Revealed at Last: the Jets’ Set

Screen shot 2011-09-06 at 1.37.51 PM.png

The WinniJets finally unveiled their new jerseys yesterday. Pluses: The chest icon treatment looks fine, that silly script isn’t being used as a shoulder patch, the typography is straightforward enough (although that truncated upper stroke on the 5 is annoying). Minuses: The sleeve striping on the white jersey doesn’t work, the league already has too many blue-on-blue color schemes, the Reebok wordmark above the NOB still rankles. Hard to assess the full effect without seeing the socks. Overall: Nothing to complain about, and nothing to get excited about either. Maybe they’ll grow into it. Further details here, and there’s an interview with one of Reebok’s designers here.

One other thing: As someone on the Chris Creamer boards pointed out, Reebok’s current template works so much better when the lower stripes follow the scoop hemline instead of staying horizontal. No diaper effect!

New ESPN column today — the annual NFL season-preview column, plus a big college football update. Enjoy.

+ + + + +

nunst032.gif

The Maryland costumes were discussed yesterday on PTI and reader Andrew Gegenheimer did some heroic transcription work for us:

Tony Kornheiser: Maryland beat Miami last night in Randy Edsel’s first game as Maryland’s head coach. Miami, as everyone knows, was without the services of either players, including five defensive starters and last year’s starting quarterback. In light of that, Wilbon, which was the bigger story? Maryland winning, Miami losing, or Maryland’s fabulous new uniforms that blew up Twitter?

Mike Wilbon: There’s no choice here, there’s no other story. Maryland’s winning doesn’t matter jack to people outside of where we live, which is, in Maryland, and near Maryland.

Tony: Well we live here, we live here, that’s right.

Mike: Okay, Miami is off the radar now because everybody knows they’re half a team. Their probation story coming down the line will be a story. What they do on the football field is nothing. Kevin Plank, a guy that most people don’t know, an alum of Maryland and maybe the most powerful…

Tony: Played there, he played there, he played there…

Mike: Former player, founder and CEO of Under Armour. This, these uniforms are so ugly, they’re brilliantly ugly, because this is going to set the agenda for what every school in America is going to do with their uniforms. They’re hideous, brilliantly hideous.

Tony: See, I don’t think they’re hideous at all. When I first saw them, I went crazy nd made phone calls to people, saying look at these uniforms.

Mike: You didn’t tweet?

Tony: I don’t know how to tweet, I did it the old fashioned way, it was like Pony Express. I called people up on the telephone.

Mike: Did you mail a letter?

Tony: It’s the state flag on both sides, the sleeves.

Mike: It’s hideous, it’s awful.

Tony: No they’re great, what’s hideous, Oregon’s uniforms are hideous.

Mike: Those are hideous too.

Tony: Maryland’s are beautiful.

Mike: Everyone, teams will scrap their uniforms before Saturday…

Tony: They should, good.

Mike: … and call Kevin Plank, this is what…

Tony: Boom!

Mike: Yes…

Tony: Boom!

Mike: They’re hideous.

Tony: No they’re not.

Mike: This is the way we’re going to go.

Tony: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Mike: Just like basketball uniforms when, when people, people meaning Michael Jordan, started wearing shorts to the knee, guys, old guys like you said these are hideous.

Tony: No, they were all right.

Mike: And before the next day only John Stockton had them
above the knee.

Tony: Did you see Georgia’s uniforms when they played? The red.

Mike: Those are, those…Geogia has a tradition. Maryland has no football identity, it’s a basketball school trying to carve a niche in football world. The University of Georgia has got Hershel Walker, they got people, what are they doing?

Tony: Here’s what they got, they got a big, fat dog for a mascot. Maryland’s got sweet uniforms.

Mike: The uniforms, Georgia, thumbs up or thumbs down?

Tony: Thumbs even.

Mike: Terrible.

Tony: Push, push, I push.

Mike: Garbage, Georgia’s got tradition, what are they doing with those uniforms?

Tony: Maryland! Terps!

Yes, well, I’m glad we cleared that up.

+ + + + +

Screen shot 2011-09-07 at 7.16.23 AM.png

More ephemera from the files: New post, featuring some really nice letterhead, over at the Permanent Record blog.

And what the hell, while we’re at it, a new post about the guy who should never be allowed near a microphone.

Uni Watch News Ticker: September call-up Justin Christian arrived just before last night’s Giants/Padres game and got stuck with a NNOB jersey and a handwritten NOB on his helmet. “As you can kind of make out, the uniform had been worn before, but I can’t quite make out the previous player’s name,” says Jeff La Haie. … Manu Ginobili’s “I” was peeling off the other day (good spot by Jeremy Brahm). … I don’t know how Marquette is gonna get through this basketball season with only four jerseys. … Overlooked detail from last weekend’s college football games: the return of the NC State helmet cart! ” It looks pretty cool with the wolf snout coming out of it,” says Mark Collins. Here’s a page showing how it looked in years past. … Soccer note from Ted Hill, who writes: “Ireland faced Russia today, and Irish defender Richard Dunne was injured and bleeding from his face. He came back onto the field with a kit with no number, but the referee wouldn’t allow it. So they wrote his number 5 on his shirt with a pen!” … It had to happen: a board game based on logos (from Jason Hillyer). … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: Maryland’s flag-based helmet is an idea that had already been taken by a Baltimore roller derby team. … Here’s a good piece on Michigan State’s original Spartan helmets. … Notice anything odd about these SI covers? “Look at the turf!” says Jon Solomonson. … Anyone know what’s up with this Rangers shoulder patch? (Spotted by Mark Kaplowitz.) … Colorado might be going Amateur Pacifist, at least according to the third-to-last bullet point on this page (from Matthew Robins). … Congrats to David Sulecki — the guy who produces those bat knob decals I’ve written about — who recently added the Flyers and Sabres to his client list. He’ll be supplying the decals for their helmets. … Good to see Stephen Strasburg back on the mound, but his once-impeccable pant-cuff blousing seemed a bit rusty. … Yesterday I asked if James Blake was putting cover-up tape on his sneakers. As it turns out, yes (thanks, Brinke). … “I am currently on a flight from Portland to Eugene, sitting next to Ducks football ticket holders,” writes Adam Walter, presumably utilizing the wonders of in-flight wifi. “I asked them how they know which colors to wear for each game and they said that, starting this year, their season tickets specify which colors the fans are supposed to wear for each game. They know they’re supposed to wear black this week, followed by green next week. They think yellow follows then more black.” … Want some retro NFL wallpaper for your screen? Look no further. Dennis Healy put that page together. … In a related item, Byran Rosenbaum is designing a wallpaper for every Arizona football game this season. … New soccer kits for Adelaide United, which plays in Australia’s A-League. “Here it would be considered a bad look to launch a kit without a sponsor, as it would indicate that you are not popular enough to have a company want to associate themselves with you,” explains Kasey van Puijenbroek. “So Adelaide’s sponsor is Coopers Brewery, the last of the family-owned breweries in Australia, which calls Adelaide home and is considered an institution in this city.”

