Monday Morning Uni Watch, MLB Edition

5583654317_508dd84bdb_o.png

The first weekend of the MLB season brought an unusually large number of uni-notable moments. Here’s a full accounting:

• The Rockies weren’t supposed to have a purple jersey this season. In fact, just last week team owner Dick Monfort said any return of the purple “won’t be until 2012″ during a Twitter-fest with fans. Guess he was just playing coy, because the world’s most accursed color was out in full force for the team’s opener on Friday. The purple jersey has mysteriously been added to Colorado’s entry in the MLB Style Guide, too (it wasn’t there before), so I guess this is now an official part of the team’s wardrobe this season. Weird that they kept it under wraps.

• One aspect of the Padres’ new road uniforms wasn’t apparent until they wore them on the field: They’ve switched the NOBs from nameplates to direct-sewn lettering. Remains to be seen if they’ve made this change throughout their uni program, but it seems like a reasonable assumption.

• The Phillies waited until shortly before their opener to announce that they’re wearing a “B” patch in memory of the Buck brothers, who were part of the team’s ownership group.

• Mildly stunning sight atop Cliff Lee’s cap: a squatchee! As you may recall, he went squatchee-free for pretty much all of last season. Maybe this was just his way of dressing formally for Opening Day.

• What’s worse than an undershirt with a swoosh on the collar? Guess. That’s Jimmy Rollins on Saturday.

• As promised, the Indians all wore Bob Feller’s No. 19 for pregame introductions on Friday, plus they put the number on the back of the mound (but what’s the deal with the stencil font?). As for the new cap, I’ve been saying all along that the “C” needs some white outlining, plus I didn’t realize they’d be wearing blue undersleeves (and presumably blue socks) with this uni combo — red would be much better. Also, if you have a new red cap, can’t you get some matching batting helmets? Weak.

• Kerry Wood and at least one other Cub (not sure who) saluted Ron Santo by wearing “10” caps during pregame introductions at Wrigley on Friday.

• The Pirates’ Chuck Tanner memorial patch — announced on Thursday and worn for the first time on Friday — sure is huge.

• By contrast, the Mariners’ Dave Niehaus patch, which we hadn’t seen on an actual jersey until Friday, is a bit on the small-ish side, which makes a lot of its nuance and detail hard to discern.

• Speaking of the Mariners, just peachy to see that the untucked phenomenon has now spread to pitchers. Sigh.

• We got our first on-field look at the A’s new gold alternate jerseys, and hot damn do they look sweet.

• Has Hanley Ramirez always worn a mouthguard, or is that a new thing?

• The first uni glitch of the season came on Saturday afternoon in Toronto, where Blue Jays infielder Yunel Escobar wore the wrong cap. As you can see, his cap also had a “K-A” inscription. Not sure what that was about — anyone?

• The next uni glitch came a few hours later in Philly, where Astros first base coach Bobby Meacham mistakenly wore his BP jersey, instead of his brick-red alt jersey.

• Perhaps as a result of Meacham’s above-mentioned gaffe, the Astros wore their road grays on Sunday. According to reader Robert Reid, this is the first time in over three seasons that the ’Stros have chosen to wear their grays. “During that period, the Astros have only worn their gray tops when the opposing team wore a home red (or, in the case of the Giants, orange),” says Robert. “Otherwise, the Astros have worn their brick red tops for every road game.” Until now, that is.

• D.J. Carrasco’s Mets logo stirrups made their regular season debut on Sunday.

• In that same game, Randy Choate looked like a bike messenger or something. Dude’s been in the bigs for over 11 years and doesn’t even know how to cuff his pants evenly? Sad.

• Barry Zito, bless him, is still wearing the striped socks.

• The Nationals continue to be the world’s most typo-prone team. They’ve already misspelled one of their own players’ names and the word “honoring” on a dedication plaque. Way to go, guys.

• Marlins catcher John Buck has a new mask.

• You may recall that the Blue Jays “pioneered” the phenomenon of Astroturf logo creep last year. Now the Rays have done likewise. Pa-fucking-thetic. Can the Scott’s Turf Builder ad for grass fields be far behind?

Phew, that’s a lot of news for one weekend! Some good, some bad, but all baseball — ain’t it great to have it back?

(Special thanks to Peter Bauck, Ted Hill, Jim Walaitis, Brad Bierman, Scott Lederer, Dan Cichalski, Jon Bradford, Chris Mayberry, and James Poisso for their contributions to today’s entry.)

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: Back on Friday I linked to this 1969 Padres program cover. At the time, I was fixated on the “Professional Baseball” notation on the MLB centennial logo, which I’d never seen before. But Frank Bitzer points out that I overlooked something much more obvious and important: Look at that Padres wordmark! That logo didn’t appear on the team’s jerseys until 1978, but it turns out that it was being used on program covers — and maybe elsewhere? — during the team’s inaugural season. So a logo that we generally think of as perfectly epitomizing the ’70s actually debuted in 1969. Fascinating! … It now turns out that the Michigan/Notre Dame tilt on Sept. 10 will indeed be a throwback game. According to that story, the Irish will be wearing a design that “hearken[s] back to the Joe Kuharich Era,” which I hope means they’ll go with this. More info on the Michigan design here. … The Nats’ recent fanfest event included a display by Phil Wood, who has a big collection of Washington Senators uniforms and memorabilia — including a rare white cap! Check it all out here (big thanks to Mike Mazzucchelli). … Here’s le Grand Orange endorsing le Grand Orange Crush (awesome find by Todd Radom). … New logo for Tim Lincecum. … Hey, guess who isn’t wearing camo? The Army baseball team, that’s who. They do have new gold jerseys, though (with thanks to Ryan Yanoshak). … You can’t start the baseball season without the requisite number of articles about laundry clubbies (with thanks to Sam Graves). … New uniforms for the Rochester Red Wings (with thanks to Joseph Lombardo). … Brad Wray spotted someone wearing this odd Yanks/Bosox hybrid logo. “It didn’t look homemade,” he says. … Oooh, check out this old CFL gumball helmet kit. “Never seen that before, not even a single helmet,” says Mike Hersh. … Christian Cisneros notes that Tim Lincecum had a new cap last Thursday. “He’s usually superstitious about that kinda stuff,” says Christian. “He’d worn his old hat since ’07, but he probably kept the World Series patch on that one.” … Last week I linked to this shot of Georgetown player Ralph Dalton wearing super-high-tops. “Here he is in his player exclusive of the team-exclusive Georgetown Terminators,” says a reader who prefers to remain anonymous. “The Terminator was essentially a shoe that was designed around Georgetown. The general release of the Terminator had ‘Nike’ on the back, while the Georgetown version had ‘Hoyas’ on the back. No other team wore the Terminators. They either wore Air Force 1s, Dunks, or the ‘Big Nike,’ which is what Rony Seikaly is wearing in that photo (albeit the 3/4 cut). The Big Nike was essentially the exact same design as the Air Jordan 1.” … When Jim Thome came to bat against Kyle Drabek on Saturday, the TV folks mistakenly posted his career numbers against Drabek’s father, Doug Drabek (good spot by Eric Davis). … Last week I linked to a 1970 helmet decal catalog from a company called Angelus, which Mike Hersh had won on eBay. Now Chuck McLaughlin reports that Angelus is still in the helmet decal biz. … Ryan Connelly’s long-running Ryberto’s DIY project recently took a more professional turn when he got New Era to make him a few dozen Ryberto’s 5950s. “I fudged around on the New Era web site and made some calls until I got hold of a contact. Then I engaged in a bunch of back-and-forth design e-mails, found out the final cost, signed off, and two months later got these beautiful hats. Some are for cousins and friends, but mostly they’re for my Uni Watch pals. Here’s Rob Ullman wearing his.” … The new version of Madden will show players sidelined after they receive concussions. … More Notre Dame news: They’re trying the new super-stretchy pants. For details, scroll down to the “Dressed for Success” section on this page (with thanks to Kevin Barrett). … Brown women’s lacrosse goaltender Maggie Suprey is apparently taking eye-black tips from John Randle. “She glared at me as I was taking the photo, and I felt a chill run down my spine,” says Tris Wykes. … Fascinating observation by Matt Fedorka, who writes: “I was screwing around on Google Street View and I looked at the outside of the TD Garden in Boston, where there were two images of Boston Bruins players who I believe to be Tim Thomas and Manny Fernandez. I knew they blurred out the faces of people on the street but didn’t know they did it on advertisements too. Also, and maybe more interesting, the B on Thomas is blurred out, but not the B on Fernandez. The faces of other players along that stretch were also blurred, but the B was left intact on both the jerseys and on other forms of Bruins advertisements.” … Over the past few years, Mets studio analyst Bob Ojeda has cultivated a signature look of going open-collared, without a necktie, but this season he’s wearing a tie. … Check out the awesome vertically striped socks worn by Oscar Robertson’s high school back in the day (big thanks to Mike Baucom). … Buried at the bottom of this article is the following: “[T]he Mariners are encouraging fans to wear white shoes to the home opener Friday to honor Dave [Niehaus], who favored such footwear” (good spot by John Doodigian). … My new hosiery hero: Samm McAlear of the Academy of Art in San Francisco (which, as you can see, goes with the ultra-rare double-decker SNOB). … Just what the world needed: a purple football field. … Dan Cichalski made MLB-themed cupcakes for Opening Day. … Rugby news from Adam Ingle, who reports that Saracens scrum-half Richard Wigglesworth went CNOB — that’s contracted name on back — on Sunday. … Also from Adam: Plenty of good rugby kit-builder sites available here, here, here, and here. … Great stirrups being worn by the Northern Iowa softball team (big thanks to Calvin Alger). … Wilson Pollacia reports that Arizona State will apparently be unveiling new football uniforms on April 12. … Japanese baseball teams are wearing black ribbons, for obvious reasons (thanks, Jeremy). … My old fanzine pal Steve Mandich has started a new blog devoted to Ichiro. “It’s gonna follow him game-by-game throughout the year, but also look at other stuff related to the man — art, music, memorabilia, and, yes, uniforms,” says Steve. “At the same time, I’ll be tracking Mariners uniforms during the season as well.” … Heresy or just clever? Little of both, methinks. Much like Under Armour’s faux flannels, this cap shows that UA is willing to engage in some surprising (to me) retro moves. Interesting (thanks, Kek). … Ladies and gents, your 1875 St. Louis Brown Stockings. Look at those belts, those collars! Also: Pullovers! (Astonishing find by Richard Stover.) … Nuggets players wore assorted green accessories yesterday, to help promote the NBA Green initiative.

