Uni Watch Profiles: Bob Halfacre

IMAG0091.jpg

Tomorrow the Dodgers will play the second of their six weekday-afternoon throwback games. They’ll once again be wearing their 1944 blue er-satins, and the Cubs will be wearing ’44 throwbacks as well. The uniforms for this game, like the ones for the April 21 Dodgers/Braves game, were not made by Majestic but by Bobcat Athletic, a small, L.A.-based uniform outfitter run by Bob Halfacre, who used to work at another small uniform operation, AIS.

I’ve known and corresponded with Bob for years (among other things, I know he hates first initials on NOBs), but we had never spoken on the phone until last week, when I picked his brain about how he scored this throwback gig, which was a major coup for his company. I think you’ll find our chat very interesting:

Uni Watch: How did you end up doing the uniforms for the Dodgers/Braves game? Like, why you and not Majestic?

Bob Halfacre: Well, first of all, we’re the name and number guys for the Dodgers.

UW: Oh, you’re their stitcher?

BH: Yeah. So we had a relationship with them. And they had that contest to choose their throwback, and they never actually approved that with Majestic. I got a call from the team toward the end of last season, saying, “We’re going to do this contest next year. Are you interested in bidding on it, to do the uniforms?” I said sure, I’d love to bid on it.

UW: So if a team wants to do a throwback game, they don’t have to work with Majestic?

BH: Technically, no. From my understanding, part of the licensing deal is that each team gets a significant credit back from Majestic — you get a certain amount of free product. Now, some clubs take that money and distribute it throughout the organization; some of them let the clubhouse guy use it to buy items like replacement pants, extra jackets, and so on; some will put half of it into their marketing budget and grab a bunch of blank jerseys to be autographed and sold; and some will use it for a throwback promotion like this. Depends on the team’s philosophy. Now Majestic’s stuff is not inexpensive. So some clubs’ philosophy is, “We’re gonna take care of the licensee,” but for other clubs it’s, “We’re gonna find the best deal we can.”

UW: So the Dodgers chose to work with you, instead of Majestic?

BH: Well, about two weeks before the contest ended, I got call telling me, “Majestic can’t do these uniforms, do you want to do ’em?” And I said sure.

UW: And why couldn’t Majestic do them?

BH: They can’t react that fast, with the contest finishing so close to the start of the season. Had they known all along that it would be the blue Brooklyn jersey, they probably would’ve said sure.

UW: Because they had blue fabric in stock?

BH: Yeah, or could get it fairly easily and quickly. But when you’re a big company, you can’t react that fast. I mean, they’re unbelievable at reacting quickly for the things that they do do, like if a player is traded. But for a project like this, they don’t move quickly from A to B to C.

But even for me, I couldn’t have done the Braves’ uniforms without Liebe. They did the chain-stitched tomahawks, they cut the lettering. I couldn’t have done that here in that time frame — we don’t have the firepower. So Liebe did that for me, and they did a beautiful job.

UW: So toward the end of the contest they brought you on board. And then what happened?

BH: They said, “We’ll need prototypes, because we want to do photos when the contest result is announced.” And I said oookay. I was a little nervous about the one with “Brooklyn” down the placket, because those pinstripes were very close to each other — much closer than today, and thinner too. But I figured it was a great opportunity, so I said yes.

Now, I’ve been doing this for 25 years, and I know most contests already have a winner before they even start. I remember there was a minor league team, and they told me, “We’re having a ‘Name the team’ contest, and the winner is gonna be this. First person who sends in that name is the winner.”

UW: Wait, so are you saying the Dodgers throwback voting was rigged?

BH: They were leaning toward the blue — that’s what they were really hoping would win. But they weren’t fixing it or anything like that. It was legitimate. But we knew the vote totals on a daily basis, so we could see where it was going and plan accordingly.

Toward the end, the pinstriped one was still in the running, and I knew there was no way I was gonna get a roll of pinstriped fabric printed that quickly. So we were literally gonna make the uniform panels, make sublimation paper, and try to sublimate it on straight. I thought, “I can wing it for three prototypes.” But of course it didn’t come to that.

UW: So when the results of the voting were announced and they showed three players wearing the blue throwbacks, those were your prototypes?

BH: Yes. The fit wasn’t perfect — we didn’t even know which players they were gonna use. I had the jerseys made up and then they called us the night before and told us which numbers to put on ’em. It was kind of a scramble — at one point it looked like they might be on the Today show, and there was all this stuff going on. But it was also really exciting.

UW: Realistically, if Majestic had made these uniforms instead of you, would there have been any significant difference? Or any subtle difference?

BH: I’d be curious to see. If you read the Dodgers’ original press release, it said they wanted to use “modern fabrics and a modern fit.” So that meant they were gonna have the pants the way most players wear them today, down to the ankle. And I said, “Are you sure you want to do that?” I think [Dodgers GM] Ned Coletti is the one who said it wasn’t that he didn’t want them to look vintage, but he just wanted the players to be comfortable.

UW: But you eventually convinced them.

BH: Yeah. Now, their jerseys were a contemporary fit, while the Braves’ jerseys were a vintage fit — their sleeves were a little bit longer, and there were little variances in the pattern.

UW: Is that because their jersey was a zipper-front?

BH: The Braves went all in from the start. From the very beginning, they said make it vintage, make the pants short. So we went with really short inseams on their pants — like, some of them were as short as 18″, which is really short. And they said to go ahead and get stirrups for them. And that was great, because most players today don’t want to wear stirrups on their own. A lot of them have never even seen them, and they don’t know how to wear ’em. So some of the players pulled them a bit higher than we’d hoped, but overall I thought it looked good.

UW: Me too. Did you get the stirrups from Twin City?

BH: Yes.

UW: Now, when the visiting team wears throwbacks, the home team is responsible for making that decision, right?

BH: Home team decides. It’s strictly about who’s gonna pay for it. And in this case, the Dodgers paid for the Braves’ uniforms, and those uniforms got left behind with the Dodgers when the Braves left town. The Dodgers will be auctioning them off. It all belongs to them.

UW: Was it weird doing a non-satin execution of a design that was originally rendered in satin?

BH: Well, we couldn’t do satin — actually, we could have done satin, but we were worried that if someone slid into second base, they’d blow it out. We did look into it. Basically, the only satin out there right now, which I could have gotten, is a cap-and-gown fabric. It’s used for sashes, stuff like that. They had a light blue, and it wasn’t the exact right shade, but we probably could’ve pulled it off. But we were worried about wear and tear, and we were worried about heat.

UW: And once you decided not to go with satin, was it weird that all your reference photos and historical imagery — everything you were basing your design on — showed the satin uniforms?

BH: It might’ve been weird if I had seen more of it. But it was 65 years ago, and there are only so many photos of it, so it’s not something that was embedded in my head. And all the photos of it were taken at night, and they’re all grainy anyway.

UW: So did you just use a polyester double-knit?

BH: No, we made ’em out of nylon.

UW: What about the Braves — were theirs made of nylon too?

BH: No, theirs were polyester. A warp-knit poly, light gray. We tried to keep it as light as we could, because the pictures we were looking at, and even Okkonen, seemed to show their road uniform being pretty darn light.

The thing about the Dodgers’ nylon uniforms, nylon is way more comfortable, but ultraviolet light’s gonna change the colors, and they don’t launder very well. But in this case, they only have to last for two games.

UW: So you’re doing the second throwback game as well, which is on May 4?

BH: Right, that was the idea from the start — that Majestic would take over for the third game and take it from there.

UW: Because that’s how much time they needed to get on board?