 

241 comments to Revealed at Last: the Jets’ Set

  • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 7:24 am |

    The Jets definitely have too many shades of blue. I think they should have went with gray for their primary color.

    • Fred | September 7, 2011 at 7:31 am |

      That’s what I thought too. Now this is making me wonder if expansion teams like to start off with somewhat of a crappy jersey so they can make the obvious modifications several years from now to boost jersey sales?

      • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 7:38 am |

        I don’t know if I’d go that deep with the conspiracy theories… but for all the secrecy around it, it sure looks like it was sorta slapped together at the last second. I can’t say I’d be surprised to see some modifications made within the next couple seasons.

        • Andy | September 7, 2011 at 9:50 am |

          When you consider that most team identities are designed on an 12-18 month calendar, often even longer than that, ‘slapped together at the last second’ is probably the best way to describe this one, since the entire identity is going from pencil sketches to on-ice in about 4 months. When you’re on a deadline, there’s really not a lot that can be done sometimes.

        • Lloyd Davis | September 7, 2011 at 10:42 am |

          The interview with the designer suggests a rush:

          “Illegal Curve: Were there other prototypes that got rejected?

          “Dominique Fillion: For this one we didn’t have time to do that, it was really focused, we had one prototype to make, when we sent the design to the factory, we knew there wasn’t going to be any modification at that stage, we were extremely focused throughout the process.”

          The blue jersey isn’t terrible. But the sleeves on the road whites? Just because something can be done doesn’t mean it should.

      • Lloyd Davis | September 7, 2011 at 11:16 am |

        Nah, I think these days they pretty much want something that’ll sell right out of the starting blocks.

        Problem is, there are too many people with ideas about what will sell (owners, CEO, business development staff, sales and marketing staff, and the hive mentality at Reebok).

        And I also think there’s too much emphasis on “creating an identity” right off the bat. They’re trying to impose a narrative rather than let it develop.

        The Flyers and Sabres came up with pretty good designs out of the box. So did the Flames. The Canucks’ original sweaters weren’t awful, and it seems the detractors tend to focus on the crest. Even the Seals’ original blue and green unis, and that psychedelic pseal, were a good look overall.

      • Joseph Gerard | September 7, 2011 at 3:50 pm |

        I tend to disagree. The Carolina Panthers haven’t touched their uniforms yet, and IMO, for a team that could’ve gone the route of the Broncos, Seahawks, Falcons, Cardinals, Vikings, etc…they actually stayed pretty traditional. Must be Jerry Richardson, since he wants Cam Newton to keep a Steinbrenneresque clean-cut appearance. The Houston Texans basically are using a USC-like uniform with different colors–and they started play AFTER the Broncos, Seahawks, and Bills released their travesty of uniforms. The NBA, aside from teams like the Sonics and Pistons that wanted an NHL-like crest on their unis in the mid-1990′s, tend to always be pretty decent. And look at the Mets: they’re GOING BACK to their original uniforms!

    • Fred | September 7, 2011 at 7:32 am |

      PS, thanks for just talking about uniforms today, Paul. :)

      • Daren L | September 7, 2011 at 9:28 am |

        Bob Irving, who is the sports director at a local Winnipeg radio station, gave his thoughts on the Jets’ sweater unveiling.
        Here is the link.

      • chuck | September 7, 2011 at 3:15 pm |

        I rather enjoyed yesterdays lively banter!

    • T. Machnik | September 7, 2011 at 9:48 am |

      Dark jersey OK although that royal blue would have looked better rather than the navy blue as the primary color. I would replace the full sleeve navy blue stripe for a traditional shoulder yoke and I think the lighter blue rings would be interesting. Not so sure about gray, but thank goodness that there is no black.

      • Jet | September 7, 2011 at 10:50 am |

        The striping looks good on the dark jersey.

        However on the white jersey, the royal blue jumps out, its the first thing your eye is drawn to. Not good. Also the sleeve stripes overlapping the extended shoulder bars doesn’t work at all.

        -Jet

        • Carolingian Steamroller | September 7, 2011 at 12:27 pm |

          I like the new Jets uniforms. There’s been some discomfort given the seeming proliferation of teams wearing 2 shades of blue. However, the Thrashers were a team with two different shades and going into next the Blues will be the only other team to display two different shades for their non-alternates.

        • JDrive | September 7, 2011 at 2:05 pm |

          Kinda liked the fake ones.

          http://www.torontosu...

    • chuck | September 7, 2011 at 3:07 pm |

      A gray shoulder yoke on these jerseys would have looked nice IMO. Overall, I give the jerseys a B+.

  • Pierre | September 7, 2011 at 7:41 am |

    Jeeez…I hate to be the first one to keep this Maryland uniform bullsh*t alive, but I have to admit that Maryland’s state flag is interesting. I like the black and yellow stripe that crosses the flag diagonally. It’s a shame UA could not make a decent uniform incorporating some of the flag’s features. This actually did have potential but apparently UA’s designers have the taste and sophistication of thirteen year old mall rats.

    As for University of Maryland…you can’t build a real football tradition overnight or by adopting clown costumes for uniforms. You’re just grasping for attention like your benefactor, UA. It all comes across as second rate.

    • Fred | September 7, 2011 at 7:48 am |

      We get it. After your 50+ comments in the same vein yesterday, we get it.

    • Kek | September 7, 2011 at 7:54 am |

      Wait, so this is what it’s come to on Uni Watch? We’re apologizing for keeping a conversation about UNIFORMS going?!?! Maybe this is because you were top dog commenter yesterday on the record breaking day, I don’t know, but it seems absurd to almost be hesitant talking about uniforms on this site!!!!

      You can’t build tradition on uniforms? That’s pretty much exactly what Oregon has done. I’m not saying the uniforms in and of themselves turned their program around but their drought subsided and they place on the national landscape coincides with their makeover.

      The ACC is a crap football league. If Maryland can parlay this attention into on-field success it might be the them playing in a national title game in five years.

    • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 8:02 am |

      True… you can’t build a football tradition overnight. You build a football tradition by winning for multiple seasons. However… if attention-whore uniforms can bring in better players to help the cause of winning… there ya go.

      Maybe it seems like a bad gimmick to you, but it works. Look at Boise State and the blue turf, or the way Oregon has suddenly found much more success since joining with Nike. How would you suggest they go about attracting better players?

      The only bad part of this whole thing is how lame UnderArmor’s press kit was. Based on yesterday’s post, it reads like they took a Nike Pro Combat release from 2 years ago and just crossed out Nike’s trademarked terms with a crayon and wrote in their own.

      • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 8:06 am |

        The only bad part of this whole thing is how lame UnderArmor’s press kit was.

        Stop talking about corporate crap that nobody cares about and focus on the uniforms already. Jeez.

        • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 8:16 am |

          But I wouldn’t be being true to myself and all of my fellow commenters if I censored myself and didn’t post what I really thought. :)

        • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 8:19 am |

          Ah, your flawless logic has won the day. Let the flogging of the press release recommence!