 

270 comments to Monday Morning Uni Watch, MLB Edition

  • Chris Holder | April 4, 2011 at 8:15 am |

    So now we have, at the very least, a: blue football field, a red football field, an alternating purple/gray football field… jeez. Thank goodness my alma mater (who are purple and gold) just put down a new GREEN (crazy, right?) artificial surface this past year, or I’d be worried. Considering we host the D2 football championship game on ESPN every year, I’m actually a little surprised that somebody didn’t influence them to “be different”.

    Now for the big question? Who will be the first baseball team to put down turf that is a color other than green? You know it’s coming. “We just wanted to be different”, they’ll say. Apparently you also want to be stupid.

    • scott | April 4, 2011 at 8:31 am |

      If a baseball team does it, it would run counter to the sport’s move toward more tradition. Seems like a minor league team might try it out first, especially since it’s the minor league teams who are doing unconventional things like having complete artificial turf fields, including the basepaths, pitcher’s mounds and batters’ circles.

      • Chris Holder | April 4, 2011 at 1:30 pm |

        I agree. I could see a minor league team with a blue color scheme doing something a la Boise State. I really believe that could be a possibility some day. I tend to think that a bright red (like Eastern Washington, I believe?) would never happen, just… ’cause. For some reason I feel like it would be even tougher to look at than on a football field, though I have no rationale for that.

        Either way, I really hope it never happens. But the logical side of me says some stupid team will eventually try it.

      • Silver Creek Doug | April 4, 2011 at 4:32 pm |

        In college, Oregon State and Texas have already done this with their artificial turf fields. No dirt anywhere to be seen.

        • Komet17 | April 4, 2011 at 10:15 pm |

          I bet the pitcher’s mound is dirt…

        • captincanuck | April 5, 2011 at 12:35 am |

          Texas Tech has also had it for at least 2 years. However the mound is dirt but the rest is all turf.

    • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 8:36 am |

      I hope it’s either the Astros or the Yankees. The Astros could go with black and paint stars on it so the outfield looks like space. Or the Yankees… because the combination of the timeless uniform and a blue outfield would make people’s heads explode.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 9:56 am |

        Pretty sure The Jeff has TFPIC, but I’m trying to imagine how hot a black playing surface would get in Houston on an sunny August afternoon (or a navy one in New York, for that matter).

        Some fans probably would be able to feel the heat radiating up into stands.

        Relates to my longheld idea for a country song,
        “Ain’t No Black Cars in Yuma, Arizona”.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 10:54 am |

          Despite the official roof policy (which no one really knew about until the 2005 World Series, when the MLB forced them to follow it), the Astros never actually open the roof at Minute Maid unless it’s 70-75 and sunny, which happens about one day a year in Houston.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 10:55 am |

          Oh, and I had a black car in Phoenix. It didn’t get too hot as long as I kept the sunroof shade closed.

    • Jack | April 4, 2011 at 8:44 pm |

      Considering there are only 2 astroturf fields left in the majors, baseball is not the concern. I also think it is safe that the NFL would never resort to this either. This is a college issue.

      The worst parts is if you don’t like the way a uniform looks you can change it and never use it again. If you don’t like the turf, you are stuck with it.

      In the original yahoo article I read and posted yesterday, the reporter makes the point April first is not the right time to unveil a change like this. Normally you on April Fools day you make a fool or someone else, not yourself.

    • Chris | April 5, 2011 at 12:36 am |

      Cliff Lee’s hat in the comments above wasn’t necessarily him being formal for Opening Day, bc Philly didn’t wear those caps on opening day.

  • Greg B. | April 4, 2011 at 8:15 am |

    I hate to say it, but the purple Rockies jerseys look better than either the all black or pinstriped jerseys to my eye. Anything that causes us to lose a black jersey can’t be all bad.

    • Flip | April 4, 2011 at 12:07 pm |

      Purple, as in mountains majesty, works just fine. It’s a good look for a softball top. The black type does it no favors, though.

    • Chris Holder | April 4, 2011 at 2:01 pm |

      It’s the Rockies’ color. Ergo, they should wear it with pride, even though it makes our Fearless Leader cringe. It’s ridiculous how the Rocks and their Marlin cousins have both forsaken their original colors for uniforms that are mostly black/white.

    • Chris | April 5, 2011 at 12:33 am |

      Rox said this offseason that they never officially removed the purple tops from their unis. They’d been hinting all year. Monfort said they were thinking about CHANGING them, but never said they wouldn’t be WEARING them in 2011. Guys like EY Jr. were mounting a campaign all winter.

  • alan borock | April 4, 2011 at 8:20 am |

    I believe that the other Cub wearing the #10 hat is Reed Johnson.

    • ClubMedSux | April 4, 2011 at 10:05 am |

      Looks like him to me too.

      • MN | April 4, 2011 at 10:33 am |

        Agreed

    • JIM | April 4, 2011 at 4:25 pm |

      It was Reed Johnson – I watched the game & saw he had it on when he was introduced (I was wondering what it was until I soon realized it was for Santo)

  • ben_g | April 4, 2011 at 8:34 am |

    First off, I’m not a huge fan of any of the Blue Jays’ current uni elements. However, since Escobar wore what is the current official team logo, instead of that ghastly and soul-scarring “T” hat, I like to think that he got it right and everyone else was wrong.

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 5:07 pm |

      Very well put, Ben.

  • Jason62 | April 4, 2011 at 8:38 am |

    Rockies Owner Dick Monfort was asked ” Are there any plans for purple uniforms in the future?” and his response was “There is some talk of changing them, but it won’t be until 2012. Give us your feedback.”

    So it was more like they might think about changing them in 2012, not they wont be using them until 2012.

    • Mark K | April 4, 2011 at 9:07 am |

      Maybe the feedback was don’t wait.

  • Alec | April 4, 2011 at 8:40 am |

    I might have been the only person watching, but I found it interesting that the NCCA women’s final four had a pre-Mikan lane design(the “key”) on the court.

    Also, at the Big City Classic(for Lax) the refs werewearing green & black stripes.

    • Geen | April 4, 2011 at 11:09 am |

      That’s “NCAA” to you, buster!

      Anyhow, nice touch with the “key” lane, plus the faux “fade” on the paint job.

      But as for the lacrosse referee shirts: what was that all about?

      • Bryan H. | April 4, 2011 at 9:09 pm |

        The lacrosse referee shirts were green and black for headstrong. A lax player died of cancer and that is the awareness color for blood cancer. Duke also had green chinstraps, green shoelaces, and some had green sticks, all for the same cause.

    • inkracer | April 4, 2011 at 11:12 am |

      You weren’t the only one watching.. I watched the end of the Notre Dame-UConn game.

    • Aaron | April 4, 2011 at 1:31 pm |

      I also watched the end of the ND-UConn game, and I also really liked the court design. Any hope of the Pacers adopting something similar?

      (I’m pretty sure the answer is no.)

  • Eric S | April 4, 2011 at 8:47 am |

    Arizona State will be getting new uniforms, not Arizona (got new uniforms last season).

    • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 8:55 am |

      Mea culpa. Now fixed.

  • Jeffrey Lowery | April 4, 2011 at 8:49 am |

    Today’s ballgame being played on all natural grass brought to you by Mother Nature. Remember that is Mother Nature available everywhere.

  • David | April 4, 2011 at 8:53 am |

    Hey Paul, just FYI Hanley has been wearing the mouthguard since the middle of last year.

    David, soflamarlins.com

  • Natron | April 4, 2011 at 8:55 am |

    For the record, FSN didn’t really incorrectly post Thome’s stats against Doug Drabek. At the time, they were talking about how Thome would be facing them both Kyle and Doug, and what his stats were against Doug, as if it were some indicator about how we would do against Kyle.

    Lame, but in the context of the broadcast at the time, it wasn’t incorrect.

  • Michael Churchill | April 4, 2011 at 8:57 am |

    re. Jim Thome and the Doug / Kyle Drabek “mistake”: Are we sure it wasn’t intentional and they were talking about the rare occurence of a batter facing both father and son?

  • Bob A | April 4, 2011 at 8:58 am |

    I really hope the Astros gray road shirts become a regular thing. So much better than the brick reds. Maybe the team will be sold to an owner who has the stones to stand up to his wife when she insists that she wants to choose what they wear.

    • Mark in Shiga | April 4, 2011 at 9:50 am |

      I have the opposite view. ^_^;

      Gray is dull, boring, and insipid; with their plain black hats (and socks hidden behind the pants) the Astros look no different from any other team when wearing gray. I like how they use red as their primary road jersey. It’s not like they’re doing anything ridiculous or garish with it, and on the road it contrasts perfectly with the white jerseys of the other team.

      I say let’s make white at home and color on the road the standard again. There’s no reason that fans should have to see what looks like a parade of visiting teams all wearing the same thing every series.

      • scott | April 4, 2011 at 10:57 am |

        Do people also like when NBA teams wear, say, red tops and white shorts? No, because it would look ridiculous. Then why do people support that look in baseball. If you’re going to wear red brick jerseys, have the guts to pair them with red brick pants, too.

        • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 11:29 am |

          Meanwhile, in the NFL, having colored jerseys with white pants is normal, and everyone here hates the colored monochrome look.

      • concealed78 | April 4, 2011 at 11:14 am |

        Come on, man. I don’t want to see my team’s ugly alternate all the frickin’ time. The ugly & redundant black jersey, the extremely clunky letter & number double trim, the glaring thick double sleeve stripes.

        I’ve been looking at that damn thing since 1993 and I’m tired of it. Here’s the original 1991 version that may or may not have been cleaned up a little to remove a certain annoying watermark; maybe. Much cleaner and restrained look IMO. But I’d still rather see the home pinstripes & gray roads. And of course, the ‘rups and proper white hosiery.

      • Flip | April 4, 2011 at 12:14 pm |

        As pointed out over the weekend, there’s plenty of color in baseball w/ the caps, undershirts and stirrups.

        MLB players don’t get it. Look at the kiddie leagues. They get it™ no pajama looks there. They all wear colored hose.

        The loose-fitting tops, besides looking sloppy, overpower the colored undershirts.

        Just tidy up, guys. Set a good example.

    • Flip | April 4, 2011 at 9:52 am |

      The ‘Stros road grays are far superior to those brick monstrosities. Love the white shoe laces Bud Norris is sporting, too. http://cache.daylife...

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:06 pm |

      Road grays would be fine if they ditched the brick red and went back to orange, including an orange hat.

      The Astros and the Padres just need to blow up their unis and start over.

    • pflava | April 4, 2011 at 12:19 pm |

      The Astros uni’s are crap pretty much any way you slice it (what’s worse is the fact that they have one of history’s greatest baseball uniforms collecting dust in their proverbial closet). Still, in their current silly choo choo/old west incarnation, I’d much prefer to see the road gray over Softball Train Conductor.

      • JamesP. | April 4, 2011 at 12:59 pm |

        One must remember that, at the time the Astros opened their new stadium, there was a stadium renaissance that had just started a few years earlier. In trying to catching on with that trend, Uncle Drayton decided to tie the Astros in with the history behind the location of the new ballpark. Union Station had served as the main rail stop in Houston for a long time, so to honor that history, he decided to change the team’s colors to what you see today, and made use of a reproduction steam locomotive. With the change to Minute Maid as the stadium sponsor, they added those damn oranges to the train and around the park.

        Hopefully, with a new owner, they change the colors from red to orange, black to navy, and the sand to gold. Blending the best of the previous official colors…

        • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 5:17 pm |

          If he wanted to do that, he should have changed the name of the team as well, because to tie railroad history in with the Astros…Makes. No. Sense. Changing the colors was *fine*, but “Astros” connotes a space theme, not a choo-choo theme.

  • Bernard | April 4, 2011 at 9:00 am |

    I am in love with the Pirates’ Chuck Tanner memorial patch and its placement on the sleeve. In fact, I think the patch (minus the memorial number, of course) would make a fine addition to the jerseys permanently. Not sure how you would work out “earning” this star, but I love the way it looks on the jersey.

  • Gordon | April 4, 2011 at 9:02 am |

    Heads up: No link for 1875 St. Louis Brown Stockings.

    • Gordon | April 4, 2011 at 9:03 am |

      wow, that was fast

    • traxel | April 4, 2011 at 9:04 am |

      It’s there now, and might I say……creepy.

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 10:59 am |

      Love that Greek crenelation pattern on the collars

      • Broadway Connie | April 4, 2011 at 11:58 am |

        Totally!

      • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:07 pm |

        Um, no. I would not wear that.

      • pushbutton | April 4, 2011 at 1:30 pm |

        Greek….that’s the word I was looking for….

        Seriously, that’s the best team photograph ever.

        Cardinals should throwback to that.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 3:21 pm |

          Wouldn’t that be an Orioles throwback? Or were the Brown Stockings the predecessors to the Cardinals?

  • traxel | April 4, 2011 at 9:03 am |

    RyCo, Reserve a hat for me. I’ve got one to trade I think you might appreciate being a Pitt guy. Was there supposed to be a link to an Ullman Pic?

    • Ry Co 40 | April 4, 2011 at 1:40 pm |

      they’re all spoken for. if i drum up enough interest i’ll put together another order

      (unless you’re a size 7. i have a guy that hasn’t gotten back to me at all. he has about a week)

  • Ed | April 4, 2011 at 9:04 am |

    About that AstroTurf logo thing. This may not count as full blown ads but at wrigley the huge pull rakes that are used by the grounds crew have Scott’s lawn logos on them

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 11:04 am |

      That’s different. Ads on the fences or equipment are more traditional and don’t necessarily affect gameplay. Changing the texture of the playing surface beyond changing the nap of the grass can screw up players going to catch pop fouls.

      There’s also some element of “how far is too far?” in the difference. Wall ads are traditional and may become iconic of the stadium, like the WB Griffith sign at Fenway or the Marlboro sign at old Cleveland Stadium, and ads on the equipment aren’t everpresent during the game. An ad directly on the field is in some way an invasion of sanctified ground.

      • scott | April 4, 2011 at 1:18 pm |

        I said the same thing about those ads behind homeplate, but now they have become commonplace.

        • Aaron | April 4, 2011 at 2:30 pm |

          Doesn’t mean they’re a good idea.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 3:13 pm |

          Who puts ads behind home plate? Are you talking about the wall ads? Because the only grass ads I’ve seen behind home plate are team-specific.

  • George | April 4, 2011 at 9:10 am |

    “Over the past few years, Mets studio analyst Bob Ojeda has cultivated a signature look of going open-collared, without a necktie, but this season he’s wearing a tie.”

    So was Chris Carlin, his pre and post-game show partner, who also tends to go open-collared no-necktie.

    I’m wondering of that’s for the whole year or whether they did it just for the opening series and will go back to the casual look starting Tuesday.

  • traxel | April 4, 2011 at 9:14 am |

    On that Padres program, I was drawn to the second to last team logo. Process of elimination said it was the Phillies. Never noticed that logo before, things like that normally don’t get past me, so I checked Creamer and http://www.chriscrea... There it was. Not one of their better efforts.

    • pushbutton | April 4, 2011 at 1:22 pm |

      Here’s your complete set of 1969 MLB logos in glorious color.

      • interlockingtc | April 4, 2011 at 8:55 pm |

        That is why I fell in love with sports logos. I think of buying the Fleer Sticker packs with those very logos. Even the weird Senators Yellow Pages clip art pitcher had some charm. The laughing Brave always made me a little uncomfortable. And the G.I. Joe Pirate is definitely a period piece…but those logos sure sing to me. Ah, to be 9 again and see it all fresh.

        • timmy b | April 4, 2011 at 10:14 pm |

          That display is from the back cover of a book called “Baseball: The First 100 Years” that I got from Campbell’s Soup in exchange for $1.25 and four soup labels in 1969. Long lost, but was a tremendous book.

  • DenverGregg | April 4, 2011 at 9:18 am |

    On the Padres’ scorecard, two things stick out to me:
    1. the Cubs logo looks slightly off (maybe the “C” is too thin?); and
    2. that Phillies logo – WTF?

    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 9:46 am |

      Longtime Phillies logo. Never on the uni, though.
      On baseball cards, goes back to the ’50s…
      Here’s a 1965 card…
      http://cgi.ebay.com/...
      and a 1954 card…
      http://cgi.ebay.com/...

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 10:22 am |

        Pretty sure it was their logo up until the change to the “modern” P in ’71.

    • DenverGregg | April 4, 2011 at 10:51 am |

      Thanks. It was discontinued just before I started paying attention to baseball and it looked like a poorly-drawn beaver.

  • WFY | April 4, 2011 at 9:25 am |

    At NatsFest, there was also a apparently a 1971 Senators cap which had a patch instead of embroidered curly W. Owner Bob Short was said to be unable to afford the real deal. I didn’t see it myself (because I’m not taking a day off from work to attend something that should have been on a Saturday in late January) but saw it on Facebook. I’m surprised SBF didn’t get a photo.

    • teenchy | April 4, 2011 at 9:55 am |

      Was this NatsFest related to the current franchise, or a get-together of AL Nats fans, players etc.? I used to attend the latter when I lived inside the Beltway, and I’ve seen those embroidered patch curly W’s, not only on the ’69-71 red caps but also on the navy-with-red-piping ’63-68 caps. The patches occasionally pop up on eBay.

      Given that navy patches exist and the navy caps predate the Short era, I’m not sure I buy the “Short is cheap” story on these (though that’s not to say Short wasn’t cheap; the Quesada-led ownership group may have been as well).

    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 10:18 am |

      “Owner Bob Short was said to be unable to afford the real deal.”

      Baloney. Whoever said that had it wrong. As happens so commonly these days, if someone doesn’t know what they’re talking about, they just make up something to sound as if they have vast historial background.

      That was a spring training hat. Patch-logo hats for spring training were exceeding common throughout the ’50s and ’60s. Seeems like everytime I wander through my files I find another team that wore them…and I hadn’t noticed at the time. Just cuz was nothing unusual, just a obvious training photo.

      • teenchy | April 4, 2011 at 10:34 am |

        Ricko, thanks for the info. I was a kid during the 1960s and didn’t pay a lot of attention to subtle uniform details. I did think the Nats’ red caps made them look less like Cub Scouts.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:06 pm |

          For example…

          Milwaukee Braves “patch letter” hat…
          http://a.espncdn.com...

  • barrydingle | April 4, 2011 at 9:28 am |

    I’m fairly certain the NCAA passed a rule saying all fields must be green, after Eastern Washington went red. They along with Boise are grandfathered in so they should be the only ones with “colored” fields.