BH: Right. They basically needed two months. So I get the first two games, and they’ll use the same uniforms for the second game that they did for the first one. I’m gonna grab some of the pants and shorten ’em, though. Like Clayton Kershaw, I felt so bad for him.

UW: Yeah, that wasn’t a good look.

BH: Well, it was kinda Bob Feller-y, don’t you think..?

UW: Uhhhh…

BH: Listen, Clayton Kershaw is so much smaller than his bio! They’ve got him down as like six-foot-two and 200 pounds [actually, even bigger than that — PL], and he’s not even close. He’s a little guy. And I felt bad, because he’s the one guy who when he put the thing on, he was a little, uh, apprehensive, a little concerned. And I thought, well, what’s the chances that he’ll pitch that day, one in five? And sure enough. But then he went out and nailed it, and I was really happy about that. I wouldn’t want the uniform to affect anyone’s performance.

UW: For this next throwback game, the visiting team is the Cubs. Which year are they wearing?

BH: They’re going with ’44, so that’s the block “Chicago” with the red underline. And we’re having socks made — I’m a little nervous about that, because they did not wear stirrups.

UW: Really? Are you sure about that?

BH: Yeah. They had socks with a little bit of white down by the ankle. If you look at the photos, that’s what they wore.

UW: Are you sure that wasn’t a white-bottomed stirrup with a really small opening?

BH: It could have been, but I don’t think so. I pulled like 100 photos and checked.

UW: What about that stirrup where there’s the woolen upper but then there’s that stretchy, elasticized bottom?

BH: I thought of that too, but that was more of a ’20s and ’30s thing, not ’40s. But anyway, we decided to go with the socks, because it’s easier to get the boys to wear ’em.

UW: And will these socks be white on the bottom?

BH: Yeah. Hopefully not too far up, just an inch or two. I’m trusting Twin City on that. If they get wrong, I’m thinkin’ I’ll cut the toes out and re-sew the socks, just to get the stripes where they belong. Hopefully the players won’t pull ’em up too high.

UW: What about the stripes on the undersleeves — are you doing that?

BH: I thought of you on that. I couldn’t get the stripes knit into the sleeves, so we thought about sublimating them, but we couldn’t find a good fabric for that. So we bought stock long-sleeve shirts and we’re gonna sew three rows of red braid trim on each sleeve.

UW [flabbergasted]: Are you serious?! Dude, that is hardcore! [A few days after this interview, Bob sent me photos of the stripes being sewn on. — PL]

BH: Hopefully, someone’ll wear it.

UW: Yeah, you’d better hope it’s not a warm day, right?

BH: It’s a performance shirt, so there’s no problem there. Otis, the Cubs’ equipment manager, said, “Go ahead, maybe I can get a few players to wear it.” Or at least the manager and coaches. So that’ll be ready to go. And we already have the hats — they’re unstructured, unblocked…

UW: Did New Era do those?

BH: No — they’ll do the hats starting for the third game. But for these two games, I used a local company here in Los Angeles.

UW: We were noticing that the caps in the first game had a very low-profile crown.

BH: Yes, very low profile, very unstructured.

UW: We also noticed the underbrims — the Dodgers had gray and the Braves had black.

BH: That’s actually navy, not black. I wanted to do green for both teams, ’cause that’s what I remember from when I was a kid, but they just didn’t have any green available. For this next game, both teams will be gray.

UW: Is this the first time you’ve done an MLB throwback game?

BH: Yeah.

UW: And will you be doing any others this year, for other teams?

BH: That’s all I have for now. But I’m hoping these two games kinda work as a springboard for us.

UW: Now, you also work the L.A. Kings, right? What do you do for them?

BH: I’m one of the equipment guys. Been doing that for the past twenty-something years. I’m there on the bench at every game.

UW: Isn’t that a full-time job?

BH: Well, I’m not the top equipment manager. I’m more like the fourth guy on the equipment food chain there. Glorified stick boy, you might say.
———
I’m pretty sure Bob’s just being modest there. This was only about half of the interview I conducted with him, by the way — it turns out Bob had a pivotal role in a key uniform development that we’ve debated for years here on Uni Watch (no, not the Broncos’ 1962 helmet). I’ll have that portion of our interview, probably on ESPN, later this month.

+ + + + +

helmet4.gif

Dark Horse Chronicles, continued: Reader Trevor Williams is one of our best researchers (in fact, he recently made major inroads on a longtime cold case, which I’ll be telling you about in the next week or so). He’s been intrigued by the mystery surrounding the Broncos’ early-1962 “Was it brown or blue?” helmet logo, so he started digging. Here’s what he found — or, rather, didn’t find:

From what I can tell, the new uniforms were unveiled in March 1962 and the switch from the dark helmet decal to the white decal was made in early to mid-October 1962. In AP Images, the dark logo is still being used on September 30, 1962. In an SI article from October 22, 1962, they are wearing white logos.

Here’s a UPI wire story about the March 1962 unveiling. No mention of the helmet decal.

The new uniform colors are mentioned in this 1962 SI article, but again, nothing about the helmet logo.

This blog has an interview with Jerry Sturm, who was on the ’62 Broncos. It includes this passage: “We talked about the 1962 helmet. His had the white horse. I mentioned that the history records said the first few games of ’62, they had a brown horse on the orange helmet, then changed it to white. He didn’t remember that.”

What really hurts this search is the lack of 1962 Denver Post or Rocky Mountain News content on the Internet. Outside of contacting the Broncos themselves, which I recommend, someone should go to the Denver Library and see if there’s an item about the helmet logo switch. The entire Denver Post archive from present to 1895 is available on microfilm at the library’s main branch, in the Western History section.

I’ll be contacting the Broncos about this soon (between the draft and the lockout, this hasn’t been a good time to contact NFL teams with uni-related queries). Meanwhile, any Denver readers wanna follow Trevor’s suggestion and start poring over microfilm from October of ’62?

+ + + + +

guthrie.png

Collector’s Corner, by Brinke Guthrie

Why does the best sports stuff come from the ’70s? I think the reason is that there wasn’t much merchandising in the ’60s, and by the ’80s there was too much junk. So the ’70’s are our eBay sweet spot for this week.

*Here’s a twofer — a great auction with an MLB bank and a Caps’n Bats Mini Sport Kit.

* Here’s a beautiful 1973 Chargers photo. This was the last year for the white helmets. [More importantly, it was the last year before the Chargers became the first NFL club to wear team-colored facemasks. — PL]

• Every home should have one of these helmet lamps.

• Here’s a rarity: Atlanta Flames tube socks!

• Never seen this NHL Rockies decal design before.

• I’ve shown this before but it’s worth repeating: Grab this 1973 NFL Playbook while you can. Primo. [Couldn't agree more. My copy is one of my most prized possessions. — PL]

Seen something on eBay that you think would make good Collector’s Corner fodder? Send your submissions here.

+ + + + +

Raffle reminder: I’m currently raffling off a free ticket to that Pop-Up Magazing thing I’m participating in. Details here.

Stirrups Club reminder: Robert Marshall has a new slate of stirrups up for sale. Details here.

Project Neon reminder: If you like neon signage and/or cool creative projects, you’ll want to know about Kirsten’s neon sign iPhone app and here Kickstarter campaign. Details here.