      • Donald | September 7, 2011 at 8:58 am |

        The more pictures I see of the uniform one thing stands out. They still suck, but the attention to detail they went with is amazing. Players wore yellow bands on their right side red on their left. The checkered sleeve I’ve seen on a few players. Even the UA tabs on the visors matched the black/gold one side, red/white the other. They kept it amazingly consistent.

      • Pierre | September 7, 2011 at 12:23 pm |

        The Jeff: “How would you suggest they go about attracting better players?”

        Well, they could start by contacting Willie Lyles…I think they can get his number from Oregon.

        It ain’t the uniforms that’s getting Oregon good players…and Oregon is certainly not alone in that regard.

    • walter | September 7, 2011 at 9:30 am |

      Obvious Maryland T-shirt slogan to come: “We Hate Your Uniforms Too!”

      • Ron V | September 7, 2011 at 11:17 am |

        How about, “Fear the Flag!”

    • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 3:00 pm |

      “Tony: No they’re great, what’s hideous, Oregon’s uniforms are hideous.
      Mike: Those are hideous too.”

      I knew I loved Tony Kornheiser for a reason…

      • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 3:19 pm |

        Not that I thought the whole uni was *great*. Loved the jersey, though.

  • Anthony | September 7, 2011 at 7:42 am |

    James Blake is the tennis player. Jeff Blake is the “Where is he now?” NFL QB.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 8:02 am |

      Right. Now fixed. Thanks.

  • Simply Moono | September 7, 2011 at 7:49 am |

    Thanks, Dennis! =) I’m ready for Thursday’s game…

    • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 8:04 am |

      Needs more stripes. ;)

      • Ry Co 40 | September 7, 2011 at 9:14 am |

        “put the F-ing map of florida in the background… put a for sale sign at the bottom…”

        sorry, just popped in there

  • MikeG | September 7, 2011 at 8:24 am |

    From yesterday’s column a follow-up on Ohio State, it appears that the All In Sticker is not on the neck bumper but might be a sticker on the back of the helmet similar to the buckeye leaf. There appears to be a Block O sticker with writing that says All In through the middle on the right back-side of the helmets.

    http://photo.the-ozo...

  • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 8:25 am |

    I’m just glad there’s no Bettman piping or randomly-colored underarm panels on those Jets unis. They’re definitely more tolerable than some Edge unis have been.

  • Kyle Allebach @ School | September 7, 2011 at 8:29 am |

    I’m diggin’ the new Jet’s jerseys. It isn’t perfect, but it’s nice.

    RE: The retro wallpapers; there is no Eagles, and it makes me sad :[

    • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 8:44 am |

      Would you want the helmet wing or the full body eagle, and what resolution?

      • Kyle Allebach | September 7, 2011 at 3:06 pm |

        I would say the retro, full body eagle from either the 60′s or the 80′s. I mean, I wouldn’t mind the kelly green helmet either, but I kinda like the logo more.

        I use 800×600, so whatever resolution would be awesome.

  • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 8:45 am |

    Looks like some of the code in the ticker got jumbled up:

    “So they wrote his number 5 on his shirt with a based on logos (from Jason Hillyer)” – “with a” links to the pic with the guy with the handwritten 5, but “based on logos” goes to a dead link, suggesting something that’s supposed to go in between.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 8:57 am |

      Now fixed.

  • Payton | September 7, 2011 at 8:49 am |

    Those Arizona backgrounds are beautiful!

  • abmir | September 7, 2011 at 8:50 am |

    I must say: I think I prefer the higher cuff that Strasburg is wearing this season over last year’s mid-calf cuffing. Yes, the pants do kind of resemble football pants at this fit and (new) length, but I think the look is clean and athletic without looking like a novelty.

    Besides, the calves-on-display look is good jumping-off point for talking about the origins of high cuffs in baseball in general, isn’t it?

  • Todd | September 7, 2011 at 9:17 am |

    The fact that Paul hates the UA uniforms and the UA press release so much makes me like them that much more. They are far from traditional and I really don’t think they look all that bad. I like the other uniforms in their set and they have some great color combos. I live in MD and have always been a fan of their flag because it is so different from every other flag in the US. The fact that they are using that and all the colors from the flag in their uniforms is fantastic.

    As for the Jets uniform, I think I would have rather seen it with the wordmark across the front. I am sure they will add an additional sweater eventually, but for now this will suffice. From a consumer viewpoint, I am looking forward to what a tuque would look like with the logo on it.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 9:20 am |

      I have never stated — nor am I stating now — that I hate the UA uniforms.

      But people like to form their own narratives.

      • Todd | September 7, 2011 at 9:26 am |

        well then the fact that you picked apart the release the way you did yesterday, making sure not to mention the company so as to not give them the press they were aiming for was enough. It’s obvious you have a strong dislike for the corporate side of sports and logo creep and all that, but I think there is plenty of room for creativity, especially when it comes to uniforms. I can agree that a classic, clean uniform looks great, but I give UA and UMD a lot of credit for trying something different to build interest in their program.

        • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 9:43 am |

          You keep defending the design as if I had attacked it. But I have said nothing negative (or positive) about the design.

        • Tom V. | September 7, 2011 at 9:47 am |

          Paul, you called them costumes. Do the Yankees wear costumes too?

        • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 9:50 am |

          I called them costumes because I think that’s what they are (you’re free to disagree, of course).

        • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 9:55 am |

          You know what? I take it back — I did have a few negative words about the designs in yesterday’s comments. Thank god we settled that.

        • Todd | September 7, 2011 at 10:06 am |

          I don’t think you need to take offense. This being a blog based on your opinions of the world of uniforms, one would think you would have a stance. Most who read this blog daily probably know where you stand without you having to say anything. It isn’t a big deal that you favor tradition and the classic looks to anything that is made as an attention grabber. There is something to say about the simple design that goes into PSU and the Yankees and the Colts and I think they are great uniforms. ESPN will always give the story to a school like Notre Dame over UMD just because of the tradition. Some organizations don’t have that luxury of being able to draw attention without lifting a finger. I’m willing to give UMD (and UA) a pass. Sports are supposed to be fun. At least they didn’t try to mix purple into their scheme.

        • Todd | September 7, 2011 at 10:16 am |

          also, I have seen multiple posts here where you (or a contributor) have taken teams and made alternates based on the state flag where they are located. Kinda cool that a team actually went and did it.

        • Shane | September 7, 2011 at 10:30 am |

          There’s a right and wrong way to knock out a full flag jersey. IMO, I’ve only seen it done awesomely once:

          http://cdn0.sbnation...

          The funny thing to me about the whole UA/UMd thing is that the Ravens use a little bit of the flag in their uniforms as well, but it actually works for them. A flag that bold, you need subtlety.

        • Connie | September 7, 2011 at 11:18 am |

          Stimulating two days!

          I am a happy foot soldier in Paul’s partizan troop fighting the invasion of corporate advertising into realms heretofore considered beyond their reach. Front pages of serious newspapers; outer layers of clothing; the number and sequencing of time-outs; the names of civic facilities, not least parks, fields, stadiums and arenas; and the unhindered rental of elected officials. It is the hilarious irony of our times that these same corporate interests have persuaded a large and credulous population of frightened white people that the problem of the day is the dominance of the public sector. Oh, yeah: except for violence. Big Government is bad unless it’s that most paradigmatically socialist of all our national institutions, the US military.

