October 17, 2010 at 4:46 pm |

    Please excuse my awful use of words in my last post. I guess I was paying more attention to the football game on tv than what I was typing.

  • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 5:22 pm |

    anyone besides me think the broncos ought to wear the orange top at home FULL TIME?

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 5:30 pm |

      Was thinking the same thing. I know Elway won his Super Bowl in navy, but it’s tough not to think of The Drive, The Fumble, The Three Amigos and such and not think of the Orange Crush look as being quintessential Denver Broncos.

      —Ricko

      • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 5:45 pm |

        a lot of teams don’t look good when a helmet matches neither jersey nor pants…

        but this looks damn good

        /just sayin

        • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 6:16 pm |

          If you are refering ONLY to a navy helmet, orange shirt, and white pants, I’m with you. Everything else is a regurgitating disaster.

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 6:40 pm |

          yes benjamin

          the nikefication is awful…everyone agrees…it’s the colors that are good

          last year, i proposed they switch to something more like this

          much better, no?

        • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 6:55 pm |

          Yes. But one more fix. One plain orange stripe down the center of the helmet instead of the dumb spike.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 7:50 pm |

          Agreed. Now, Phil, why don’t you like Boise’s blue helmet, white jerseys and orange pants but you like this? Not talking all the bumperstickers, of course.

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 7:58 pm |

          because no one should wear orange pants jim…

          otherwise you’d end up looking … well like this

          only you would wear that

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 8:02 pm |

          Me and the ’78 Broncos.
          http://cdn2.ioffer.c...
          Awesome.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:41 pm |

          Or the Brian Sipe era Browns…
          http://www.cleveland...

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 9:59 pm |

          sipe era browns helmet was orange, and matched the pants…big difference

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 10:02 pm |

          Point taken.

        • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 11:52 pm |

          That was my favorite Browns uni era.

    • pflava | October 17, 2010 at 5:39 pm |

      Totally agreed! Besides the historical precedent, the orange just looks better.

    • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 5:42 pm |

      I am with you also Phil. Orange is better.

  • Geeman | October 17, 2010 at 5:33 pm |

    Terry D. did a great job with the Chargers uniforms. I was thinking about the same thing recently. Love the navy, love the light blue even more, and if you could harmonize those, it’d be great. Chargers need to take this and run with it. Perfect blend of old and new.

    • Terry D. | October 17, 2010 at 10:50 pm |

      Thanks! =)

    • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:32 pm |

      Nothing wrong with an occasional Athletic Gold jersey for the Rams or chargers. Great way to break the monotony that are their current unis.

  • Geeman | October 17, 2010 at 5:34 pm |
    • SoCalDrew | October 17, 2010 at 7:45 pm |

      Yeah, but he forgot the helmet numbers!

  • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 6:13 pm |

    Couple of observations:

    NFL
    – The metrodome sure can make a good matchup BORING.
    – Do not like the Stillers throwbacks at all.
    – Denver looks hidious as usual. The old style endzones are great but don’t match anything about their modern look or stadium.
    – Black trim on Eagles green: Fail.
    – It’s about time the Saints dump the wide black pants stripe.

    NHL
    – Sharks wear cool (temp) colors. The yellow trim has a warming effect. Get rid of it, change it back to gray.
    – Stars, please, PLEASE go back to North Stars colors.
    – Avelancheses colors are looking more and more 1990s (dated).
    – The Wild logo goes the wrong way.

    NBA
    – I think the Heat woud look good with some motorcycle/hot rod looking fire on their shorts.
    – The shiney material look is okay with me if the sweat sticky change color problems are eliminated.
    – Raptors have and always will be a uni mess.
    – Wolves, Grizz, Mavs = same damn thing.
    – Bucks vs. Warriors is a FINE looking matchup.

    MLB Playoffs
    – Giants: Go ahead and break out the orange tops, but MUST wear the orange bill cap and sox stripes.
    – Phillies: A less pinker red would go a long way.
    – Texases: Good, but pick a permanent dominate color.
    – Yankees: Only uni beef – in the logo, the left arm of the Y is too close to the N. Needs a bigger gap right there. Some breathing room. Please fix before next game.