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: The big news from Sunday night prompted the Padres to play soldier dress-up last night. Meanwhile, the Nats wore stars and stripes, but I’m told that was a planned Military Appreciation Night that was already on the schedule and was not a specific response to current events. … Meanwhile, here’s a great uni-related subplot to Sunday night’s presidential address: The guy working the prez’s Teleprompter was wearing a Caps jersey (big thanks to Casey Gross). … New championship-anniversary logo for the football Giants. I’m guessing (and hoping) that this won’t be a patch — just a promotional mark. … Francisco Cervelli is no longer wearing the S100 helmet (plus that’s a pretty remarkable photo of the ball hitting the bat, no?). … Frank Bitzer notes that the “W” on Ryan Howard’s NOB appears to be bigger than the other letters. … Mike Hersh found a couple of great items from an old 1999 Leland’s auction catalog: a beautiful Dodgers satin uni and — the real prize — an absolutely spectacular prison football jersey with INOB (that’s inmate number on back). … Tiffany Walker found this cool Lady Met doll (with somewhat disturbing hips) in her grandma’s attic. … Here’s footage of a latter-day home run derby between Hank Aaron and Sadharu Oh. “It’s weird to see Aaron wearing the Braves’ 1981-1986 togs (which, naturally, he never wore as a member of the club),” says Austin Gillis. … New kit for AC Milan. “Too busy,” says Kenny Loo. … MLS note from Markus Kamp, who writes: “At Saturday’s Sounders/Toronto FC match, Sounders fans held up #11 cards, the correct MLS font, for Steve Zakuani (recovering from a broken fibula and tibia from a brutal tackle in last weekend’s match at Colorado) at the 11th minute. This sort of thing is one cool DIY aspect to soccer culture that I think deserves more attention in the larger sports world.” … Very interesting piece on firefighters’ helmets (thanks, Kirsten). … Beginning this fall, high school field hockey players will have to wear protective eyewear, but they way the rule is structured is stirring up controversy (with thanks to Scott R. Jamison). … New player exclusive Jordan Phase 23 Hoops designs for Ray Allen and Joe Johnson. … See this Joint Special Ops Command coin? Kristopher Hunt notes that it bears a striking resemblance to the Ravens’ alt logo. … More soccer news, this time from Timothy O’Malley: “Manchester City will be changing their numbers for the upcoming FA Cup final, disregarding the standard EPL font they have used for the entire competition and instead going with this font, which is identical to the lettering they wore in this years Europa League.” … Reprinted from last night’s comments: Yesterday Comrade Robert Marshall noticed that the late-’70s Tigers were wearing stirrups with at least five stripes. But now Ryan Fregosi has determined that the stripe count was actually six! … Edgar Latorre has launched a new site about game-used jerseys. … Italian reader Marco Scurati was at Adidas Italia’s HQ yesterday for the AC Milan 2011/12 home jersey launch. “The strip is not a throwback (Adidas doesn’t like a retro style in football) but is inspired by Milan’s 1901 jersey, the year of the first ‘scudetto’ (the Italian title),” he says.

 

147 comments to Uni Watch Profiles: Bob Halfacre

  • Jowen | May 3, 2011 at 8:00 am |

    Excellent piece today, Paul and Bob.
    That’s the stuff I tune in for.

  • Jowen | May 3, 2011 at 8:17 am |

    I was so impressed with today’s lede that I ended a sentence with a preposition and failed to ask whether or not the Reds have decided on their throwbacks for the Dodgers’ game. Any info?

  • Jerry | May 3, 2011 at 8:23 am |

    Awesome interview. That is why I love UniWatch.

  • Craig D | May 3, 2011 at 8:38 am |

    Howard’s NOB just appears to grow in the middle because the ends of his name slope away from the camera and the W is straight up and down.

    It’s a shame they couldn’t give Bob the entire six games. Why not reward the man for being able to crank those out in a short time period? I get the feeling like he did all the grunt work and Majestic is walking in and saying “Ok kid, you can leave now. Let the real uniform people take over”. Just seems like a slap in the face of the little guy. He did a tremendous job.

    Congrats Bob. Hope you get more of those deals!

    • RedWing in Colorado | May 3, 2011 at 10:30 am |

      I’m interested to see if the pants stay short once Majestic takes over. I suspect that they will, once again, fail in making the throwbacks accurate. I fear that we will once again see the pajamists making inroads.

  • Mark in Shiga | May 3, 2011 at 8:48 am |

    Great interview! Bob, I agree with Craig; the Dodgers should have let you continue to make whatever uniforms the Dodgers needed for all their throwback games.

    I really wish the Cubs had gone with something more interesting, such as their 1930s road jerseys with the more ornate CHICAGO, than the somewhat-dull jerseys they’re actually wearing. At least there won’t be names on the back, which will be an improvement.

    In fact, if the Dodgers had chosen any color other than pale blue, the Cubs could have work their awesome 1941-42 light blue road vests!

    I wish Bob could have been rewarded with the rights to make all the Dodger throwbacks, but on the other hand, from a collector’s perspective, I guess this means there will be twice as many game-used jerseys as you might expect. I really want to acquire one, so I’m hoping that that’s the case! (Say, could you tell us which Dodgers wear size 44? ^_^;)

    • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 9:39 am |

      Holy cow.

      “I’m trusting Twin City on that. If they get wrong, I’m thinkin’ I’ll cut the toes out and re-sew the socks, just to get the stripes where they belong.”

      I have a new hero. If teams themselves cared about their uniform history half as much as he does, throwback games would look so much better.

      Guess that also answers the question about why the Dodgers don’t have authentics for sale online yet.

      Bravo, Paul. Fantastic interview!

  • Kevin G. | May 3, 2011 at 8:53 am |

    Were the Chiefs or the Chargers the first team to go with colored facemasks? It appears they both started wearing them in ’74.

    • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 8:57 am |

      I guess if you count white as a team color… I’ve always viewed the Chargers as the pioneers on that front, though.

      • The Jeff | May 3, 2011 at 9:25 am |

        When the entire league is wearing gray and one team switches to white, yes it counts as a team color.

        As for the first team to use a colored facemask, it might also be the Philadelphia Bell of the WFL. I know they had blue facemasks, and that the WFL season started before the NFL, but I don’t know if the Bell started with blue or switched to it later.

        • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 9:30 am |

          According to The Helmet Project, they only wore blue (and the Detroit Wheels wore yellow in ’74 too):
          http://www.nationalc...

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 9:42 am |

          What do you guys think about this?

          I think, based on those photos, that the Packers experimented with painting their facemasks green in 1959. Apparently, the paint flaked off during games and they abandoned it in favor of gray.

        • Gusto44 | May 3, 2011 at 9:47 am |

          Thought I saw some black & white photo of a Chicago Cardinals player from the 50s once and he appeared to have a red or black facemask.

        • The Jeff | May 3, 2011 at 9:53 am |

          I should have remembered the Packers thing.

          Given the flaking issue, I wonder if the whole team used them or not. If it was team wide, then I’d give them the honor of being first, but if it was only a few players for a few games, I’d just footnote it and leave the official declaration of first to the WFL.

        • Ron V. | May 3, 2011 at 11:29 am |

          Unitas with blue mask. I don’t recall ever seeing it worn in game photos.
          http://kterrl.files....

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 11:52 am |

          I’m not so sure we should be counting hand-tinted photos.

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 11:59 am |

          It’s hard to tell from the few photos available, but it sure looks like the entire Packer team was wearing painted facemasks back in 1959.

          I’m not making any claim to who was first – I just don’t know. I was totally unaware of this possibility until a couple months ago. Other NFL teams may well have tried something like this, and if they had similar results it would also be unknown, for the same reason we can’t confirm Denver’s blue pony.

  • Kevin | May 3, 2011 at 9:15 am |

    July 1st, North Texas switches from Under Armour to Nike.

    • The Red Dog | May 3, 2011 at 10:48 am |

      I wonder which shade of green Nike will use for North Texas State.

      • Aaron | May 3, 2011 at 11:11 am |

        Mean Green?

    • Eric | May 3, 2011 at 2:45 pm |

      Link to confirm?