          Um… where was I?… Oh, yeah. Anyway, It does seem that many sports fans under, say, the age of 40 – maybe the majority – don’t give a shit about those things that drive me crazy. I think it’s offensive for a uniform maker to call attention to itself, to take credit for designs, and especially to push for a new set of expectations in which “exciting” football “programs” feature six different uniforms that are changed every year. But a lot of people seem to dig it. I suspect that there will be reactions and counter-trends, and maybe it will be cool one day to dress like Albie Booth, but probably not soon.

          Hence, please do join in with all gusto, you ignorant young sheep.

          I like the Maryland jersey, by the way, but not the helmet.

      • Geeman | September 7, 2011 at 9:35 am |

        I don’t think the design is all that bad, if that’s your thing. I’m more of a traditionalist, but there are elements of the uniforms that I like. The problem with the uniforms is, however, self-evident: Maryland probably will not wear them again, and if they were so great, Maryland would wear them again.

        They were obviously part of a corporate stunt where the university took a back seat to the corporation making the uniforms. That offends many of us long-time college football fans, and that’s the whole point, which seems lost on so many.

        • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 9:43 am |

          I don’t know if Maryland really took a backseat here. All the talk seems to be Maryland this, Maryland that. Outside of Paul shredding the lame copycat marketing kit, I haven’t really seen UA get mentioned that much.

          I don’t think the typical TV watching fan was thinking about UnderArmor, it was more “holy crap! what the heck are they wearing” or “dude, that’s effing sweet” or some variation thereof. No one actually gives a shit about UA claiming the jockstraps are 20% cooler or wtf-ever.

        • Ricko | September 7, 2011 at 10:41 am |

          Not to mention it was great to see Maryland pay tribute to the Charm City Roller Girls.

        • Geeman | September 7, 2011 at 11:18 am |

          Uniforms don’t have to look like Penn State’s or Albama’s to be great or grab attention. See the Chargers.

          http://cdn1.sbnation...

        • Nate in the PDX | September 7, 2011 at 2:29 pm |

          Another way to look at this is that whatever we perceive as good design is always elevated by comparison to whatever we perceive as not-good design. If there weren’t uniforms out there which some of us considered to be crap, this wouldn’t be much of a conversation, would it?

          It’s certainly the case for me that my appreciation for “traditional” uniforms grows every time I see one of these preposterous costumes trotted out. So in that sense, I welcome stunts like this one pulled by Maryland… with the caveat that this is a slippery slope, and I fear eventually there will be more uniforms whose design I think is not-good than uniforms I think is good. We shall see.

  • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 9:17 am |

    Count me as one who prefers the new maker’s logo on NHL logos and the lead image is a PERFECT example of why. Using the old logo, even if the picture was blurred or from a distance, chances are 90+% of sports fans could identify whose mark it was.

    Looking at the lead images, I don’t know that more than 25% of fans (who don’t already know who makes NHL jerseys) could identify whose logo that is. It might as well be a random bar. I’m good with this.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 9:22 am |

      Not a bad point. But on teevee, it’s gonna look really annoying.

      • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 9:24 am |

        It’s not perfect – not by any means, obviously, because it’s still there – but I’ll take it over the old version any day.

      • Shane | September 7, 2011 at 10:19 am |

        Maybe the mullet should make a comeback and cover up the Reebok logo.

        • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 11:26 am |

          It’s funny to think that it was CCM/Koho that started putting their mark up there on NHL unis, four years before Reebok bought them out.

        • Lloyd Davis | September 7, 2011 at 11:30 am |

          Shane may be on to something. The CCM logo was on the hem during the era of Mike Ricci.

          Jagr will be playing for the Flyers this season. But I think he abandoned that look before he went to the Russian league.

        • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 2:07 pm |

          It was Nike who first started doing it in the mid-1990s. They had contracts with Philly, Chicago, San Jose, and Detroit. They did it because it was easier to see their logo when the commentators were talking about specific players.

        • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 3:27 pm |

          Nike had the swoosh on the unis, yes, but in the traditional hemline position where CCM and Starter also had theirs. I’ve never seen a Nike NHL gamer from the 1996-99 period that had the swoosh at the collar; certainly not a Red Wings jersey from that era.

        • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 6:04 pm |

          Sorry, Rob – you’re right. I was thinking of the international jerseys. Nike won that contract from CCM.

          The NHL jerseys were not allowed to have the logo on the collar at that point. It was when CCM won the league-wide contract that they moved them to the neckline.

          Good call, Rob.

        • JR Boucicaut | September 7, 2011 at 6:52 pm |

          Reebok had the contract before Nike in the IIHF, not CCM.

        • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 8:07 pm |

          Sorry, JR. Freudian uni-slip. “Outbid CCM” would have been better than “won from”.

        • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 8:18 pm |

          If you really want to talk about high placement of makers marks on international jerseys – I give you Tackla, whose diamond logo graced the shoulders of many an IIHF jersey in the early 1990s (and possibly earlier).

          Here are a few jersey examples:
          Poland: http://www.classicau...
          Canada: http://www.classicau...
          1992 “Unified” Team: http://www.classicau...

          Reebok followed suit in 1994 with their vector logo on the shoulders of the Olympic/IIHF unis, and then Nike’s World Cup unis in 1996 had the swoosh on the shoulders. The IOC then stepped in with the curtailing of such blatant branding, resulting in the swoosh being moved to the back of the collar starting in 1998. Positively sedate in comparison…

  • Patrick_in_MI | September 7, 2011 at 9:18 am |

    Wow, I love those retro NFL wallpapers! But no Chargers?

    • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 9:26 am |

      Well a lightning bolt is a lightning bolt… unless you want to use that silly shield logo there’s not much you can do to be retro with the Chargers.

      • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 9:49 am |

        …but if you want a retro Chargers wallpaper, I can make a couple, just let me know what logo/resolution you’d want.

  • Patrick_in_MI | September 7, 2011 at 9:23 am |

    * Heads Up *

    That NFL retro wallpapers page has a link to retro baseball wallpapers as well. However, my antivirus program went red alert when I clicked on it.

  • Patrick_in_MI | September 7, 2011 at 9:29 am |

    Breaking news…

    A Russian jet has crashed upon takeoff, killing all 36 aboard. Apparently it was carrying KHL players including Ruslan Salei and Brad McCrimmon.

    http://news.blogs.cn...

    • Shane | September 7, 2011 at 9:57 am |

      http://en.wikipedia....

      Wow, a lot of familiar names on there. Absolutely terrifying.

      • Obbs | September 7, 2011 at 10:31 am |

        Oh my God. What a terrible tragedy.

  • Graf Zeppelin | September 7, 2011 at 9:51 am |

    Re: Winnipeg Jets –

    Not a fan of the italicized numerals. Otherwise good.