    • Mark K | April 4, 2011 at 10:22 am |

      nope- that was the NFL.

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 11:06 am |

      There’s a few JMU grads at my law school hoping they go with the full purple field when they’re scheduled to upgrade their surface in a few years. They’ll be disappointed that it won’t be the first one.

  • Berto | April 4, 2011 at 9:30 am |

    Somewhere, TJ Matthews is smiling.

  • Hank-SJ | April 4, 2011 at 9:41 am |

    How long will it be before the next misspelled Nats uni is “Worth”?

    If they need a proof-reader, I’m available. Could always use a side gig. Salary negotiable.

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:10 pm |

      Same here. I could proof their work from Ohio, right?

  • JGoodrich | April 4, 2011 at 9:46 am |

    I guess the ND/UM rivalry didn’t start until 1991 or later, since the Michigan article says the upcoming game will be the rivalry’s first night game. 1990 was definitely a night game @ ND.

    In fact, the announcement of this year’s ND/USC game being at night says it’s the first night game at Notre Dame stadium since 1990’s game – against Michigan.

    • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 10:10 am |

      pretty sure this year’s game is the first night game ever at the big house

  • AMDG | April 4, 2011 at 10:03 am |

    I love the A’s gold jerseies. They do need to add striping to the pants to match that of the tops.

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 11:07 am |

      They need green pants to go with the yellow tops

      • Ryan B | April 4, 2011 at 12:31 pm |

        No they don’t.

      • Aaron | April 4, 2011 at 2:37 pm |

        I don’t know about green, but I’m not the biggest fan of white pants with the gold tops. Pretty much the same reason I don’t like powder blue tops with white pants.

    • Frankie | April 4, 2011 at 2:22 pm |

      Agreed.

      • Frankie | April 4, 2011 at 2:23 pm |

        Agreed about the stripes, not the green pants.

  • Mark K | April 4, 2011 at 10:26 am |

    Shouldn’t those Notre Dame helmets have a four leaf clover on them? You know- luck of the Irish and all that?

    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 10:30 am |

      No.
      (see discussion last week regarding same)

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 10:39 am |

        Okay, a quick summation…

        Shamrock: Three leaves, symbolizing Ireland, the three leaves traditionally said to represent the Trinity.
        Four leaf clover: A good luck talisman, not especially Irish either in history or connotation.
        Three loaf cleaver: A bread-slicing instrument.

    • Mark K | April 4, 2011 at 11:48 am |

      Sorry, Ricko- forgot the sarcasm tags

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:06 pm |

        I know. :)

  • Broadway Connie | April 4, 2011 at 10:41 am |

    “… Here’s le Grand Orange endorsing le Grand Orange Crush (awesome find by Todd Radom). …”

    Maybe it’s because my French is so sub-fluent that I find this Rusty Staub thing such a hoot. I mean, the tag “Le Grand Orange” is itself terrific, but the rendition of Hey, Kids! into “Eh Les Jeunes!” is inexplicably funny. OK, just to me.

  • Chris | April 4, 2011 at 10:55 am |

    You are definitely right about the Indians new hat. It is so bland, and from not that far a distance the ‘C’ gets engulfed by red you can barely make it out.

    The cap needs something. It needs white outlining for the ‘C’ or since they are wearing blue undershirts and socks perhaps a blue bill on the cap to break up all that red.

    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 11:08 am |

      Yup. Two dark colors that close together on the “value scale” usually need a lighter color to separate and define them.

      That’s why so much white trim came into pro sports in the mid to late ’50s. Teams realized that many colors went to the same shade of gray on black and white TV. So teams (Cubs and Cardinals to name just two) added a white outline to their hats (and in some cases other areas of the uni). To their surprise, they learned it not only looked better on TV but also helped in photos and such, even in fans’ “viewability” from the stands.

      Speaking of such things…
      HAS ANYONE EVER INVESTIGATED HOW MUCH ADIDAS PAID HANK AARON BE CERTAIN HEW AS WEARING THEIR CLEATS WHEN HE HIT #715?
      http://thecomposite....

      He hit 714 in Cincinnati in plain black cleats, then suddenly was sporting adidas with their highly visible white stripes. Once he’d hit 715, he went right back to plain black.

      I imagine Paul has addressed that somewhere along the line.

  • Austin Chen | April 4, 2011 at 10:57 am |

    I thought the minimum on New Era orders was 100 or so? Does anybody have RyCo’s contact information? I’m a graphic designer and would like to know more!

  • Chris | April 4, 2011 at 11:08 am |

    Heresy or clever?

    That’s heresy and I’m pretty sure if the same Pirate like hat had a big Swoosh on it instead of an Under Armour UA everyone else would be shouting Blasphemy!

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 11:50 am |

      Ah, but the question of fault often falls to one of intent. UA has shown that it is both able and willing to make traditional looking uniforms while still using its modern textiles, and that it doesn’t dictate style to the teams unless they ask for help. That may be seen as a demonstration piece that shows that any team outfitted by UA can use pillbox caps if it should so choose.

      Nike, on the other hand, tends to think that a change in the fabric or template requires a radical change in style as well, so a Nikefied pillbox cap would be seen as a marketing ploy with no other intent.

    • Chris | April 4, 2011 at 12:12 pm |

      Everything you said about UA you can say about Nike too. Nike doesn’t treat everything like Oregon despite what haters think.

      Nike makes traditional looking uniforms with modern textiles. It doesn’t dictate style unless teams ask them.

      You do know Nike makes Penn State’s uniforms right???? Not every Nike team has 6 helmets, 5 jerseys, and 4 pants.

      Sounds like you just don’t like being called out.

      • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 12:54 pm |

        True, not every team has a million combos, but very traditional teams, like Ohio State changed their unis as soon as they signed on with Nike. Perhaps Penn State is the only one that didn’t allow Nike to change things, but the difference is that UA goes in with the assumption that it’s up to the school while Nike goes in assuming they will change the design and only doesn’t at the school’s protest.

        I’m not a Nike hater. I think the new NFL contract is going to improve things, since Nike’s construction template is better suited to traditional designs than Adidas/Reebok’s. Nike still tries to dictate to schools what their design should be, rather than assuming the school has the first say in any changes.

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:13 pm |

      It’s a pillbox hat, so it’s clever.

      If they put it on a normal good-looking hat, it would be heresy.

  • Mike D | April 4, 2011 at 11:08 am |

    MLB question for anyone out there: When did umpires stop wearing ties? Man I wish they would bring that uni-element back.

    • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 11:22 am |

      Early ’70s.

    • spurs214450 | April 4, 2011 at 11:40 am |

      I think it was either 1975 or 1976 in the NL and 1982 in the AL.

      • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 12:31 pm |

        Earlier than that.

        • spurs214450 | April 5, 2011 at 4:42 am |

          In the 75 World Series that I see highlights of quite regularly on MLB Network, I saw the umps in blazers and ties for all 7 games. Also in the 1978 Yankees-Angels game in the Bronx where Guidry had all those strikeouts the umps wore ties with their red blazers(except for the plate ump who wore his chest protector inside the red blazer). Another MLB Network highlight I see quite often on Rickey Henderson–it takes place in 1982 and the base umps have the blue blazers, red ties, light blue shirts, and gray pants.

    • umplou | April 4, 2011 at 1:27 pm |

      OK Mike – YOU be the first to go out on the field when its 80-90+, with a non wicking button down shirt with a tie and jacket on – and for good measure, put 20 lbs of 1969 era gear on, and work the plate for three hours….

      • Mike D | April 4, 2011 at 1:35 pm |

        As someone who is shortly becoming an ump, I would gladly do it! The uniform makes the man!

  • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 11:21 am |

    The A’s gold shirts do indeed look sweet – except for this rare pose in which it looks like its a blank shirt…
    http://scores.espn.g...

    -Jet

    • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 11:23 am |

      Note the gold shoelaces!

      • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 11:28 am |

        Nice! Really, the only thing ruining the look is the stupid pajama pants. That garb is just crying out for some sweet stirrups…

        -Jet

        • StLMarty | April 4, 2011 at 8:43 pm |

          I hate piping on jersey paired with pipingless pants.

  • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 11:26 am |

    Why are there two different Phillies uni/cap combos shown as “opening day” in the ticker? One of them is obviously not opening day (or is one of them the batting practice uni? – I forget they have those now)
    http://cache.daylife...
    http://farm6.static....

    -Jet

    • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 11:31 am |

      creams/halladay = opener
      pins/lee = game 2

    • Hank-SJ | April 4, 2011 at 11:34 am |

      Phils wear the cream unis and blue hats for day games (Opening Day), the pinstripes for night games (The Night After Opening Day?)

      • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 11:44 am |

        Thanks!

        -Jet

      • Aaron | April 4, 2011 at 2:45 pm |

        Am I the only one that thinks the blue hats look absolutely horrid for the Phillies? I know there is some historical precedent for more blue for the Phillies, but it just looks so wrong.

  • Marc M. | April 4, 2011 at 11:30 am |

    With regards to the Madden video game, it’s a VIDEO GAME, not real! Geez. PC gone crazy.

    • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 11:46 am |

      I agree, to a point anyway. They really need to keep the “bad” hits in the game and have the digital refs throw flags for them. Not having those types of hits is just stupid if they want to claim the game is realistic.

      I wish 2k would put out another football game. Even a non-licensed game is better than having no alternative to Madden at all.

    • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 12:01 pm |

      Why is it “PC”?

      What exactly is “political” about it?

      I hate the term “PC.” It’s become a meaningless buzz descriptor that means absolutely nothing…

      • Broadway Connie | April 4, 2011 at 1:08 pm |

        Tell him, boss. Whenever someone invokes PC, I just figure it’s a way for that person to not deal with complexity. Saying this or that is PC is more than anything else a manifestation of anxiety and resentment and – yep – paranoia among certain American white people looking for a way to externalize their difficulties and bafflements. Blame leftists and cosmopolitans, even when the issue at hand has nothing to do with ideology. Richard Hofstadter described people-who-say-PC pretty well in “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.”