  • Jack | May 3, 2011 at 9:24 am |

    That 25th Anniversary logo for Big Blue sucks. The font for the “25” ruins it. Woof.

  • Broadway Connie | May 3, 2011 at 9:39 am |

    Lively ticker to complement the excellent interview.

    Sometimes a ticker link takes you to a website that becomes an instant bookmark. That happened today with Mr. Irrelevant (via Casey Gross, White House teleprompter guy in Capitals jersey) and Core 77 (via Kirsten, firefighter helmet design). Two cool sites.

    Plus Cervelli’s bunt, Lady Met, and that unbelievable prison football jersey.

    • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 9:57 am |

      Core77 is one of the best design sites out there. I actually wrote stuff for them way back in the 1990s. And, rather amazingly, that material is still up there on the site:
      http://www.core77.co...

  • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 9:46 am |

    “Meanwhile, here’s a great uni-related subplot to Sunday night’s presidential address: The guy working the prez’s Teleprompter was wearing a Caps jersey”
    I’m actually a little taken aback by that.

    Doesn’t a dignified occasion like a Presidential address deserve a little solemnity? I know that they probably didn’t know the content of the speech when he was called in to run the teleprompter, but a sports jersey in the room seems especially jarring once you know it.

    And maybe that’s it, that the whole thing was too rushed for him to change his clothes after being called in.

    • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 9:53 am |

      i read somewhere that he was called in straight from the caps/lightning game.

      • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 9:54 am |

        Makes sense. That occured to me when I was halfway through with my post.

    • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 11:18 am |

      Doesn’t a dignified occasion like a Presidential address deserve a little solemnity?

      Two points on this. First, he was called in for emergency duty, as happens, and odds are that whatever he was wearing underneath the jersey was less appropriate.

      Second, the video production people I work with dress like that all the time anyway. Including several former White House communications folks. In any newsroom, you have two kinds of people: The photogs, and the people who secretly wonder if the photogs got into the business solely because they were looking for a career where they could dress like slobs.

      But it certainly speaks to why it’s a general rule in official Washington that you keep a clean shirt, a conservative tie, and a blue blazer on a hanger in your office at all times, because you just never know.

    • Jeff Wilcox | May 3, 2011 at 2:40 pm |

      Just a quick point on the man in the Caps jersey… From his positioning, he was most likely the camera operator, not the prompter operator. The teleprompter hood hangs over the front lens of the camera, allowing the subject to look directly into the lens while reading. Therefore the guy behind it is at the camera.

      The prompter op is most likely at a table to the side, sitting in front of a laptop that controls the scroll of the text.

  • MPowers1634 | May 3, 2011 at 9:50 am |

    I LOVE when Paul gets to bring us behind the scenes!

    Great Job Paul and Bob!

  • teenchy | May 3, 2011 at 10:03 am |

    Nats’ Military Appreciation Night had been on the schedule, I received e-mail on topic beofre the announcement.

    Task Force Raven logo is no doubt the NFL Ravens’ alt logo, just stretched horizontally a bit. Somehow I doubt there’ll be any action taken.

    Very nice work by the Bobcat Athletic crew. Even though they use those awful blue-on-blue softball road alts, I see this as evidence that the Braves Get It™ to some extent. Of course, if they knew the Dodgers were paying for it…

    Speaking of Atlanta, I don’t remember those Flames tube socks but remember many late-night runs to Majik Market during my college years. Are there any still left?

    • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 10:19 am |

      “Task Force Raven logo is no doubt the NFL Ravens’ alt logo, just stretched horizontally a bit. Somehow I doubt there’ll be any action taken”

      legit question, not being snarky: why would there be any action taken in the first place? they’re not selling the logo on merch, right?

      • The Jeff | May 3, 2011 at 10:25 am |

        Well we are talking about the Ravens… you know, the team who had legal action taken against them for their first logo.

      • teenchy | May 3, 2011 at 10:42 am |

        Infringement – likelihood of confusion between the marks, or dilution – not confusion, but used in unflattering light or weakening the mark by use for unrelated goods or services. “Lessening its uniqueness” is a term often heard.

        Defenses would be fair use or parody.

        In this case and in this environment I’d venture that the Ravens will pass this off as “flattery.”

      • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 11:22 am |

        Some units do sell their coins, but I can’t imagine anyone this side of Dan Snyder objecting to a military unit using his team’s logo in this way.

        Dan Snyder, though, would absolutely litigate.

        • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 12:03 pm |

          Personally, I don’t think the issue is whether it’s actionable; it’s why a government agency would piggyback on someone else’s logo instead of coming up with their own. Seems like bad form.

        • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 1:22 pm |

          Except it’s not “a government agency” doing this. With challenge coins, it’s most often literally the guys and gals in the unit themselves, and/or their spouses and kids, often working with one or more of the various low-cost metal stampers. The custom coin-makers will generally either do a cheapo design to spec, using clip art of one kind or another, or they’ll use existing unit art, which often comes from the same sort of process of on-the-cheap design working with a patch embroider.

          To the best of my very limited knowledge about challenge coins.

          Besides, appropriating commercial art for unit insignia is nothing new in the armed forces.

        • Kevin Bresnahan | May 3, 2011 at 2:44 pm |

          My unit had a bunch of different items in a gear locker such as t-shirts, coins, shot glasses, and other similar items. We sold them for a little more than cost and used the “profits” to fund our Marine Corps birthday ball. The design was done by one of the Marines, and generally approved by the gunny or the sergeant major. It’s possible that the staff NCO who approved this design simply wasn’t a sports guy and didn’t know any better, or WAS a sports guy – a Ravens fan – and approved anyway.

        • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 4:07 pm |

          Also, rereading the original link, these seem to be challenge coins handed out by the commander of Joint Special Operations Command as personal tokens. The name of JSOC’s current chief? Vice Admiral Bill McRaven. The three stars on the raven on the coin represent a vice admiral’s rank – it’s equivalent to a three-star generalcy. So this would seem to be a pretty deliberate, one-to-one design issue, where the Ravens logo was deliberately used to represent a man named McRaven. Seems highly likely that it was either pulled from the web by whichever family member or junior staffer was tasked with designing the coin, or was pulled up as clip art by whichever metal stamper was hired to make the thing.

    • SLG | May 5, 2011 at 11:02 am |

      Hey, guys…just want to shed some light on this, as I have a connection with the team. The “powers that be” at the Ravens have seen challenge coin for JSOC – and could not be more thrilled that it utilizes the logo. The organization is an enormous supporter of our military – Coach Harbaugh has done a USO tour in Iraq. There’s not a chance they’ll take legal action…in fact, I think it’s more likely they will seek to use the coin for the coin toss of our opening game, which takes place at home on the 10th anniversary of 9/11. And if they can find someone from JSCO willing flip it – even better.

  • Bouj | May 3, 2011 at 10:23 am |

    That was an unbelievable interview. I live in TX, and I want to send him some business for the next time I need uniforms and such.

  • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 10:27 am |

    i love the US flag patch on jerseys, and it’s sticker on helmets. i have one on my hockey helmet, and would stitch one to a DIY jersey. but i know some of you dislike and even hate it. just curious, what are UWs thoughts when seeing a dirty US flag sticker on the back of a fireman’s helmet?

    http://www.core77.co...

    • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 10:32 am |
      • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 10:41 am |

        Personally, I’m not much in favor of them.

        There is, however, a huge difference between someone who works for the government (city, state or federal) displaying the flag on his uniform and a private company doing so.

        The Packers, no matter how much I love them, do not represent America. They represent Green Bay and the state of Wisconsin. Put one of those flags on instead.