  • Shane | September 7, 2011 at 9:54 am |

    Absolutely loving the Jets home uni.

  • Kub | September 7, 2011 at 10:18 am |

    How can anyone trying to do “Retro NFL Wallpaper” do a Ravens wallpaper?

    • The Jeff | September 7, 2011 at 10:23 am |

      Because the team changed logos. Retro is not limited to the 60′s. Plus, in the Ravens case, the original logo is far better than the current one.

      • Ricko | September 7, 2011 at 10:39 am |

        You got that right.
        Always believed it was shame that rather than make a deal with the layperson who essentially came up with this gothic, spooky old house, Poe-esque beauty…
        http://www.thelossco...
        …the Ravens were willing to settle for Jeremy from SECERT OF NIMH…
        http://1.bp.blogspot...

        • Todd | September 7, 2011 at 11:03 am |

          a coworker of mine has a Testeverde uniform from the “early days” of the Ravens with that emblem on it. I like that jersey a lot and really wish they had stuck with that logo.

    • Aaron | September 7, 2011 at 10:50 am |

      I was a little disappointed there was no Colts, with the bucking horse.

      • Ed Hughes | September 7, 2011 at 12:17 pm |

        …and with a big “BALTIMORE” above the horse, where it belongs.

  • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 10:40 am |

    Cool sports numerology going on today, for myself, at least … Thirteen years ago today (and ten years after being in the park to see Wrigley Field’s first night game on 8/9/88), I was fortunate enough to be in the park watching Mark McGwire’s record breaking home run on 9/8/98. I suppose good things happen when a date has a bunch of eights and nines in it.

    • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 11:53 am |

      Duh … feeling silly … stupid Labor Day …

  • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 10:45 am |

    Uni-related caption contest today from my Page 2 colleague Kurt Snibbe:
    http://espn.go.com/e...

  • ScottyM | September 7, 2011 at 10:47 am |

    Well, today’s tidbit on where the concept of Marylaugh uniforms came from proves once again, Under Armor is nothing more than a ripoff organization.

    Well done, UA. You’re the LA Gear of the 00s. The generic of the sporting apparel industry. The “store brand.” Okay, not really. But you get the point, way to knick other peoples’ work.

    • Tim N | September 7, 2011 at 3:20 pm |

      Have you actually ever worn UA clothing? It is excellent, high quality stuff. I am not a fan of the Maryland uniforms, either, but I can still see that the company produces a quality product.

      • Kek | September 7, 2011 at 3:45 pm |

        Yeah, it’s laughable to compare UA to LA Gear! UA has the market, still, on lock when it comes to the compression gear, the hot/cold gear and this new charged cotton. Maybe you hate them jumping into the fray guns ablazing with these Maryland designs, but don’t downplay what the company has achieved to date.

  • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 10:47 am |

    Today’s ESPN column is up:
    http://espn.go.com/e...

    • Tim E. O'B | September 7, 2011 at 7:26 pm |

      Thanks for the love in the ESPN article. It’s always cool to see my name up in the lights.

  • Jimbo | September 7, 2011 at 10:54 am |

    Does anyone have any idea why Under Armour spells its name with a u? I always assumed they were a British or Canadian company because of the spelling, but in the wake of this uniform fiasco and the foaming-at-the-mouth reaction to criticism by Terp homers, I’ve discovered they are indeed from Maryland.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 12:11 pm |

      That’s a really good question. Anyone..?

      • Tim E. O'B @Work | September 7, 2011 at 2:39 pm |

        It probably is for trademarking reasons, Many companies with generic sounding names cannot trademark that identity because the Gov’t says it’s too general. This happened in Bloomington IN when I was in school at IU. A pizza place called Pizza Express got sued for the use of the phrase ‘Big Ten’ in their ‘BigTen Special’ (a pizza and two drinks for about $10).

        Once they realized they may be open to other infringements, they decided to Trademark their name but were rejected and ended up changin their name to Pizza X (which was already their nickname).

        This is why you see many companies with Xs or Zs or obvious misspellings of common words – they are the only way to trademark somthing so commonplace. Since Armour is not the American English way of spelling armor, the gov’t can’t say that the name isn’t original enough.

        …that or they just like how it looks.

    • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 12:12 pm |

      It could be a trademark thing. They were afraid of the phrase ‘under armor’ becoming shorthand for ‘performance doubleknit base layer,’ which it has to some extent. By using the alternative spelling they’re able to survive the trademark becoming generic.

    • Mike 2 | September 7, 2011 at 12:26 pm |

      As a Canadian, I’ll go with “because its the correct way”.

      • George Chilvers | September 7, 2011 at 6:19 pm |

        You mean some people spell “armour” without a “u”? That’s just plain wrong ;)

        • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 7:40 pm |

          to borrow a phrase from tommy pischedda…

          “fuckin’ limeys”

          ;)

  • Neil Hochman | September 7, 2011 at 10:58 am |

    Found another picture from the NY Rangers tour of FDNY houses yesterday. The patch in question is from the Garden of Dreams foundation. http://twitgoo.com/4...

  • Obbs | September 7, 2011 at 11:06 am |

    When Justin Christian gets his jersey with NOB I hope it comes with a number lower than the 70s

    • Tim N | September 7, 2011 at 3:21 pm |

      Pudge Fisk begs to differ.

  • Ben Fortney | September 7, 2011 at 11:07 am |

    Logan Morrison’s low cut ‘rups initiated a Gary and Keith convo on SNY last night. Highlights from my recollection:

    - Keith called the low cut ‘rups “ankle chokers.” He hated wearing them and hates the look.

    - Keith would take his team issued rups to the local dry cleaner in St. Louis to have elastic added to them, so he could get the ribbon effect.

    - Gary wondered if the dry cleaners even knew what a baseball stirrup was (my guess implying that dry cleaners – usually immigrants – wouldn’t know baseball)

    - Keith stated in St. Louis they knew exactly what they were because “it’s a baseball town” and it was hard to mistake the stripes on the Card’s ‘rups. And of course they’d do him that service because they loved him. [Who wouldn't!]

    - Gary called the STL ‘rups “hip waders”

    • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

      The implication is racist/insensitive/whatever you would call it, but even if he’s talking about the stereotypical dry cleaner, don’t they play baseball in most of East Asia anyways?

      • Ben Fortney | September 7, 2011 at 1:26 pm |

        That was my thought… but he also made the point that a stirrup isn’t exactly a normal looking piece of laundry.

        • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 7:43 pm |

          who the fuck sends stirrups to the dry cleaners?

  • Patrick | September 7, 2011 at 11:13 am |

    I don’t play a lot of video games, but I was wondering what happens when a college team wears a one-off uniform (such as GA and Boise St.). Does it become available in the EA game? Would it be in next year’s game?

    • corndog | September 7, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

      Sometimes yes, sometimes no. For NCAA 12, if you preordered the game from certain retailers, you were given a code that you could use to unlock some of the 2010 Pro Combat uniforms to use in the game. So, I would think that this year’s pro combats will be available for next year’s game.