      • RS Rogers | April 5, 2011 at 12:25 am |

        Since “PC” is usually invoked by people who wish to shut down honest discussion by calling names, which is exactly what “PC” itself is supposed to be, and since accusations of “PC” are in almost all cases not involving undergraduate student governance obviously false, my rule of thumb is this: The first person in a discussion to use the phrases “PC” or “political correctness” is wrong, and knows he’s wrong.

        As a rule of thumb, it has in my experience a better than 90 percent accuracy rate.

        True story: I was at the WWII Memorial in Washington, DC, Sunday, when a friendly seeming silver-haired old matron approached me and my father-in-law and started talking about how she’d heard that “FDR or someone” had “a quote” that ended with “in God we trust,” but that last part had been left off the memorial “so as not to offend the Muslims.” I gently tried to point out that this story was a well-known false internet rumor, and that conservative Republicans had controlled every branch of the federal government at the time the WWII Memorial was built and decisions were made about which quotes to include, and also that “In God we trust” is a sentiment that would not be offensive to Muslims, but to no avail. She was certain that “PC” was at work, and the “PC”-invoking mind is a closed mind.

    • Chris | April 4, 2011 at 12:04 pm |

      How is it PC?

      The rule exists in real life, not returning to the game after a serious concussion.

      Now it’s in the game….the game that prides itself on being as realistic as possible.

      That has nothing to do with ‘PC’ at all

      • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

        You’re right it ain’t “PC” but you didn’t read the whole article did you? It also said they won’t have any of the head to head hits or anything like that in the game. That’s the part that’s BS, at least IMO. Hell, if there are no hits like that, then where are the players’ concussions coming from? You’ll have a key player get a concussion and be taken out of the game, only it’ll be happening on what looked like a good clean tackle and feel like it’s the computer cheating you.

        • Chris | April 4, 2011 at 12:29 pm |

          You think illegal hits are the only way people get concussions?

          Who cares if it feels like the computer is cheating you.

          Sometimes it feels like life is cheating you in real life. Injuries are part of the real game they should be part of the virtual game.

          It adds to the realism. In past Madden and other games you have the option to turn on and off injuries and fatigue which is BS.

          I don’t care if it feels like the computer is cheating if a player gets taken out. It already happens with other injuries why should concussions be different?

          In my opinion I feel cheated out of a realistic experience when I build a team in a baseball video game and even with injuries on somehow go an entire 162 games and playoffs without a single injury to anyone. What a waste of building a team.

          I feel way more cheated playing Madden or NCAA and every game I play is 72-0 and I complete 95% of my passes and go whole careers without throwing an interception, whole seasons where my starting RB takes every carry because somehow never gets fatigued, never needs a breather at all.

          I don’t get the uproar over concussions…every other injury is in the game too. Big deal

  • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 11:43 am |

    As someone who grew up a Mets fan but adopted the Padres as a secondary rooting interest when they entered the league, you’re frying my brain with that 1969 scorecard showing the “70’s” font type. Wow…

    -Jet

  • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 11:53 am |

    paul, i have to take issue with your analysis of the tribe’s threads. for one, i love the contrasting blue sleeves and hose, i see no reason for an arbitrary matching rule of thumb. it either looks good on a case by case or it doesn’t, and in my horchata, they look great. if they were a royal blue team, i probably wouldn’t like the contrast, but that ain’t their blue.

    on to the chapeau. the damn hat is perfect, lay off the hat man. i personally prefer the blue with red block C, but either way, it does not need white. if your reason is it doesn’t show up enough, i call bull shit. i watched them play the pale hose on opening day on this little commodore 64 screen, and i could see it just fine, so i am sure all the high defers have zero problem seeing it(although i am sure some will complain to complain). more teams should look at the tribe on this one. not to mention, aside from the feller patch, there really isn’t any white on that entire uniform, the uni itself is cream, and there is zero white stroke around any number or letter. if they put an arbitrary white stroke on the hat, i think it would wind up looking waaaay to bright. but hey, that’s me and my opinion, you have the right to be wrong, nobody is perfect.

    i can’t argue about the helmet, that would be a nice touch.

    • Chris | April 4, 2011 at 12:01 pm |

      You are right the blue hat w/ red block C is better.

      I just think the red hat w/ blue block C the colors don’t contrast enough. Yeah, you can see the C still it doesn’t pop, it doesn’t stand out enough…in typical logo terms.

      The hats together though are a good difference to the Wahoo hats. Combined with the cream home and gray away alternate uniforms its a nice classic look.

      • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:58 pm |

        why does it have to “pop” why can’t it just be an elegant look? pop for pops sake isn’t right. both lid are plenty sharp as is.

    • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 12:02 pm |

      The C still needs an outline, it should just be cream instead of white. Problem solved.

      • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 12:42 pm |

        Hear hear

    • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 12:04 pm |

      if your reason is it doesn’t show up enough, i call bull shit. i watched them play the pale hose on opening day on this little commodore 64 screen, and i could see it just fine, so i am sure all the high defers have zero problem seeing it(although i am sure some will complain to complain).

      ~~~

      thanks to the free preview of EI, i watched a lot of the indians this weekend, and i have to say, about 98% of the time, the blue c on the red cap was 100% fine…so i’ll agree with the honorable comrade marshall on that — there was about 2% (usually angled into the sun where the reflection cause the two colors to blend) where it wasn’t completely clear — but who gives a shit, you KNOW what the damn cap looks like the other 98% of the time

      doesn’t need a white (or cream) outline at all

      • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

        i didn’t think anybody would agree with me on that one. is it the model of clarity? no. but it isn’t lost either. again, in my horchata this is the best new mlb uniform this season, and i tend not to like sans stripes jersey tops. the a’s is a miss beyond it being gold. really? a headspoon? they have not worn the headspoon since they were a red and blue team in kansas city. nor do they wear anything like that now. but i digress, the tribe nailed it in every way. lay of the chapeau lukas.

        cream outline? there problem solved? well crap on a cracker jeff, thanks for solving that for me. no, i am saying no outline is needed.

        • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:19 pm |

          Never dis the headspoon. Respect the headspoon and welcome it back with open arms. Best. Alt. Ever.

        • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 12:26 pm |

          movi,

          i love the a’s gold, but comrade marshall is correct about the spoon…i like it on a lot of teams, but it doesn’t look quite right on the a’s — they could have solved the problem by adding sleeve stripes sort of like rollie has (but not on a pullover)…would look better

          no outline on the indians cap…red w/blue c is perfect

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:35 pm |

          i am not calling out the headspoon as universally bad, it works for some teams. and i do like the triple braid as opposed to the single braid, just like i liked the pointer sisters bumble-pins back in the day. what i am saying is it does not match any of their other jerseys and they have not worn that style since i have been alive, which is a considerable amount of time, so it looks like a college team who adopts the rays look as an example. so to me it looks amateur. i dig why people like it, i want to like it, the gold rocks. they cold have mimicked their 70’s look, but shrunk the sand knit era stripes to a thin braid, and been classy disco. if i can put those words together. whatever, it isn’t a total fail, but it isn’t a success in my horchata either.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:46 pm |

          Twins have a headspoon their navy jerseys.
          They been dissed for it?

        • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:49 pm |

          Rollie’s jersey looks more football-ish. Not that I’m totally against that look on a baseball jersey, but a headspoon is better in this case. Now on the script jerseys, I don’t think it’s needed. They’re good as is.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:55 pm |

          i will if you want me to, fine. i have never liked their use of it, but the twins uniform is such a universal disaster, except the move to the TC, that i wouldn’t even know where to start with them.

        • tosaman | April 4, 2011 at 1:51 pm |

          OK, I’m exposing my uni-ingnorance, but what’s a headspoon?

          It’s not contrasting front panels on the cap, I take it?

          http://www.dreamroun...

        • tosaman | April 4, 2011 at 1:52 pm |

          Make that ‘uni-ignorance’ and lack of spelling skills.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:18 pm |

        Not sure closeups are the issue.

        And if the point could be made that the outline elminates the 2 percent of time it doesn’t work?

        A bright dark background tends to swallow dark lettering.
        All we have to do is look at the late ’70s/early ’80s Red Sox version of navy-on-red to see the white outline is stronger design, in terms of visual definition of the two dark colors.
        http://www.sportsmem...
        Or this Indians hat…
        http://sportsillustr...

      • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 12:30 pm |

        Not only does it not pop enough, but it’s gonna look *really* bad when the weather gets warm and the players start sweating thru their caps. At that point, the dark(er) red and dark(er) blue will become a smudge.

    • pflava | April 4, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

      He’s also right about the undersleeves – no need to make them red to match the cap. Blue looks better.

      • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:25 pm |

        sometimes a match is nice, but navy and scarlet is a forgiving colour scheme on that one. they are also clearly trying to be a scarlet & navy team, and not choosing to push one or the other as dominant, which i also like in this case. not every team, but in this case. i don’t know, i really think this is a great set. i might have liked this font, and the crooked c better, but that would just be complaining to complain. best new uni this year.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 12:48 pm |

          I like the caveman C and also the wishbone C better than the block, but it’s certainly an upgrade over Chief Wahoo or the script I. It needs some kind of contrast between the blue C and red cap though; that’s practically unreadable.

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 12:17 pm |

      Well, I’ll take both sides.

      Outline the C on the hat, but keep the contrasting sleeves and socks.

      • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 12:31 pm |

        Not only does the “C” need an otuline, but it’s gonna look *really* bad when the weather gets warm and the players start sweating thru their caps. At that point, the dark(er) red and dark(er) blue will become a smudge.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:41 pm |

          it’s okay paul, nobody is perfect, you being wrong was bound to happen sooner or later. maybe we should mark the calendar? it’s a great lid man, lay off the tribe lid. even if it does blend more, you can still read it fine. players wore hats sans stroke for years, i am happy to see the look back. it is a sharp hat anyway you try to slice it.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 12:49 pm |

          So is Mr. Marshall calling this a red-letter day? ;)

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:52 pm |

          ha! good one jd, i wish i would have thought of that.

        • walter | April 4, 2011 at 2:17 pm |

          The issue is: the background is wool fabric but the insignia is embroidery, so it’s brighter. That helps the red “C”, but hurts the navy one.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:44 pm |

        Seems to me the Indians had one of the really great alts in baseball in their fauxback-harkback-whatever we want to call it. However, instead of just letting fans relish in it, the team was so desperate to have a new hat to peddle this year that they screwed up a great looking uni.

        We can sit here and discuss the merits of the new red hat on its own, but the plain and simple fact is…it looks like crap compared to it predecessor.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:47 pm |

          does not.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:54 pm |

          When color are abutting, bright dark letter on darker background (last year) pretty much always trumps darker letter on bright dark background (this year).

          Previous Indians harkback is a far more elegant piece of headwear, and letter is far more discernable.

          I mean, just sitting on a table side by side, reference to nothing else, last year’s version is just…classier.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 12:58 pm |

          This (to me)…
          http://isportacus.co...
          is a far classier look than this…
          http://cache.daylife...

          One’s a black tux, the other’s a powder blue tux.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 1:03 pm |

          are you talking about that horrible script i hat? i beg to differ on that side by side. besides, you wear the letter of your city, not your mascot. the O’s hat is stupid for the same reason.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 1:05 pm |

          okay, you are talking blue C, not script I, my bad. i said i prefer the blue, but i don’t hate the red either. either way, that wasn’t the point, the point was it does not need a white stroke.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 1:08 pm |

          I have a commment about nine comments back that’s been stuck in moderation for almost an hour (grrr…) addressing the outline.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 1:12 pm |

          me too rick, it was about the headspoon thing that you brought up after i typed it. what’chu gon’a do.

        • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 1:30 pm |

          “besides, you wear the letter of your city, not your mascot.”

          Tell that to Oakland & Chicago.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 1:36 pm |

          you know maybe some other teams caps who are perfectly fine without a stroke could use some fixing too. seems to me this team’s logo does not exactly “pop” or appear as a model of logo clarity either. maybe some silly white stroke would make it better. well that or black.

        • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 1:46 pm |

          http://img864.images...

          You’re right, that does look better.

        • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 1:49 pm |

          ok, THE

          don’t ever do anything like that again

          and comrade, for the love of all that is holy, please do not use ollie as your example of any met ever again

          /thanks

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 1:54 pm |

          And the Twins.

          The “TC”, technically, is a graphic explaining where “Twins” comes from: Twin Cities. There is no word beginning with “C” in the name/descriptor of the franchise, and never has been. They aren’t the Twins Cities Twins.

          If we subscribe to wearing “city” on the hat, then the often-criticized “M” should be the preferred choice.

          I like the TC, largely BECAUSE it is almost universally overlooked that, despite it being comprised of letters, it’s purpose is, in effect, to serve as a graphic.

        • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 1:57 pm |

          Oh come on Phil, at least I didn’t add a black drop shadow. :)

        • walter | April 4, 2011 at 2:20 pm |

          It looks like we’re supporting their 1979 hat. Not my favorite, but not bad by any stretch

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 2:23 pm |

          That hat, The Jeff, is exactly what I thought the Mets should have gone with back in 1962. First thought when I saw the original was that the royal hat didn’t set up the orange “NY” nearly as well as the Giants’ black version had.

          Two-color wasn’t without precedent. In the ’40s the Giants had employed a white “NY” edged in scarlet on a royal cap.

          Also, under the circumstances, the white outline would have made it a lot more their own…the one-color version being so recent in memory.

        • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 3:16 pm |

          In the sign business, red letters on a blue background – or vice versa – is a Design 101 NO-NO. Poor contrast. Needs white.

          -Jet

        • Skycat | April 4, 2011 at 3:25 pm |

          It may have something to do with the lighting, but the red hat does not seem to even match the shade of the Indians’ wordmark. The hat appears to be a lighter shade of red.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 3:33 pm |

          provo, in general city name is best, a’s are an exception, i’ll give you that. but i also don’t much care for “sox”. if that is what they want to reference, put up a graphic image of sox. but i also was not saying nobody does it either, and you know that, i ws just saying in general i prefer the city. but none of this has anything to do with the block C, you are just arguing with me just to argue with me, you don’t really care about any of this, you are just captain schadenfreude.

          darn it rick i love you and all, but get the sand out of your crawl, i called you a party pooper on friday because you were, get over it, let’s move on. i think everybody knows what TC stands for. and while they are not the twin city twins, i think you can admit that it is a reference to the city and not the team name. i know you want to stick it to me, but come on man.

          i could not have been any more sarcastic then that met hat comment. i can’t believe anyone actually thinks that NY on the met hat needs a stroke, that is ridiculous. just because it isn’t perfectly clear from a thousand feet some of you are okay with snap-crackling a white stroke to make NY pop? that is freaking crazy, the mets hat is fine when it is sans black, maybe the best hat in the game.

          sorry phil, it was just a good example of the hat, needed an overcast day so the orange NY wouldn’t stand up and bust a jig on the eyes.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 3:43 pm |

          jet~
          sign business? this isn’t a sign, and i am not arguing that it has the best contrast, all i am saying is that in my horchata the tribes new lids are sharp. i understand your point though, it isn’t high contrast, but i am fine with that, not everything has to pop,/i>.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 4:07 pm |

          No, no, no….not being combative in any way about the Twins “TC”.

          None whatsover.

          Just pointing that there’s an interesting quirk about it that often gets overlooked. In terms of the team’s actual name, the “C” stands for…nothing.

        • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |

          alright, good enough then. the TC is way cool, as is cream pins(which should just be the home uni), but beyond that the twinks have troubles stylistically..

          just finished watching dem (a)o’s play the tigers, and that orange old english D isn’t that clear either, but is also another of my favourite chapeaus.

    • ABoxOfBroken8Tracks | April 4, 2011 at 9:06 pm |

      What’s a horchata?

      • interlockingtc | April 4, 2011 at 10:08 pm |

        rpm’s right: not everything has to “pop.”

      • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 10:10 pm |

        im comrade marshall’s world, a horchata is anything he wants it to be…

        however….

  • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 12:51 pm |

    well they are selling great rick,if that is the only reason they are doing it, and i don’t think that it is. i have seen 5 of the blue ones here in kc, and they may be the only non royals lids i have seen on a anybody’s head but my own in the last 5 months. but i prefer to think they are working on phasing out chief wahoo in a way that won’t send clevelanders to the picket line, and not only trying to sell merch.

    • Ry Co 40 | April 4, 2011 at 1:38 pm |

      i own a navy with red C indians fitted. love it! my second favorite hat in all of current MLB hats

  • Samuel | April 4, 2011 at 12:56 pm |

    Last week I took an old Hideki Matsui bobblehead from the Yankees and custom painted it to the new A’s gold jerseys. So glad that it looks so sweet in real life. I like it a lot. It’s slightly different from the 70s look, which gives it a modern touch.

    I threw together a quick slideshow of the process
    http://greeneggsandl...

    • Jet | April 4, 2011 at 4:23 pm |

      Nice job!!!!

      -Jet

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 8:14 pm |

      Very nice!

  • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 1:26 pm |

    That Video about ASU’s new unis may be the most hyperbolic college athletics video of all time. I mean, if you invoke Pat Tilman’s name, it should probably be for somthing more noble than new unis…

  • Seth H | April 4, 2011 at 1:42 pm |

    Note to the North Carolina commenter who made the claim a few months ago that “Columbia Blue” was nothing more than hijacked “carolina blue”: Check out the decal catalogue in the ticker; notice what the light blue is called.

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 2:31 pm |

      Columbia blue RGB: 117, 178, 221
      Carolina blue RGB: 142, 186, 229

      They are indeed different colors. Based on the balancing, Carolina blue should be slightly darker.

  • Christopher | April 4, 2011 at 1:53 pm |

    RE: Streetview. The faces are blurred automatically, not manually by hand. So it often things strange things are faces or license plates.

  • =bg= | April 4, 2011 at 1:59 pm |

    headspoon? squatchee? what?

    • Mike Engle | April 4, 2011 at 2:13 pm |

      Throw these into the Uni Watch glossary?
      Headspoon: for baseball button-down uniforms, the piping bordering the button placket and going around the neck. Looks like a spoon, with the wearer’s head in the spoon. Attributed to rpm (?)
      Squatchee: the little button on top of most baseball caps. It has no functional value and can be removed. Originally attributed to Bob Brenly (?), but popularized on UW by rpm.

      • tosaman | April 4, 2011 at 2:24 pm |

        Thank you.

      • rpm | April 4, 2011 at 2:53 pm |
      • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 3:13 pm |

        Squatchee is in the glossary already:
        http://www.uniwatchb...

        I’m not putting headspoon in there because I don’t like the term myself and have no plans to ever invoke it. Reminds me too much of an anthropomorphized piece of flatware.

        Not imposing a ban on the term or anything like that — use it if you like it. But I’ll stick with placket piping.

        • =bg= | April 4, 2011 at 11:58 pm |

          “squatchee” is a fun word to say, isn’t it.

  • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:03 pm |

    So I have a favor to ask people here on UW:

    I’m working on a large project right now with NBA uniforms but I hit a roadblock and my oblique strategy to solve this problem leads me to ask you people for help.