        The US Mens National Team represents the United States in international competitions. They have the right to wear the flag.

        The NFL is just pandering, and cheap pandering at that.

        • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 10:49 am |

          “a huge difference between someone who works for the government (city, state or federal) displaying the flag on his uniform and a private company doing so”

          definitely true.

          i always loved the fact the steelers have the flag on their helmets.

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 1:16 pm |

          You mind if I ask what you like about it?

        • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 1:43 pm |

          i always think it’s cool that my country’s flag is on the back of my favorite/hometown team’s helmet. gives me a little pride to see. same as on the back of my own helmet. just makes me proud to wear it.

        • Cort | May 3, 2011 at 2:52 pm |

          It’s against the law to use the Texas state flag in advertising of any kind, including on non-governmental uniforms. This might be the most ignored law in the history of state government. The Texas flag is EVERYWHERE, on baseball jerseys and furniture store flyers and about anything else you can imagine.

          It usually doesn’t bother me much, but some of it — Lone Star Speedos, for instance — make me uncomfortable.

    • Jack | May 3, 2011 at 11:25 am |

      I like the US flag on a sleeve- not on the back though. On helemts, not so much. On MLB hat- on the side like they used to I also like.

      I general it should only be for special occassion or holidays, Memorial Day, Independence and 9/11.

    • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 11:31 am |

      Title IV of the United States Code, Chapter 1, §8:

      (j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations.

      Seems entirely sensible. Don’t soil the flag in order to play a game. Or anyway, don’t do that and pretend that you’re respecting the flag, honoring the country, or behaving like a patriot. If you’re actually engaged in service to the country, however, you can wear the flag, and if it gets soiled in the course of duty, so be it.

      And even though a national team athlete is representing the United States in competition, the U.S. Flag Code does not make an exception. If you’re an athlete, the flag belongs nowhere on your uniform, ever.

      • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

        I’d categorize the national team as a “patriotic organization,” but concede the larger point you’re making. The flag is simply not appropriate on an athletic uniform.

        • Broadway Connie | May 3, 2011 at 2:49 pm |

          Agree with Chance re broad consensus among many of us here that “The flag is simply not appropriate on an athletic uniform.” Not on hats, helmets, jerseys, etc.

          Without wanting to disturb that consensus, I also want to declare more radical sentiments. I don’t want to see the flag (as badge or sticker or lapel pin or whatever) anywhere on the clothing or equipment of non-federal, non-military personnel. Yeah, that means the Cub Scouts, VFW, cops, firefighters, state troopers or anything that might go under the “patriotic organization” clause of the Flag Code. I don’t even like the flag on military kits (we got along with no-flag unis for the first 200 years of the republic), but I realize there’s no hope on that score.

          In short, I want the flag to be a FLAG.

          National teams? They used to feature the US shield (usually a simplified version with five stars and five stripes) and/or just the letters USA. Bring back the shield.

          Cops and firefighters? Lots of friends and family for me, but no, not even these good men and women (well, usually, good) should be sticking flags on the backs of their trucks, helmets, etc.

          Sorry to offend, honestly, but I think that inappropriate uses of the flag tend to allow people to feel they’re being patriotic when all they’re being is fetishistic and divisive. Want to show patriotism? Drop $50 in the contributions box at a National Park.

      • Bouj | May 3, 2011 at 12:20 pm |

        The US Flag Code has repeatedly been deemed unenforceable because it’s in violation of the First Amendment. I don’t think teams shoudl be willy-nilly throwing flag patches on uniforms, but there is no legal way to stop them now.

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 1:17 pm |

          True, but not everything legal is a good idea.

        • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 1:34 pm |

          The U.S. Flag Code is inoperative as a matter of enforceable law,* but it nonetheless represents the established standard of etiquette for the respectful display and treatment of the flag. Has done for about a century. That’s why Congress keeps it on the books, absent any enforcement provisions, and even from time to time amends it on suggestion from the armed forces, the scouts, and various other civic groups.

          *Except for a few bits whose enforcement hasn’t been blocked yet that actually do carry the force of law in the District of Columbia, and that are sometimes used to shut down nuisance street vendors.

  • Rob H. | May 3, 2011 at 10:29 am |

    What about that AFL Full Color Football cable series that was on last year? Has anybody watched it in-depth to see if it has any clues about the Broncos helmet question?

    • The Jeff | May 3, 2011 at 10:38 am |

      It didn’t say a damn thing.

      Honestly, while it was a decent program, it seemed to focus in too much on the later half of the decade. Far too much time spent on Joe Namath & the Jets, for example.

      Even the NFL Films Broncos history video glosses over that era really quickly, jumping from the burning of the striped socks to shots and game footage from ’66.

      • MPowers1634 | May 3, 2011 at 2:37 pm |

        What about footage of the teams playing AGAINST the Broncos…often when I want to see pics of teams in hard to find specific uniforms, I will browse their opponents sites as well.

    • LI Phil | May 3, 2011 at 10:39 am |

      i never saw it (no showtime) but i believe someone on here was looking for it and said any footage that was shown didn’t have a look at the helmet in question (only the white bronco)

      good for bringing it up though — maybe someone can take another look; perhaps a still or some brief footage does exist

      • The Jeff | May 3, 2011 at 10:45 am |

        If the footage exists, the NFL/Showtime didn’t use it. I still have a copy from when it originally aired, it doesn’t help us any.

        /you still should find a way to watch it sometime though, it is interesting in other ways

      • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 10:46 am |

        I can’t believe that they haven’t released that show on video, or even iTunes.

        Then again, I’m still waiting for the recent HBO Lombardi doc to be released. I csn’t believe nobody worked out a home video deal when these were being financed.

  • Alton | May 3, 2011 at 10:34 am |

    That picture of Francisco Cervelli is really an amazing shot but the first thing I noticed was his poor mechanics. I am an assistant high school baseball coach and one of the things I really stress to my team is to watch the ball until it makes contact. Cervelli is looking straight ahead at the pitcher.

    • Perry | May 3, 2011 at 11:12 am |

      Alton, I don’t have time to find a source on this right now, but I’m quite sure I’ve read that this is physically impossible. The human eye cannot track an object moving that fast across as much of the visual field as it does once it gets close to the batter. I know players claim they see the ball hit the bat, but it’s an illusion. You can track the ball until it gets X feet away (I want to say X=20, but to be honest I don’t remember for sure), after that your brain does the anticipatory work.

    • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 11:47 am |

      It’s about angular velocity; for the bulk of the pitch, the ball’s path is foreshortened, so it has very little apparent movement. For the last 15 feet or so, it moves across the batter’s field of vision faster than it’s generally possible to see, both physically in terms of muscle acuity to track the ball and mentally, in terms of the brain’s processing speed for visual stimuli. I read once that a few test subjects have been able to track the ball to within about 6 feet of the plate. SI reported on this in the 1950s, and the basic conclusions haven’t been significantly challenged since.

      “Keep your eye on the ball” is about mental focus, not the physical movement of the head during a pitch.

  • Mark in Shiga | May 3, 2011 at 10:38 am |

    Bob, after typing out a long post, I realized I forgot to ask this: can we fans buy these jerseys, non-game-used, directly from you?

    A game-used one would be nice, but the more I think about it, the more I’d like to get one to wear in practice on my league team, and get my grandfather’s number 37 on it. He wasn’t a Dodger in 1944, but he was playing in high school in Brooklyn that year, which is pretty close.

    I’d much rather buy one from a small outfitter like yours, with a human face on it, than a big conglomerate. And yours wouldn’t have that hideous little MLB logo on the collar!