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 6:22 pm |

      The metrodome sure can make a good matchup BORING.

      true…what about today’s matchup tho

      • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 6:31 pm |

        Not watching. Too BORING. If it were outdoors, I’d be glued.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:17 pm |

          That was about the dullest 24-21 game I’ve ever seen.

          Probably the dopey penalties on both teams contributed to it.

          Someone said recently that in no other sport does a team reflect the personality of its head coach more than in pro football. Might be the case, because the word that keeps coming to me when I watch the Vikings is “befuddled.” And that about sums it up.

          —Ricko

    • SoCalDrew | October 17, 2010 at 7:48 pm |

      – Avelancheses colors are looking more and more 1990s (dated).

      Hideous then, hideous now.

      • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 9:59 pm |

        I hated them at first but they grew on me. I’ve always disliked the use of the black pants/helmets, though. They remind me of youth/rec league teams.

        When they darkened the burgundy a few years ago, that ruined things for me and I’ve circled back around to my original opinion that the colors suck. I dunno if the steel blue has also changed, but that seems to be looking more and more like the color of a plastic ice pack these days.

        And I totally agree that the Broncos’ end zones are great, but they’re completely incongruous with the rest of the team’s look. Put those blue and navy diamonds in Soldier Field and you’ve got a winning look. I actually had this conversation with my dad 3 or 4 weeks ago.

        • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 10:26 pm |

          blue and navy? Uh, make that orange and navy.

  • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 6:28 pm |

    Here’s something more irritating than another BFBS school…..http://espn.go.com/c...
    Second team listed in “Others receiving votes” is KANSAS. Nobody EVER screws up Florida and Florida State. North Carolina and North Carolina State. Oregon and OSU, Ok. and Ok. St. Ariz. and ASU. BUT FRIGGIN KANSAS!?!?!?!?!

    • traxel | October 17, 2010 at 6:38 pm |

      Just copy and paste the link. Too upset to try and fix. farggennnfuffugggin. See the Phil for some better choice words. It may be the only thing but he’s definately better at F bombing than I am.

  • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 7:44 pm |

    James Harrison should be suspended for what he did today. He made three helmet to helmet hits and knocked two players out of the game – and never got flagged. He launched himself at Josh Cribbs. If that were an offensive play he would have gotten a chop block. Disgusting play.

    • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 7:57 pm |

      Didn’t see it, but if that’s true I’m with you. That’s why I’m not optimistic about any new helmet technology. They’ll just use it as an even deadlier weapon.

    • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 7:57 pm |

      Didn’t see it, but if that’s true I’m with you.

      • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 7:57 pm |

        OK, never mind that 2nd one…

    • Steve | October 17, 2010 at 7:58 pm |

      I’m with you on that on man….James Harrison will continue to lead with his head until the league decides to suspend him.

      …and he’s an a**hole.

      • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 8:46 pm |

        Apparently Rodney Harrison agrees with Steve and me, and he’s a man who knows helmet-to-helmet hits.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:20 pm |

          If that thug agrees, then it’s unanimous.

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:08 pm |

      I remember the Redskins trainer wondering aloud back in early ’80s if, “Maybe it wasn’t better back when the guys had a layer of fat on them and played in the mud instead of weight training all year and launching themselves at each other on artificial turf.”

      Think of that whenever there’s talk of the head-to-head stuff.

      —Ricko

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:13 pm |

        btw, if you’ve never been fortunate enough to walk the sidelines during an NFL game, then you really truly don’t realize how fast shit happens. It’s scary fast, and they hit SO hard. It’s faster even than most major college games.

        Don’t think so? Think about Percy Harvin. He ran away from everyone when he was at Florida?, right? So either he has slowed down, or all the players are that much faster. Bet on the latter.

        —Ricko

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 8:16 pm |

          didn’t look like any of the cowpokes caught him

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 8:58 pm |

          Most of the time, they did.

        • =bg= | October 17, 2010 at 9:06 pm |

          you’re right, was on the sidelines @ a Bengals game. Fast, and -Loud.-

      • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 8:24 pm |

        It was better when guys had a layer of fat and they played in the mud. You could sort of relate to them, then. Now these guys are like aliens.

        I was on the sideline for a D-2 game, and even that was scary fast and hard. I can only imagine the NFL.