    If you could name the Washington D.C. basketball team anything other than Wizards or Bullets, what would it be?

    I tried Monuments:
    http://img.photobuck...
    http://img.photobuck...
    http://img.photobuck...

    and Capitols (like the old BAA team):
    http://img.photobuck...
    http://img.photobuck...
    http://img.photobuck...
    http://img.photobuck...

    Any ideas/suggestions welcomed…

    • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:18 pm |

      Sorry for the double post, I was locked in moderation… See down below

    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 2:33 pm |

      ABA also had the Washington Caps, and the NHL had no trouble re-using it.

      Though I know it’s a name from a defunct football league, I’ll always believe “Washington Federals” is a heckuva name for team. Appreciated the USFL team’s color scheme, too: Green, black and white. Like the money.

      Someone’s using Federals currently, though, aren’t they? Minor league hoops or something?

      How ’bout “Commanders”? Probably better for the ‘Skins.

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 2:37 pm |

      Those are both good names, though Capitols probably wouldn’t fly given the existing NHL team. However, the only good graphic in there was the basketball dome. You could even put a basketball player up there if you were feeling especially saucy. The beveled font is overdone and never looked right on a jersey and those stripes just muddy everything up. Better to put contrasting block letters on a striped background. Try doing the letters in flag blue on a red and white striped background or do the name in red on white over two red stripes to continue the DC flag motif.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 2:40 pm |

        I was setting up the re-use of “Federals”, not suggesting Capitols.

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 3:15 pm |

          That was directed to Tim, not you Ricko.

        • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 3:21 pm |

          Does get confusing sometimes, doesn’t it.

          We have an accord then (unlike those in the actual capitol), that Capitals is not a capital idea for the NBA.

      • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 3:22 pm |

        Agreed. /handshake

  • Statz63 | April 4, 2011 at 2:10 pm |

    Did anyone else notice that the picture of “the Big O” was from the championship game that inspired the movie “Hoosiers”?

    • Dwayne - Say NO To Baseball Slacks | April 4, 2011 at 6:21 pm |

      No, it was not.

      Milan played Muncie Central Bearcats in the 1954 Indiana State Finals, which Milan won 32-30.

      Milan played and defeated The Big O and Crispus Attackus High School, soundly, 65-52 in the 1954 Indiana State Semi-Finals.

      Crispus Attackus won the State Championship in ’55 & ’56.

  • concealed78 | April 4, 2011 at 2:12 pm |

    I’d be all for the star to replacing that 1997-era pirate sleeve patch logo with the pointless red on it & trendy 1990s goatee that really should be completely phased out.

    It might look too much like pandering to a different Pirates era, tho it would maybe have the same vibe as the A’s elephant sleeve patch; maybe put a black Pirates “P” in the middle, and keep everything else.

    Maybe something like this home & road set .

    • concealed78 | April 4, 2011 at 2:14 pm |

      Ooops, this was supposed to be a reply to Bernard’s Pirates post.

  • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:13 pm |

    So I have a favor to ask people here on UW:

    I’m working on a large project right now with NBA uniforms but I hit a roadblock and my oblique strategy to solve this problem leads me to ask you people for help.

    If you could name the Washington D.C. basketball team anything other than Wizards or Bullets, what would it be?

    • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:15 pm |
      • Marc | April 4, 2011 at 2:28 pm |

        I vote for the Mullets. Not only does it ring like Bullets, but it’s as American as Apple Pie

      • The Jeff | April 4, 2011 at 2:34 pm |

        Washington Warhawks

        You could potentially have an eagle/hawk theme or a fighter jet theme, and it’ll go well with the Warriors name when the Redskins finally cave and change to that sometime around 2018.

    • concealed78 | April 4, 2011 at 2:15 pm |

      “Municipals” or “Hills”

      • Broadway Connie | April 4, 2011 at 2:34 pm |

        Washington Eagles.

        Washington Federals, aka Feds.

    • Mike Engle | April 4, 2011 at 2:16 pm |

      Vilk nominates The Supremes, and I second it.

      • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 8:21 pm |

        Motion carried.

        But I’d also settle for the Federals’ name and color scheme.
        http://www.throwback...
        Just need to incorporate a basketball into that logo somehow…

    • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:18 pm |

      Sorry for the double post, I was locked in moderation…

      • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 2:30 pm |

        all your links seem to be broken

        • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:32 pm |

          Just fixed ‘em

    • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 2:35 pm |

      Then I’ll repost this here…

      ABA also had the Washington Caps, and the NHL had no trouble re-using it.

      Though I know it’s a name from a defunct football league, I’ll always believe “Washington Federals” is a heckuva name for team. Appreciated the USFL team’s color scheme, too: Green, black and white. Like the money.

      Someone’s using Federals currently, though, aren’t they? Minor league hoops or something?

      How ’bout “Commanders”? Nah, Probably better for the ‘Skins, there being so many warriors in the NFL.

      • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 2:50 pm |

        As far as I can tell, I don’t think Federals is in use…

        • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 3:24 pm |

          You could do Federals and still use that great basketball dome logo.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 3:41 pm |

        “How ’bout ‘Commanders”? Nah, Probably better for the ‘Skins, there being so many warriors in the NFL.”

        Just realized the verbal and headline shorthand would be…

        CO’s

        “Down in Washington, the CO’s host the Eagles in the Sunday Night Game…”

        (yeah, I know that’s “Commanding Officer”, but still…)

        The Hogs (in the stands) could dress as Sergeants…the NCO’s.

    • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 2:39 pm |

      I’ll repost too:

      Those are both good names, though Capitols probably wouldn’t fly given the existing NHL team. However, the only good graphic in there was the basketball dome. You could even put a basketball player up there if you were feeling especially saucy.

      The beveled font is overdone and never looked right on a jersey and those stripes just muddy everything up. Better to put contrasting block letters on a striped background.

      Try doing the letters in flag blue on a red and white striped background or do the name in red on white over two red stripes to continue the DC flag motif.

    • Shane | April 4, 2011 at 4:09 pm |

      It was from the old soccer team, but I love the name:

      Washington Diplomats

      • Shane | April 4, 2011 at 4:11 pm |

        Doesn’t hurt that I’m rocking a Johan Cruyff Dips jersey at work today, either.

    • Ry Co 40 | April 4, 2011 at 6:07 pm |

      Washington Defenders

    • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 6:56 pm |

      Check down the page to help me one more time…

  • Marc | April 4, 2011 at 2:26 pm |

    Anyone else think it’s wrong for players on the same team (let alone on the field at the same time) to be wearing two different sock designs? I have no problem with a team having two sets of socks, but for crissakes, if Zito wears the stripes they should make ALL the high-cuffed players wear the stripes for that game, or vice versa.

    • Mike Engle | April 4, 2011 at 2:31 pm |

      YES, Matt Cain. Yes.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 2:38 pm |

        Indeed.
        Now if only Zito didn’t think he was playing soccer.

        • =bg= | April 4, 2011 at 11:55 pm |

          the socks look swell. however, i wish he wasn’t such a pathetic pitcher making more money than most third-world countries.

      • Marc | April 4, 2011 at 2:44 pm |

        I’ll give Cain a pass since he wasn’t on the field, but Belt and Tejada both went high-cuffed with solid socks while Zito wore the stripes. :/

    • Christopher | April 4, 2011 at 3:40 pm |

      100% agree- I hate it. Everyone should decide before the game how they’re going to look and everyone should conform.

      The socks/’rups are such an integral part of the uniform and the team’s look.

    • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 8:17 pm |

      As I’ve written countless times, it’s crazy that there are no lower-leg standards or regulations, but that’s just the way it is.

      As I’ve also said a few times lately, the lack of lower-leg standards has led to socks now being treated more like equipment (like wristbands, batting gloves, etc.) than like a uniform element. It’s basically the player’s choice in terms of how to wear equipment, so you get a hodge-podge of sock styles.

      Do I like that? No — I *hate* it. But that’s the current state of affairs.

  • E. Lindsey Hall III | April 4, 2011 at 2:28 pm |

    In the second picture of Ralph Dalton (in the grey terminators) it appears that his left shoe says HOYA and the right says HOYAS.

  • Johnny O | April 4, 2011 at 2:45 pm |

    Nyjer Morgan is making his Brewers debut today in right field and is unfortunately not wearing his trademark stirrups. Haven’t heard anything why he has gone long cuffed.

  • Charles | April 4, 2011 at 2:55 pm |

    Paul,
    in regards to your weekend baseball recap, you finish with
    “Some good, some bad, but all baseball — ain’t it great to have it back?”
    Well, the official count is 11 negative comments, 10 neutral comments and just 2 positives. For a sport you claim to love so much, you could only bring yourself to say 2 positive things about the uniforms (one of which being about your longtime favorite Barry Zito)?
    For awhile now, it has seemed to me that your column has been declining into a forum for cynical whining and a sweeping hatred of anything new that isn’t a throwback. It seems perhaps a better title for the blog would be “Old Uni Nostalgia and New Uni Bashing”.
    I may be the only person holding this opinion, but as a longtime fan of your work it’s been harder for me to click over to the site lately, and I hope that this trend doesn’t continue.

    • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 3:04 pm |

      First off, anything he didn’t mention probably is a positive. All those positive “unspokens” far outnumber the negatives. The evening news doesn’t read a list of all the banks that DIDN’T get robbed today.

      Secondly, gee, what are the chances that a website that’s largely about uni history—and is visited by people who are concerned/fascinated with uni history—would have a penchant for older unis?

      I’m not being a crank and saying, “Go away”. I’m saying stop and think about the character of any website, and take what you find of value there…even if it comes from those with a different perspective than yours.

    • Paul Lukas | April 4, 2011 at 3:16 pm |

      Uni-notable things are often notable because they’re bad. I love the Phillies’ cream alternates, but that’s not uni-notable — that’s just business as usual.