    • Ry Co 40 | May 3, 2011 at 10:42 am |

      i’m willing to bet bob’s not allowed to sell them. MLB is a real –corn-mother– when it comes to their property. but i’m curious to hear bob’s answer.

      really cool interview, by the way! major league DIY!!!

    • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 11:01 am |

      Be patient with Bob today, guys. First, he’s on the west coast, so he hasn’t even woken up yet. And second, he’s probably in a last-minute frenzy as he gets the uniforms ready for tomorrow’s game.

      • Mark in Shiga | May 3, 2011 at 11:25 am |

        Haha, Paul, I’d completely forgotten about Bob’s time zone! Sorry! (It’s quarter past midnight where I am!) And yeah, he would be pretty busy today.

        I’m confident that this 1944 “Brooklyn” jersey, with no MLB logo, can be made for fans. All it contains is a city name, not a Major-League-Baseball-trademarked team nickname. And since all the lettering is one-color, it should be cheap. (Cheaper, at least than the quadruple-layer Marlins jerseys, for example — I’ve always liked how the Yankees, with their simple design, have the cheapest jerseys.)

        The real 1944 Dodgers didn’t have a #37, so I wouldn’t be intruding on anyone’s turf if I wanted it as a shout-out to Grandpa. And it’s such a great design.

      • Seth F | May 3, 2011 at 12:01 pm |

        I sure hope he’ll let us fans order one of those…..this Georgia boy would love to get his hands one of those gorgeous Braves zip-ups. And like Mark, I would much rather support Mr. Bob than the big boys at Majestic. Keep us updated on this one please.

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 12:25 pm |

          I’m in, if it’s possible.

  • Austin Gray | May 3, 2011 at 10:39 am |

    There’s more to the Manchester City font than you might expect. At the base of each number is a small logo. It’s not a team logo, manufacturer’s logo or sponsor logo. It’s the crest for the City of Manchester. The crest also adorned their jerseys for their 1969 and 1956 FA Cup Final appearances.

    • The Red Dog | May 3, 2011 at 10:52 am |

      There were rumors they were trying to get permission to wear the City of Manchester crest on the actual jersey. Putting it on the numbers might be the compromise?

      I’m sure somebody knows for sure.

      • tim | May 3, 2011 at 2:28 pm |

        i submitted the coat of arms part in my email but it got it was left on the cutting room floor.

        They don’t need permission to wear the coat of arms(as they wore it for years) I’m sure this was the quickest way they(and Umbro) could come up with a jersey that was able to be sold. To embroider the fronts of the current home jerseys and put the arms on the numbers.

        • Cort | May 3, 2011 at 3:02 pm |

          I tried to send it, too. No luck.

          Back when teams didn’t wear any sort of crest — you were identified exclusively by team colors — it was tradition for cup finalists to wear their city crest on their shirts. So arch rivals like City and Manchester United wore identical crests when they appeared at Wembley.

          When crests came into common usage in the 70s, City adopted one that drew on elements of the Manchester coat of arms (it uses the ship, the shield and the Lancashire rose). It’s very popular with supporters, but the club can’t use it, because British courts have ruled that it violates copyright laws. There’s a new crest that’s been circulating among supporters, a variation on the 1972-1996 version, that looks pretty nice, but it’s never been used by the club.

        • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 3:15 pm |

          Violates copyright laws, or Man City can’t copyright it themselves?

          Arsenal had this problem, so they created a new crest. The club didn’t know who had created the old one in the 1940s, which is apparently a requirement for copyright in the UK (good thing the Yankees aren’t English).

        • tim | May 3, 2011 at 3:51 pm |

          I don’t think they can copyright it themselves. I read it somewhere a long time ago. I had originally hoped they would have worn Red/Black shirts in memory of Neil Young. I’m sure one off shirts for the FA cup final weren’t in the plans as far as merchandising it, maybe the away shirt for next year then.

        • Cort | May 3, 2011 at 5:38 pm |

          I think you’re right, Chance: they can’t copyright it themselves. But there was a lot of grumbling that United had somehow stepped in to block access, thwarting us yet again. City ended up with a sort of sad looking thing, that looks like it was designed by a President For Life (lots of stars, and an eagle bearing a shield, and a somewhat lame Latin phrase — Pride in Battle?) I miss the old crest.

          Stoke wears red and white stripes, so there’s no way they could have worn the red and black change kit, although it surely would have been a nice tribute to Neil Young (the greatest uncapped English forward of all time).

    • tim | May 3, 2011 at 7:14 pm |

      We are the home team though and i feel have ‘choice’ of kit for the day i’d imagine. That being said i’m sure sky blue was the first choice just as red/white is for stoke.

  • =bg= | May 3, 2011 at 11:01 am |

    PL you’re getting the Giants at a good time, they can score runs to save their lives.

    Meanwhile, did you find out if Lincecum ever had a deal with Nike and it fell thru? IE they are marking T’s with his image on them- a full body graphic- but he clearly has no affiliation with them on the field. (Mizuno only.)

  • RS Rogers | May 3, 2011 at 11:50 am |

    Love today’s lead photo. Three of my all-time favorite historical jerseys, in full throwback glory, together in one photo. Great interview, too, of course, but what a glorious image!

    Man, I wish the Cubbies would go back to that road script treatment.

  • John English | May 3, 2011 at 11:55 am |

    I’m sure this has been covered here before, but does anyone know of a place online that lists all (or most, anyway) of the Turn Back the Clock game dates going back a few years, at least?

    It’d be a great resource for someone (maybe me) to tackle if nobody’s doing it already.

    • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 12:22 pm |

      I’m not aware of one – go for it!

    • Bouj | May 3, 2011 at 12:23 pm |

      Not sure of an online resource, but Henderson’s guide is pretty comprehensive if you’re willign to spend the $30 or so to get it.

    • Rob H. | May 3, 2011 at 4:01 pm |

      I started to launch one last year, but just haven’t had time to keep it up…

      [url]http://throwbacks.jimdo.com/[/url]

      Maybe I’ll get it caught up some day…

    • Rob H. | May 3, 2011 at 4:14 pm |

      I had started to launch one about year ago, but just haven’t had time to keep it up…

      [url]http://throwbacks.jimdo.com/[/url]

      Maybe I’ll get a chance to work on it this summer

      • Rob H. | May 3, 2011 at 4:39 pm |

        sorry didn’t mean to double post – thought it didn’t go through

        • John English | May 4, 2011 at 11:26 am |

          Cool…I’ll send you a few things

  • Bernard | May 3, 2011 at 12:18 pm |

    I am LOVING the new AC Milan kit. My goodness, that’s sharp.

    • Chance Michaels | May 3, 2011 at 12:24 pm |

      I have the opposite reaction – it’s too busy when seen up close, and the stripes are so narrow they don’t read at distance.

      • Bernard | May 3, 2011 at 12:47 pm |

        I hear you, but I think the ship has largely sailed on uncluttered jerseys for these club teams, and although that shot isn’t the greatest, I think they’ll look pretty good in HD.

        I like the narrow stripes, I like the collar, I like the white adidas stripes… yep, I’m a fan.

      • George Chilvers | May 4, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

        Milan, through my formative years, always had narrow red and black stripes. It’s only recently they’ve taken to wearing broader stripes.

        I saw them back around 1972 against Everton – in narrow stripes. One of the nastiest teams I’ve ever seen, playing all sorts of tricks round the blind side of the referee, which actually led to an Everton player retaliating and beign sent off!

    • KevinW | May 3, 2011 at 12:51 pm |

      I like this part of the quote: “The strip is not a throwback (Adidas doesn’t like a retro style in football)”

      What the hell does that mean? Could it have something to do with the fact that many of the new nike kits have ‘retro style’?