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:06 pm |

          First time I saw Chris Doleman (Viking rookie linebacker from Pitt) in shorts and teeshirt at training camp I thought, “Evidently God makes some people football players.” The guy’s body looked it was drawn by the artist of a superhero comic.

          And these days, generally speaking, everyone but some quarterbacks and linemen look like that. So imagine what it’s like in a game when they’re all playing with a more-than-slightly-pissed-off attitude. Most of we mortals would be taking our lives in our hands if we tried to exist out there during a game, because even those broad-bellied lineman are faster than we are. One hit and we’d have to be carried off the field in sections.

          —Ricko

    • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:37 pm |

      He gets away with it because it he plays for THE STEELERS – the toughest team in the World! It doesn’t hurt that he did it against the Browns, who AREN’T SUPPOSED TO WIN THAT GAME.

      Try making those same hits while you are wearing 30 other NFL uniforms, and your A&& will be suspended AND thrown out of the game AND fined a good $50,000.00.

      But he did it playing on a Sunday for the STEELERS – the toughest team in the World, in a game they were supposed to win anyway. No penalty. No problem.

  • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 7:52 pm |

    warshington back in athletic gold trou tonite

  • jon | October 17, 2010 at 8:49 pm |

    Does the fact that the redskins wear 4 different and distinct stripe patterns (helmet, sleeves, pants, and socks) with their yellow pants bother anyone else? I love the yellow pants and I love striped socks, but these unis look like they were just thrown together…

    Could we get some standardization next year?

    • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:09 pm |

      Mentioned that last week, I think. Those pants and socks weren’t designed to be worn with that jersey…or vice versa.

      That’s why, as good as the color combo might look, the details still make the gold pants (and the socks) look like a gimmick.

      —Ricko

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 9:18 pm |

      it totally offends my OCD, but the stripes on the gold pants are SO MUCH better than the stupid wide stripes on the white pants or the maroon pants (despite nothing rally matching with the gold pants/striped socks)

      it’s really quite a simple fix…change the helmet and add sleeve stripes eliminate the stripes on the vestigial remnants of a sleeve

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:23 pm |

        Well, as originally designed (y’know, back when there were sleeves) the pant, sleeve, and sock striping were the same pattern…
        http://www.thesmartf...

        That’s why I say the gold pants and the striped socks look sort of “gimmicky”. Too thrown together as some kind of lame throwback attempt.

        —Ricko

      • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 10:06 pm |

        All they really need to change is the helmet. When you have three color stripes and your three uniform parts are in those three colors, what you do is say maroon always touches gold. Then the socks and pants match from that standpoint and you can invert the stripes on the sleeves and helmet and it all fits into a recognizable pattern.

        • NickV | October 18, 2010 at 4:42 pm |

          The Redskins desperately need to update the “80’s” themed stripes on the two sets of pants (Burgundy and White) that no longer match the stripes on the jerseys (Not for the past ten years).

          Colors are great.

          Three sets of pants are great – no problem with it, as you can avoid wearing Gold pants against other teams doing same.

          Stripes are a mess – Helmet is different from the pants which neither work with the jersey which are all three mismatched to the 70’s era striped socks.

          Solution – ALWAYS wear the 70’s era striped socks, and coordinate all other stripes to WORK WITH each other, and not clash with the socks.

  • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 8:53 pm |

    The October pink-out has made its way to…wiffleball.
    http://www.majorleag...

    • jdreyfuss | October 17, 2010 at 9:02 pm |

      My mind boggles at the thought of Major League Wiffleball.

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:10 pm |

        You can still get good seats, though.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:16 pm |

          And no steroids necessary. They’d be counter-productive anyway, as you’d just break the ball.

        • The Jeff | October 17, 2010 at 9:21 pm |

          Does breaking the ball count as a foul ball, an automatic out, or a home run?

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:25 pm |

          More importantly, in the women’s league does that get someone a rep as a ball buster?

          —Ricko

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:27 pm |

          That’s a good question. I’ll have to check the rules.
          Speaking of which, I recall reading that you can doctor the ball as long as you don’t set it on fire.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:30 pm |

          From the rules:
          “Players may do whatever they like to the ball at any time, except for: cutting new holes in the ball, misshaping the ball, tearing the ball apart, putting bodily liquids or solids on or in the ball, or setting the ball on fire.”

        • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:33 pm |

          “putting bodily liquids or solids on or in the ball”

          Okay now, other than spit…

          —Ricko

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 9:36 pm |

          putting bodily liquids or solids on or in the ball

          WTF?

          what kind of game is this?

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 9:46 pm |

          At first, I thought they meant gum, but yeah, that’s disturbing.

          Probably one of those CYA rules, like when you buy a toaster and they tell you not to use it in the tub.

          ‘Cause you know there’s at least ONE young man out there who’s tempted to throw a crappy slider. The type that makes those “Jackass” movies so popular.

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 10:25 pm |

          Got a reply to The Jeff’s question.

          “Good question. If a ball is broken, we just continue the play, until that play is over. So basically, whatever would have happened if the ball wasn’t broken.
          Now, it’s the responsibility of all players to identify and retire all broken wiffleballs by tossing them out of play. Sometimes we ask for a second opinion if the ball is barely cracked. Usually, any crack on the seam across the middle is enough to put it out of play for good. Cracks from the holes are a little different. Those cracks need to be about 1/8” before those balls are tossed out. Game balls usually last 1-2 games.
          We did have an incident a couple of weeks ago in batting practice. I totally shattered a cheap-brand wiffleball into dozens of pieces. Think of when Randy Johnson hit a bird flying by with a pitch. It was a total explosion. If that was during a game, it would have been a tough call. We probably would have decided on a ground-rule double.
          Just never do a “do-over”. Those are terrible, and hardly ever fair.”

          Hm, I always loved the “do-over” rule in street football, but I’m flexible.

        • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 10:28 pm |

          jim…you want “do overs” in the pros too

        • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 10:32 pm |

          Aw, you remembered our instant replay discussion…

          You’re right, I do. If the ref can’t clearly see it on the jumbo screen in 15 seconds, do over.

          Is it just me, or do the colleges handle the replay thing a lot better?

        • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 10:41 pm |

          Colleges, NBA, NHL…

      • Ricko | October 17, 2010 at 9:31 pm |

        Seriously now, when I went to watch Natron and his team play Wiffleball, a number of the teams had bats they’d painted pink for use during the week of Mother’s Day.

        Nice to know they can now buy them instead. Won’t all that unsightly chipping now.

        —Ricko

      • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 9:32 pm |

        And the Tigers STILL couldn’t make the playoff in that league.

  • aflfan | October 17, 2010 at 9:40 pm |

    Here is Swift Current 25th anniversary 3rd jersey

    http://twitpic.com/2...

  • JTH | October 17, 2010 at 10:39 pm |

    Hey, does this count as one of the combo script/mascot helmet logos that were being discussed yesterday or the day before? If so, I want to submit it as an example of one in the non-suck category.

    • LI Phil | October 17, 2010 at 10:47 pm |

      HAH!

      i was going to add that, but i figured my lsu was one and done…absolutely…i’d say it counts and doesn’t suck

  • Jim Vilk | October 17, 2010 at 11:12 pm |

    Posted this photo earlier this morning, wondering why the Clippers were playing the Jazz on the Lakers’ floor.
    http://cache.daylife...
    They played the Nuggets today, again on the Lakers’ floor.
    http://cache.daylife...
    Found out why, as their arena mates host the yearly preseason Staples Center Shootout.
    http://my.lakers.com...

  • ben | October 18, 2010 at 2:36 pm |

    radical

  • Patrick | October 18, 2010 at 4:40 pm |

    The Bush administration required that over the air signals be digital and not analog. It does not mean you are required to have a cable subscription. All it means is you can not use and old tv and a pair of bunny ears from the 80’s unless you have a digital tuner.

  • uggs mini | October 18, 2010 at 7:21 pm |

    Have a fantastic day! Thanks for sharing. :0

  • how to earn money from home | October 18, 2010 at 10:11 pm |

    I am not sure how on earth you maintain your momentum or acquire a chance to write such superb material. Enjoyable and informative is just what the doctor ordered.

  • Accessories | October 18, 2010 at 10:19 pm |

    I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work Look forward to reading more from you in the future.

  • nick | October 19, 2010 at 12:47 am |

    cool

  • ugg boots on sale | October 19, 2010 at 10:43 pm |

    Terrific work! This is the type of information that should be shared around the web. Shame on the search engines for not positioning this post higher!