      If you think I’m a whiny crank, feel free to read some other site. I report what I see. As soon as the uni-verse is 99% wonderful, my commentary will be likewise. Up until then, I’ll keep calling it like I see it.

    • Christopher | April 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm |

      Not to pile on, and your comments were not ignorant bashing we see on here a lot… but uni-notable stuff did you see this opening weekend that was positive in your opinion?

      Again, lots of teams still have beautiful uniforms… but why should one mention that? The White Sox wore their awesome, simple road greys. Ummm… who cares? Of course they did.

      However, on that uni, something notable happened- they swapped out the cool dimond logo for a sox logo (something 90% of fans did not like).

      • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 3:55 pm |

        The White Sox wore their awesome, simple road greys. Ummm… who cares? Of course they did.

        However, on that uni, something notable happened- they swapped out the cool dimond logo for a sox logo (something 90% of fans did not like).

        ~~~

        um…did you happen to actually watch the white sox play the indians this weekend?

        • Charles | April 4, 2011 at 4:21 pm |

          Yeah Chris, the Sox wore the black alternates all 3 games (something they said they were gonna stop doing so often this year…) though I’d put money on grey tomorrow vs. KC, since they usually ride a jersey until they lose.

          Anyway, Ricko, your point about the news comparison is taken, though I could argue that news broadcasts in general are themselves needlessly negative. I’d hope you wouldn’t tell me to ‘go away’, as I’d say I kept my criticism pretty courtesy and fair-just stating opinion. No need to get overly defensive. God knows everyone here has a lot of respect for what Paul does, bringing our fetish some well-deserved coverage.

          I guess my point is that change is inevitable–in uniform design and player style, just like every other aspect of life–and at times it feels like the site is quick to automatically shoot down anything new that doesn’t involve a lot of stripes or a well-established formula. Part of it may be an age thing, too–I have less of a problem with pajama pants, since to me they look more stylish than the skintight ankle-huggers of the 90’s–but I just hope that you (Paul) can keep an open mind, and maybe take a 2nd look before passing judgment (as long as it doesn’t involve purple)…

        • Christopher | April 4, 2011 at 5:36 pm |

          Ha… sorry Phil, no I didn’t. Followed them on my phone, didn’t watch any of the games.

          I just assumed because I swore someone on a message board I frequent said they were in greys.

      • Ricko | April 4, 2011 at 6:34 pm |

        Wasn’t taking issue with your points, necessarily, just saying that affection for older stuff probably is gonna come with the territory hereabouts.

        I didn’t particularly care for the tight ankle length pants, either, especially with high tops. Ick. REally a stupid look. Definitely PJs over that, if I had to pick one or the other.

        And I wear PJs (or at least long pants) when playing ball. That and elastic high or at top of calf are the two most comfortable ways to wear pants that I’ve found over the years.

        Doesn’t mean I don’t miss stirrups on MLBers, though. Just more visually interesting.

  • teenchy | April 4, 2011 at 3:34 pm |

    I see no comments as of yet re the untucked phenomenon. If anyone goes untucked, wouldn’t a pitcher be the most likely? To distract the batter, y’know, along the lines of flapping undershirt sleeves and flouncing jewelry.

    • Christopher | April 4, 2011 at 3:39 pm |

      No, its the whole “untuck right after the game ends”. The ump would never allow a player to *play* untucked, especially a pitcher. Not for a second.

      • teenchy | April 4, 2011 at 4:32 pm |

        I see. I don’t think I’ve ever observed the phenomenon but then I probably haven’t been paying attention. Mea culpa.

  • DJK | April 4, 2011 at 3:56 pm |

    I like some of the alternates, or “softball” unis. (would white over white with a dark hat football unis then be “baseball unis”? A topic for another day 5 or so months from now I guess). I like the traditional white vs. grey games, but I also like the games where one team wears color. If every team wore colored alts, or both teams did, it would weaken it. Maybe it is because I was a child of the 70’s, when the A’s and the Pirates and the Orioles and the Giants, etc, wore alts as there road or home unis, I am not offended by color in baseball, I am energized by it.

    I thought the A’s looked spectacular yesterday. I would love to see them wear color home and away. Same with the Nationals (red home, blue away, kinda fits with DC). But I sure would not like to see that with every team.

    • Samuel | April 4, 2011 at 6:56 pm |

      The A’s do have the green alternate tops specifically for the road, so they actually do have colored tops for the home and road.

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 8:35 pm |

      I’m pretty much with you, DJK. While about half the teams don’t need an alt, the other half do. Yes, if every team wore colorful stirrups you could whittle away some more alts, but with 30 teams there’s room for a few.

  • Andrew | April 4, 2011 at 4:39 pm |

    Paul may not like the color, but as a Rockies fan I’m thrilled to see the purple jerseys return.

  • ryan4fregosi | April 4, 2011 at 5:05 pm |

    Quote: [i]”There’s NO DOUBT that Bonifacio will PROBABLY be bunting here.”[/i] — Guess Who, Mets vs. Marlins, 4/2/11, bottom of the 7th, Jon Niese pitching to Emilio Bonifacio. Final Score: Mets 6, Marlins 4, 10 innings. FWHA!

  • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 6:36 pm |

    OK.

    Thanks to everyone who helped, I think I’m gunna go with Federals but I need more input (because ‘you people’ really helped).

    based on this http://img.photobuck...

    Which do we like best
    a http://img.photobuck...
    b http://img.photobuck...
    c http://img.photobuck...
    d http://img.photobuck...
    ?

    • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 6:58 pm |

      im totally digging that “logo” but i could see some legal issues involved — love the dude holding the two basketballs, too…

      great colors — make the homes cream, not pure white (like the dollar) and maybe nix the date — i assume that was the date the baltimore bullets were established? — just doesn’t work for me

      and you might have to make the seal/rotor into a basketball (but keep same colorscheme) and that might work…

      the usfl feds had a great colorscheme; keep the green (almost a kelly) and the black for accents…but make the home an offwhite/light gray/cream

      of a-d, i think i like d the best, just nix the date

      • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 7:32 pm |

        “legal issues involved” – Yeah, I thought of that. Reminds me of one of the first things I ever Photoshopped, almost impersonated a Federal Agent on accident when I was 18, whoops.

        “homes cream, not pure white” – Great minds, right? Was on top of that like a squatchee on a 59fifty.

        not sure I agree about the date, perhaps I could choose a better date…

        good feedback though

      • jdreyfuss | April 4, 2011 at 8:04 pm |

        I’d go with b or d. Also, go with 1788 (federal government established) or 1790 (Washington founded) for the date.

    • Jim Vilk | April 4, 2011 at 8:39 pm |

      I like A.

      • LI Phil | April 4, 2011 at 9:31 pm |

        of course you do

      • Tim E. O'B | April 4, 2011 at 9:41 pm |

        I don’t know if this means anything but my mom gave me that idea

  • LarryB | April 4, 2011 at 6:57 pm |

    My goodness. Sure is a lot here today.
    Interesting to see exactly what the Irish and Wolverines do wear.

    I liked that CFL gumball set.

  • Johnny O | April 4, 2011 at 8:34 pm |

    A good shot from opening day at Miller Park of the grounds crew using a stencil to make the “M” behind the mound:

    http://mlblogsbrewer...

  • RS Rogers | April 5, 2011 at 12:47 am |

    If the red Indians cap “needs” a white or cream outline to make the navy C “pop,” then can we agree that the red C on the Twins TC cap also needs an outline to make it “pop”?

    Alternately, we can agree that complaints about either cap logo not being sufficiently high-contrast are equally false and/or silly. It’s one or the other; this is one that pretty obviously can’t be had both ways.

    Personally, I’m honestly not sure where I come down on this. The low contrast on the Twins cap has always bothered me, but the red Indians cap has looked nothing but terrific to me as I’ve watched it in action. I suspect that if it’s not working for some people, it has little to do with insufficient “pop,” since the same argument would be exactly as true about the Twins TC logo and about the Mets orange-on-blue caps, and we don’t exactly hear anyone calling those teams out for low cap contrast. Rather, it has to do with the highly unusual phenomenon of a team using a darker logo on a brighter cap. The D-Backs do it, and the Red Sox used to, but it’s very rare in baseball history. With or without an outline, that configuration is going to confound the eye a bit.

    What that hat needs is a navy bill, and also an immediate promotion as the Indians’ one and only on-field cap. Not a white outline. Even without the navy bill, it’s a unique-in-MLB cap, one that allows a viewer to instantly recognize it as belonging to its team and no one else. So it more successfully achieves its primary design objective than at least four-fifths of all other caps currently in use in MLB, and certainly than any other cap in the Indians arsenal. Anyway, the clarity and success of the red Indians cap has me rethinking my own prior objections to the lack of contrast on the Twins TC cap. Either Paul is wrong about the Indians cap, or I’m wrong about the Twins cap, and I’m increasingly thinking it’s me.

    • The Jeff | April 5, 2011 at 1:36 am |

      A white outline on the Twins TC hat wouldn’t really work because the T is already white. The best way to make it pop more would be to make both letters the same color. If they’re both white, it’s highly visible (and probably a bit Yankee-ish) and if they’re both red, you can add the outline.

      The Mets orange on blue isn’t as bad because they’re brighter colors, and it’s been around for long enough that everyone is used to it.

  • Jeremy Kelly | April 5, 2011 at 4:40 am |

    The Yankee/Red Sox combo logo came from a sports comedy blog in 2008.

    http://huggingharold...

  • Charles N. | April 5, 2011 at 12:12 pm |

    Just saw the mention of Under Armour’s faux flannels, which reminds me to perform my due diligence here. Any chance of getting them to produce those for general consumption? Last I remember, they were only available to their team accounts. I would buy a dozen of those Fflannels in a minute.