      • Marco S | May 4, 2011 at 8:20 am |

        Hi Kevin! AC Milan asked adidas a throwback strip for next season to celebrate 110 years of the first italian title. adidas did a vintage jersey in 1999 for the centenary of the club (http://img40.imagesh...) but was such a “fiasco”, the fans didn’t like it at all. That’s why this time the strip is only “inspired by 1901 jersey”.

  • Redlegs87 | May 3, 2011 at 12:43 pm |

    would Bob Halfacre be privy to what the other teams throw backs they will be wearing?

  • DonS | May 3, 2011 at 12:44 pm |

    Re the Bronco’s helmet…….ask Kelly Tripucka to ask his father Frank – ol’ number 18! He’ll know!!

    • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 2:11 pm |

      Players are notoriously unreliable sources. Most of them pay little attention to such things.

      But let’s not couch the question. Don’t ask, “Why did they change the brown horse to white?”

      Ask, “Do you remember them changing the color of the horse decal on the first orange helmet?” If the answer is “No” he probably won’t be much help.

      Of “Yes”, ask, “Was the first horse brown or blue?” If he says, “Brown”, ask a control question. “So it matched the pantleg stripes and the stripes and numbers on the road jerseys?” If he says, “Yes” his recollections are invalid. Those items were blue, and we have color photos to prove it.

      The interviews I’ve read with both Tripuka and Gene Mingo very much DON’T do that. Every question is posed in a manner to confirm the horse was brown. No one flat-out asks either of them, totally cold and without framing the question or leading the witness: “What color was the helmet horse before it was changed to white?”

      • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 2:14 pm |

        At this point, I don’t think I’d trust ANYONE’S memory. I want either color photographic evidence or else a news item reporting on the decal switcheroo at the time.

        • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 2:47 pm |

          You and me, both.

      • Cort | May 3, 2011 at 3:06 pm |

        Sports teams collect pack rats. There has to be somebody — a front office staffer, a maintenance guy, a taxi squad center — who obsessively saved stuff. Somewhere, there is an attic in Colorado, with a box containing all of the answers.

        • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 3:50 pm |

          Or a box of color photos/slides from an some amateur who knew a Broncos staffer and was given a sideline photographer’s tag from time to time. That kind of person (not shooting for a publication but for his own amusement) would have been far more likely to be shooting color, esp. at a night game.

        • timmy b | May 3, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

          Perhaps it would help to narrow down WHEN the dark horse turned white.

          These were the first seven games of the 1962 season for the Broncos:
          9/7: Chargers (home, night)
          9/15: at Buffalo (night)
          9/21: at Boston (night)
          9/30: at New York (day)
          10/5: Raiders (home, night)
          10/14: at Oakland (day)
          10/21: Oilers (day)

          It looks like they wore dark horse at New York on 9/30 and they wore white horse at Oakland 10/14. So, we need to find a clear pic from the 10/5 Friday night home game with the Raiders. That game is when they either wore the dark horse for the last time, OR it’s the first game when they wore the white horse.

          If I had to make a guess as to why they went to a white horse, it might be because under the floodlights of a night game, the dark horse didn’t show as well as a white horse. Supposedly that was the reason why the Lions added a white outline on the Lion on the helmet midway thru the 1970 season (even though the Lion was on their helmet as far back as 1961).

        • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 5:09 pm |

          “the dark horse didn’t show as well as a white horse.”

          It didn’t even show up that well in day games, as evidenced by the photos Phil posted from that game at the Polo Grounds.

          That’s been my contention all the time. If it didn’t show up on black and white TV, they must have realized, why are we bothering to have it all? Hence, the change to white, which most defintiely couldn’t be missed in b&w.

          All about TV. It was starting to dawn on teams that more people watched one of their televised games than attended all their home games for the entire season.

          Someone once noted that sort of thing about the play/movie “Oklahoma”. In the first two days the movie version was in theaters it was seen by more people than saw it in-person during its entire unprecedented run of 2,212 performances on Broadway.

        • Cort | May 3, 2011 at 6:11 pm |

          A friend of mine is in his mid-thirties. His dad is 95. (It’s a long story.) Anyway, during World War Two, my friend’s father spent time in Manhattan, helping to write a training manual for pilots. He said his favorite part of New York was attending Broadway plays. He saw “Oklahoma” opening week; he and a buddy talked their way backstage and met some of the cast. “That Celeste Holm is a real nice gal,” he says.

          This has nothing to do with anything, except that Ricko mentioned Oklahoma. I just find it amazing that I know a guy who’s almost as old as the automobile…

  • moose | May 3, 2011 at 12:47 pm |

    um yes

    • Jeffrey Lowery | May 3, 2011 at 2:30 pm |

      That is absolutely brilliant!

  • MPowers1634 | May 3, 2011 at 2:06 pm |

    For all of you mets fans, check this out:

    http://www.eastbay.c...

  • moose | May 3, 2011 at 2:40 pm |

    wow, that was fast ryan. i figured there were more then 5, but six? six? who does even numbers? i find this disturbing. don’t the tigers know they were wearing evil? i know it was the 70’s and disco, and anything goes but come on. they have to be odd numbers man. and really with the feathers, that actually makes eighteen stripes, and that number clearly contains pure infinite evil. these unfortunately can not and will not be part of the revolution, i’m sorry, it is bears version or none for the tigers. my skin is crawling.

    • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 2:41 pm |

      I thought eight was evil, not six.

      • moose | May 3, 2011 at 3:04 pm |

        6 is just plain every day parking ticket when have your hazards on picking up kung-pao takeout evil. eight is pure evil, the work of boll weevels in the garden of corn. but all even numbers have shades of evil, and are not to be trusted, especially when worn or eaten. 4 is the serpent in the garden, it makes you think he is your friend. hey look at me, i look like an odd number, were cool bro, so you et four grapes, then whamo, no more eden. like 6, 2 is shifty too, he is just creepy 5, he’ll sneak up behind you when you aren’t lookin, knock you over the head with a broom handle and throw you in a van. evil, all evil. tap tap tap

  • Glenn | May 3, 2011 at 2:48 pm |

    Ok…..just got BACK from the Denver Public Library downtown, and did some searching through the Rocky Mountain News microfilm with the time I had.

    So far, nothing in terms of anything announcing definitively what the darker color was. There was one announcement, and I may have to go back a little earlier to see if I can find anything to clarify it, but it, like the other mention last week, is irritatingly absent in what it DOESN’T say, but it HINTS at supporting Ricko’s blue horse theory….will post the photo as soon as I upload it to photobucket, but it says:

    “Gone are the vertical striped socks of past seasons. Coach Jack Faulkner’s charges will be decked out in spanking new orange jerseys and white football pants with blue trim to erase memories of the gold and brown outfits worn last year.”

  • Glenn | May 3, 2011 at 2:51 pm |

    Also, someone else asked about the Full Color Football series that NFL Films/Showtime did a couple of years ago. I still have the entire series on the DVR, but there was hardly anything referencing the early Broncos at all, and I’m fairly certain nothing that would help us either way with this search. Had the Broncos been more competitive in the first couple of years, it would have been a totally different story, but pictures, especially color, are proving extremely hard to find.

    • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 3:46 pm |

      “…and I’m fairly certain nothing that would help us either way with this search.”

      There is nothing. DVR’d the entire series recently from NFL Network and watched it twice. Carefully. Expected little on the Dark Horse Helmet, but checked to be sure. Dark Horse helmet was worn several times for night games and at least once in the Polo Grounds. Very few people wasted color film on night games, and even fewer on the Titans.

  • Glenn | May 3, 2011 at 3:05 pm |

    here are the photos….