      As for Madden 12, many one-off styles already in there, for example, the Packers 1920′s throwbacks they wore last year, the Eagles yellow and blue uniforms, all of the AFL 50th anniversary uniforms, the Seahawks neon green, etc.

    • Wade Harder | September 7, 2011 at 12:24 pm |

      It’s usually available as DLC after the video game is released. I know on this year’s NCAA 12 that five of the teams Pro Combat were free if you shared the demo with someone. The other five were a bonus if you pre-ordered the game from GameStop.

      • Patrick | September 7, 2011 at 2:27 pm |

        Thanks. I was curious about that.

  • Tom Seeley | September 7, 2011 at 11:13 am |

    The WinniJets uniforms beg the question — how much more bland could these be? And the answer is none, none more bland. Jets will not sell enough of these to overcome their small arena and in a few years we’ll be looking at Portland as a viable NHL alternative.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 11:15 am |

      Actually, these uniforms remind me a lot of the Tampa Bay Rays’ current set, both in terms of color palette and overall feel. Inoffensive, unremarkable, middle of the road — hard to get worked up one way or the other.

      • Ben Fortney | September 7, 2011 at 11:20 am |

        Oh how I wish Tampa had incorporated yellow into their current scheme. Navy, baby/sky/Carolina, yellow woulda been killer (and still inoffensive.)

        • Graf Zeppelin | September 7, 2011 at 1:16 pm |

          I wish they had kept green as primary color. Only one MLB team wears green; everyone else wears blue, red, and/or black.

      • Daren L | September 7, 2011 at 1:16 pm |

        Here is what Ryan Kennedy, logo/uniform expert staffer at The Hockey News had to say:

        “I think the Jets really scored here. The double blue seals it for me. I really like the colours and how they kept the look simple. For what is technically a ‘new’ team, the Jets didn’t get carried away with design elements, often a trap for franchises trying to make an impact. You could tell they wanted an ‘instant classic’ kind of feel and I think they’ve succeeded in that respect. The white jersey in particular looks sharp.

        “Many teams try to be flashy because they’re usually from cities where they need to make a splash. But with the Jets’ legacy (the franchise) had no impetus to do something crazy like put ‘Winnipeg’ down the arms or something like that. They had some freedom here and it’s interesting to see how clean is the look they went with. It’s a jersey that could have been around 30 years ago or one year ago.”

        Link

      • Tom Seeley | September 7, 2011 at 10:18 pm |

        The comparison to the Rays very well summarizes my ‘bland’ comment. Seems with a clean slate one could come up with something visually interesting. My real gripe is about the staid logo which seems more appropriate for corporate letterhead than a sports jersey.

    • AP | September 7, 2011 at 11:39 am |

      Not only are they bland but this entire military theme has gone too far. Hockey players walking off Hercules transport planes, CF-18 Hornet jets in the background and politicians speaking at the event solemnly invoking the good works done by the Royal Canadian Air Force is making the Winnipeg Jets look like a unit of the Department of National Defence.

      The jerseys — much like the logo — are staid, boring and corporate. I wouldn’t be surprised if a Department of National Defence bureaucrat was assigned to the design team.

      The previous Jets logo was fun and most certainly not an homage to Canada’s military.

      I have to say this new Winnipeg Jets as air force theme is turning me off this team and I was a big supporter of Winnipeg’s return to the NHL.

      • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 2:23 pm |

        The previous logo was all about how Winnipeg was going to be a major international airport and cargo center in the 1970s. Winnipeg had a major international airport, but air travel has expanded since the 1970s (in case you hadn’t noticed). Almost every city has an “international airport”.

        Times are a-changin’… and so is the team. Get onboard, or get out of the way.

    • Tom V. | September 7, 2011 at 11:48 am |

      Yeah they’re too bland. Does anyone know what the winnipeg or manitoba flag looks like?

      [sarcasm off]

      • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 2:27 pm |

        Manitoba’s flag is a predominantly red flag with the Union Jack in the upper left corner and the provincial coat of arms on the right side.

        Winnipeg’s flag is blue and yellow, split diagonally. The blue is close to the “aviator” blue used in the Jets colour scheme. The middle of the flag has the city’s crest on it.

        We’re not Maryland. Thank you very much.

    • Lloyd Davis | September 7, 2011 at 11:50 am |

      “how much more bland could these be? And the answer is none, none more bland.”

      Well, at least they don’t have to play in Cleveland. Now, if only the jerseys had been made in Doubly.

      • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 12:17 pm |

        Where did that come from? It’s not like they used to be the Barons or something.

        • Ricko | September 7, 2011 at 1:08 pm |

          A shot at the WHA I’d guess.

        • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 1:28 pm |

          spinal tarp

        • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 1:37 pm |

          Thanks Phil. I should’ve caught that.

      • Tom Seeley | September 7, 2011 at 10:20 pm |

        well said

    • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 2:15 pm |

      For eff’s sake, I’m tired of this crap. Clearly, Tom is up on NHL trends so I’m gonna make an example out someone. Sorry, Tom, but you drew the short straw.

      The Jets are outselling Calgary Flames gear… IN CALGARY. The Jets are outselling every other team combined in Winnipeg 10-1. The Jets are the hottest moving merchandise right now at the NHL store.

      Here’s a tip for everyone because I’m tired of reading it: quit’cher bitchin’. It’s not up to us to decide what the team wears. TNSE chose these colours, this design, and this logo as to how their brand is going to represented. If you want to see it changed, buy the team.

      If you don’t like it personally, just say so. But stop making idiotic statements about the team moving because you don’t like the new look. Otherwise, the Terps would have folded their tents, anyone who went BFBS would be out of a job, and anyone who went “off the board” wouldn’t have a team to speak of.

      • Mike 2 | September 7, 2011 at 3:06 pm |

        There are probably more ex-Winnipegers living in Calgary than there are native Calgarians. Most of us have already ‘switched’ back to the Jets and have circled the Jets visit on March 9th on the calendar.

        When the Coyotes came to town, you’d see a TON of Jets jerseys in the crowd.

      • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 4:44 pm |

        I’m not sure how something unveiled yesterday can be “outselling” anything.

        In any case, that’s not particularly relevant. Buffaslug merch outsold everything else when it was introduced too. The newest thing *always* outsells everything else. Rangers fans already have a Rangers jersey; Jets fans don’t yet have a Jets jersey.

        Even if you could adjust for that factor, sales figures are not a barometer of quality. If they were, Brittney Spears would be a musical genius, etc….

        I’m not trying to make an argument against (or in favor of) the Jets jerseys. I’m just saying that basing your arguments on sales figures isn’t the way to go.

        • Daren L | September 7, 2011 at 5:42 pm |

          Paul – the original point of contention was the notion that a team would have to up and move to a new city simply because they couldn’t ‘sell’ enough jerseys.

          Would you be willing to comment on that?

          At any rate, Teebz was clearly talking about ALL merchandise that’s currently available for the Winnipeg Jets. We all realize that the jerseys will not be available to the general public for weeks to come.

          It seems from your comment above that you missed the point big time.

        • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 5:54 pm |

          It certainly is the way to go, Paul. We’re not talking jerseys, but merchandise: T-shirts, hats, toques, anything that has a logo. Y’know, the same stuff that everyone else has available.

          Do people buy it because it’s new? Sure. That’s fine. But would people buy if it were new and garish? The numbers wouldn’t be as strong as they are.

          Equating merchandise sales to a franchise moving is idiotic. Otherwise, the Buffalo Sabres wouldn’t have been sold to a billionaire since their sales were so strong with the Slug logo.

          In any case, my argument is as valid as Tom’s statement: “Jets will not sell enough of these to overcome their small arena and in a few years we’ll be looking at Portland as a viable NHL alternative.”

          Total horsepoop comment.

        • Paul Lukas | September 8, 2011 at 12:00 am |

          It seems from your comment above that you missed the point big time.

          Yup, I did. Was scanning comments and didn’t read the thread properly. My bad. Carry on.

    • Patrick | September 8, 2011 at 3:07 am |

      http://www.theglobea...

      go all the way back to June for a straightforward analysis on why the Jets will work, simply on ticket sales alone.

  • MC | September 7, 2011 at 11:48 am |

    Really disappointed the retro NFL wallpapers didn’t include one from the Eagles.

    The flying bird from the 80s and 90s was by far their best logo, and I wish they still used it. The jerseys that Cunningham wore were spot on perfect.

    • corndog | September 7, 2011 at 12:20 pm |

      Completely agree. I loved the wordmark they had back then, too. Much better than what they have now.

  • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 12:10 pm |

    I’ll be on OTL tomorrow afternoon.

    And probably All Things Considered later today (that isn’t yet confirmed, though).

    I’m sure you can all guess the topic. (Hint: Not the WinniJets.)

    • Jim BC | September 7, 2011 at 1:03 pm |

      I don’t get where “WinniJets” comes from. Is it to distinguish from NY Jets? I don’t like it.. is it too much just to type the “peg” and a space?

      • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 1:12 pm |

        I live in NYC, where the term “Jets” is used a lot. So when I type “Jets,” my brain instinctively thinks “NY Jets.” So I’ve been using WinniJets, as much for my own sake as anyone else’s.

        Just need to get my brain oriented to the new team.

      • Ben Fortney | September 7, 2011 at 1:30 pm |

        Blue on blue unis… can we call em the “Wets”?

    • =bg= | September 7, 2011 at 10:07 pm |

      All Things Considered!
      So you can showcase that NPR Voice.

      I’m tellin’ ya——–there’s money in that voice.

  • Brad | September 7, 2011 at 12:29 pm |

    Paul, I enjoyed the ESPN column. One Syracuse note, the team is wearing an “88″ decal on the back of their helmets to honor former Orange great and Pro Football Hall of Fame TE John Mackey who died in July.

    The “88″ is to the left of the striping in this photo:

    http://www.suathleti...

  • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 12:37 pm |

    Good column. I do have one question though. Have the Texans ever worn their red jerseys without the red pants? They publish their uniform schedule every year and I don’t recall ever seeing the red without being monochrome on there.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 1:05 pm |

      You know, I was kinda wondering about that myself, but the question didn’t quite make it from the back of my brain to the front. Anyone..?

    • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
      • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 1:38 pm |

        What year is that? I may only be thinking back to 2008 and earlier that they hadn’t.

        • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 1:56 pm |

          not sure, but i think they’ve been doing it once a season (and once in the haliburton clown suits) for the past several years…

    • Rob H. | September 7, 2011 at 3:39 pm |
  • John in Athens | September 7, 2011 at 12:50 pm |

    A local record store is being replaced by an Under Armour store in Athens, Ga.

    http://flagpole.com/...

    And the locals used to complain about the town having too many cupcake and frozen yogurt shops!

    • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 12:58 pm |

      Man, we need some cupcake and frozen yogurt shops here. Can we have some of yours?

      • John in Athens | September 7, 2011 at 1:33 pm |

        I will trade you a frozen yogurt shop for a record store but only if you take a planned Under Armour outlet and seventy pair of red football trousers as part of the deal.

        • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 1:42 pm |

          Unfortunately there’s no record stores in Lexington, Virginia. We could probably afford to give up at least one old-school men’s clothing shop and a local farmers market if it’s only fifty pairs of ugly pants though. I’d be willing to take the whole shipment if you’ll take some backwards hats and sunglass croakies off our hands though.

  • Brian | September 7, 2011 at 1:37 pm |

    I enjoyed the peaceful coexistence of analysis of corporate bullshit and some design criticisms in the ESPN column. Were you just holding off to give the magazine the exclusive? :) Seriously, love it all. Keep up the good work.

  • Ben Fortney | September 7, 2011 at 1:40 pm |

    Haven’t seen it mentioned here (granted I haven’t looked much), but it appears those horrible sleeve stripes on the Jets sweater are another design aspect cribbed from the military.

    A quick search of “Canadian Air Force uniforms” gave me this, this and this which I’m not sure is Canadian… but has the colors down.

  • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 1:43 pm |

    “All Things Considered” interview now confirmed. Tentatively slated to air toward the end of the show’s second hour (i.e., about 5:50pm eastern).

    • Christopher F. | September 7, 2011 at 2:12 pm |

      Hopefully you can post archived MP3′s or whatever if available tomorrow?

    • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 6:48 pm |

      They should have asked you, “Would you wear that?”

      • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 6:49 pm |

        And I noticed when you said “Nike” it didn’t sound as if you said it through gritting teeth…

    • Rob H. | September 7, 2011 at 9:20 pm |

      Interview is here:

      http://www.npr.org/p...

  • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 1:46 pm |

    So they’re all lieutenant colonels? Maybe the captain and alternate should have four stripes on their sleeves.

    • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 1:47 pm |

      This was supposed to be in response to Ben Fortney’s post. Also the uniforms only have two stripes on the sleeves, which would indicate captains. And that’s just confusing.

    • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 2:30 pm |

      Since none of them are in the military, all are citizens with no rank whatsoever. The stripes are “hockey stripes”. You have seen them before on hockey sweaters.

      Do we question Army’s players or Navy’s players as to why they don’t wear their ranks on their uniforms?

      • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 3:02 pm |

        It was a joke. Ben suggested that they were evocative of the stripes RCAF officers have on their sleeves.

        • Teebz | September 7, 2011 at 3:33 pm |

          Without a ;o) or a “lol”… can you tell?

      • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 3:43 pm |
      • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 4:07 pm |

        I still say the stripes remind me of these.

  • joey | September 7, 2011 at 1:52 pm |

    about the white Cal helmets mentioned in the ESPN article, I have some info, take it as you wish: I saw a white helmet in the equipment room a few weeks back with a navy block “C” (not the traditional Cal script) and I dont remember what color facemask. Equipment guys were talking about the possibility of having up to 4 “win” merit decals on the helmets (so they presumably will be worn game 5) at the time.
    Checking the schedule, that puts these helmets as being worn in Eugene vs. Oregon, so look for the storm-trooper look then.