    1) from Sept. 7, Rocky Mountain News

    2) They switched to the white horse on Example of a basic on October 14

    • Glenn | May 3, 2011 at 3:08 pm |

      ignore the Example of a basic, by the way….

    • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 3:15 pm |

      “…to erase memories of the gold and brown outfits worn last year.”

      Yeah, the fans really needed to be weaned off that brown, alright.

      There was, after all, so much love for it.

    • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 3:22 pm |

      Great job digging, btw.

      Thank you, Glenn.

  • John Mahaffey | May 3, 2011 at 3:06 pm |

    No pictures or videos, but last night in the 7th or 8th inning of the Padres – Pirates game, Jorge Cantu was going for a foul ball and went over the camera pit railing and broke his belt. The game was haulted and a new belt was brought out to him mid-inning, which promptly broke as he tried to put it on.

    • John Mahaffey | May 3, 2011 at 3:07 pm |

      He then went beltless the rest of the half inning.

  • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 3:10 pm |

    I think I’ll mess with the heads of those who find the MISMATCHED CLEVELAND BROWNS’ STRIPING so disconcerting.

    Okay, first off, the uni was designed to be worn white at home, and with a plain white helmet. The orange helmet came several years later, with the advent of plastic (and originally had only a single white stripe, btw).

    So, let’s look at that first Browns uni, shall we?
    http://assets.sbnati...

    Working from the center out, the sleeve stripe pattern is…
    Brown, then two orange, then two more brown.

    The pant stripe is—oh my, oh my—the same thing…but without the two additional outer brown stripes, almost certainly because, in that era, that would have been considered WAY too wide for a pant stripe. Five stripes on the pants would simply have been too much. Excessive.

    Any differences on the brown jersey aren’t as significant. It wasn’t their basic design. The just flip-flopped the brown and the white. It was, in that time frame, their alternate.

  • timmy b | May 3, 2011 at 3:33 pm |

    Ricko,

    To follow up on the Browns ancient unis, when they did wear brown in their AAFC days (at least from 1947 thru 1949) the sleeve stripes were white/orange/white/orange/white, but the sock stripes were orange/white/orange/white/orange!

    They also did use an orange leather helmet on occasion in 1950. In fact, in the fabled game with the Eagles in 1950, the Browns sported orange leather lids. I think to contrast with the white football.

    • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 3:40 pm |

      Jeez, they’d be driving the OCD’s among nuts if they did that these days.

      I think maybe you and I are among the few who know such inconsistencies weren’t all that uncommon back then. Some of the time the sock suppliers might never have even seen the jersey of the team that had just placed an order with them.

      That doesn’t explain those ugly orange striped socks the Dolphins wore for at least one season in the early 70’s, though, does it.

  • Mickel Yantz | May 3, 2011 at 5:10 pm |

    Great shot of the 1972 Kingdome ceremony with Seattle County Executive John Spellman stamped a symbolic gold home plate into place with Adidas cleats. http://www.seattlepi...

  • Jim Vilk | May 3, 2011 at 5:33 pm |

    “Mike Hersh found…a beautiful Dodgers satin uni”

    Ah, that’s how you split the lettering on a Dodgers jersey. Wish they’d do that now.

    • scott | May 3, 2011 at 9:56 pm |

      No, then the jersey would be lopsided. The Dodgers have split their dugout jackets in that way, but again it only happens when there is a zipper and the sides are, you know, even.

  • Glenn | May 3, 2011 at 5:37 pm |

    will be spending more quality time at the library as time permits, will check all the Denver Post stuff throughout the same timeframe next

  • Jeff | May 3, 2011 at 7:24 pm |

    It looks like the Mets have busted out their stars and stripes caps early. Classy, guys.

    • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 7:40 pm |

      Mets Police has a screen shot:
      http://metspolice.co...

      • Ben Fortney | May 3, 2011 at 7:47 pm |

        Horrendous. Completely ruined the good vibes I got from them in the snow whites w blue sleeves.

  • Mickel | May 3, 2011 at 7:48 pm |

    Picture of Eastern Washington’s Championship rings with the red turf featured on the ring! http://www.flickr.co...

  • Steve | May 3, 2011 at 9:30 pm |

    I had one of those NFL playbooks back in the day. Those pictures on the listing made me smile.

  • LI Phil | May 3, 2011 at 9:49 pm |

    this sucks

    what the hell is wrong with the FDNYPD/first responder caps they used to wear to honor the troops/remember the 9/11 victims?

    oh that’s right…these are for sale (or will be soon) in the MLB store

    • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 9:59 pm |

      I don’t think it’s that simple. For better or worse (you can guess which one I’d choose), this is about saluting the military, not honoring the first responders.

      More details here:
      http://www.nytimes.c...

      I agree, though, that Dickey sucks. At least he seems to this year…..

      • LI Phil | May 3, 2011 at 10:24 pm |

        there are a few dozen other ways they can salute the military than donning the S&S we killed osama caps tonight

        but few of them are available for retail sale

        • Paul Lukas | May 3, 2011 at 10:39 pm |

          Right, but none of those other dozen things are first responder caps either. I was just saying there was a reason they weren’t going that particular route.

        • Ricko | May 4, 2011 at 12:02 am |

          “Rejoice not when your enemy falls,
          and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles.”
          –Proverbs 24:17

          “When you lose, say little.
          When you win, say less.”
          —North Stars announcer Al Shaver

          “When you get to the endzone,
          act like you’ve been there before.”
          —Bud Grant (among others)

          “There is almost no situation where it’s wrong to show a little class.”
          —Unknown

      • Robert S. | May 4, 2011 at 1:58 am |

        R.A. will be fine. Anyone who thought he’d have a below 3 ERA again was deluding themselves. Knucksies tend to go up and down — think Tim Wakefield a few years back

  • mike 2 | May 3, 2011 at 10:24 pm |

    What the heck is that in Nashville? Mustard-out?

  • Ricko | May 3, 2011 at 11:24 pm |

    Ethier singled in the 4th. 29 straight.
    Tomorrow Zambrano’s pitching. Ethier’s hitting .438 against him.

  • kyle | May 3, 2011 at 11:52 pm |

    NFL.com had a “worst football uniforms of other leagues” article. Kinda weird for them to hate on other leagues, huh?

    http://www.nfl.com/n...

    • The Jeff | May 4, 2011 at 12:24 am |

      I really, really don’t get the hatred for the Orlando Thunder. Oh no, a bright color! The HORROR!!!

      The jumbled mess shown in the NFL Europe shot for #3 is far, far worse than the Thunder.

      • LI Phil | May 4, 2011 at 12:30 am |

        two things…

        one: what the hell are you doing up at this hour, THE?

        and

        two: agreed; the thunder did not have a bad uni; in fact, had the seahawks gone the white pants route (instead of the awful navy pants/socks, which looked like dance tights), that wouldn’t have been the worst uniform in the history of seattle sports

        of course, the thunder helmet, with it’s clip art logo, and white facemask, may have been one of the worst ever helmets in pro football

      • Ricko | May 4, 2011 at 12:36 am |

        More importantly, were very many of them uglier than what the Bills have just left behind?

    • Ricko | May 4, 2011 at 12:38 am |

      They forgot the subhed…
      “More Reasons Why We’re Just the Bestest League EVER”

  • Ricko | May 4, 2011 at 12:11 am |

    Yeah, you’d think in the off-season they could talk about draft choices signing and free agents signing and trades and—

    Oh, wait…

  • George Chilvers | May 4, 2011 at 2:13 pm |

    Happy Star Wars Day everyone.

    May the Fourth be with You.

    Alright, I know, but there may be someone out there who’s never heard it.