    Obviously I’m just a guy with an internet connection, so believe me if you want, or don’t want, but that’s what I saw

    • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 3:05 pm |

      I’m imagining an inverted UConn helmet. Is that about right?

      • joey | September 7, 2011 at 7:21 pm |

        yea, pretty much. dont really remember if the “C” has hte same sort of outline as Uconn does tho, but for the most part that’s correct.

  • Ian K | September 7, 2011 at 1:58 pm |

    “The sleeve striping on the white jersey doesn’t work”

    Were you planning on backing that up in any way, or just leaving a random statement without any evidence…

    In fact, the green on this page just isn’t green enough….

    • Ry Co 40 | September 7, 2011 at 2:19 pm |

      so a link to a picture showing you exactly why the sleeve striping is stupid doesn’t do it for you?

    • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 2:34 pm |

      I knew exactly what he was talking about when I read the statement, but simply enough: One stripe down the sleeves – OK; Two banded stripes around the sleeves? OK; One stripe down the sleeves combined with two banded stripes around the same sleeves? Too much!

      That makes for TWELVE distinctive marks of color within about six square inches of space, in four different places on the uniform. Simply too much going on.

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 2:58 pm |

      I know what you mean about the green. Working on it…

      • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 3:06 pm |

        Seriously Paul. Kelly green all the way.

  • TOM | September 7, 2011 at 2:10 pm |

    notice anything odd about the SI covers?

    i would say that it’s a little odd to have defensive players on all 6 of the covers.

  • Christopher F. | September 7, 2011 at 2:17 pm |

    RE: The captain’s patch- this should be solved tomorrow (Thursday) night. Drew Brees had 4 gold stars last year, and I assume he’s still the “capitan” of the Saints. So he’s certainly going to be wearing the 5-year version.

    • Ry Co 40 | September 7, 2011 at 2:18 pm |

      probably a gold “C”

      i can’t tell you just how glad i am the steelers don’t wear that stupid patch

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 4:12 pm |

      he’s certainly going to be wearing the 5-year version.

      Yeah, except there is no five-year version. At least not that we’ve yet seen.

      • Christopher F. | September 7, 2011 at 4:28 pm |

        I worded that wrong. How about:

        If there is a 5-year version, he’ll be wearing it tomorrow.

        I guess all I meant is the mystery will be solved tomorrow, won’t even have to wait until Sunday.

  • Flip | September 7, 2011 at 3:03 pm |

    This may already have been covered, if not this year, then whenever this trend started. But after schools use their one-off uniforms, are the players content to go back to the heavier, slower, yada, yada, yada fabric, cut, etc. of the old uniforms?

    And I’m still baffled how loosely the term “uniform” is bandied about when they’re anything but uniform these days. Especially from week to week to week.

    • jdreyfuss | September 7, 2011 at 3:09 pm |

      Even if they change it week-to-week, the players are all wearing the same jersey, pants, socks, and helmet on a particular week. That’s what makes it a uniform. Having a consistent uniform week-to-week is what makes it a brand identity (or lack thereof).

  • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 3:21 pm |

    “I don’t know how Marquette is gonna get through this basketball season with only four jerseys.”

    Can they mix and match with the pants?

  • scott | September 7, 2011 at 3:26 pm |

    Yankees look like the Yankees today.

    • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 3:46 pm |

      Were you expecting them to show up looking like the D-Backs?

      • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 3:52 pm |

        Sometimes it’s a nice reminder that the whole world hasn’t changed. I actually chuckled when I read Scott’s post.

  • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 3:31 pm |

    “New soccer kits for Adelaide United, which plays in Australia’s A-League. “Here it would be considered a bad look to launch a kit without a sponsor, as it would indicate that you are not popular enough to have a company want to associate themselves with you,” explains Kasey van Puijenbroek.”

    *sigh*

    • Kasey vP | September 7, 2011 at 4:52 pm |

      Jim,
      All of the major sports here have sponsors logos on their uniforms. I’m not saying that’s right, I do like some of the Nth. American purity of just the city or college on the shirt. But ours is a country like yours where Soccer is growing but still a smaller sport, mainstream perception/image is important. Euro-league teams(the most successful soccer leagues have sponsors on their shirts and like it or not, not MLS and the A-League will be compared to these leagues. Maybe if Soccer was rich enough, it wouldn’t need to do it, but the Australian Football League just signed a billion dollar broadcast deal and their teams have sponsors on their guernseys. I guess when you live to your means, every dollar counts.

      • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 6:53 pm |

        Oh, I understand. Wasn’t sighing at the messenger, just the message.

        • Kasey vP | September 8, 2011 at 3:39 am |

          No worries mate,
          One day when the US dominates Soccer(read Soccernomics by Kuper for why it is likely to happen) then other countries will attempt to ape US sporting conventions. Although by then, MLS will likely have 30 years of kits with sponsor logos on the chest, I’m not going to be the one to try to take a revenue stream off an owner;) I guess I’m brainwashed by 30 odd years of watching the beautiful game but I don’t think a soccer kit looks right unless its got some sponsor on the chest. I do miss those old DC United kits with the 3 stripes across the chest though.

  • Latrell | September 7, 2011 at 3:40 pm |

    “Tony: Maryland’s are beautiful.”

    Ugh. Can somebody get Tony Kornheiser off TV, PLEASE?!? Thank you in advance.

    • Chris Holder | September 7, 2011 at 3:59 pm |

      He and Wilbon are both blowhards. I never can tell if Kornheiser is serious or not when he is spouting his usual nonsense. Oddly, I still enjoy watching the show at times… I think mostly just to see how much I can disagree with the two of them.

    • Christopher F. | September 7, 2011 at 4:37 pm |

      To each their own, they’re the only show I can watch on ESPN. They cover much more than the east coast, they admit their biases when they have them, and they are funny.

      • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 7:50 pm |

        “They cover much more than the east coast.”

        ~~~

        so they’re…hillbillies then?

  • Joseph Gerard | September 7, 2011 at 3:45 pm |

    I like the Jets unis. They are definitely an improvement from ANYTHING they ever wore as the Thrashers.

    On that note, good ESPN article Paul. Any word on the Steelers throwbacks yet this year?

    • Paul Lukas | September 7, 2011 at 4:13 pm |

      Sigh. I just published the NFL column. If I knew anything about the Steelers, don’t you think I would have included it?

      • Joseph Gerard | September 8, 2011 at 2:12 am |

        Sorry, my bad. I think the throwbacks need retired, the block numbers need to come back on the regular unis full-time, and the Batman unis become the team’s third uniform. Any thoughts? Won’t ever happen, but it’s a thought.

  • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 4:28 pm |

    I didn’t see anything in the column about whether or not they’re going to use those green dots on the helmets again this year. Did anyone ever figure out what they were there for, anyway?

  • JimWa | September 7, 2011 at 4:44 pm |

    Seriously, though … one more note on the Winnijets uniforms: Especially noticeable as STUART is one of the “models”, but I’m never a fan of fonts where its hard to tell the As from the Rs.

    • Oakville Endive | September 7, 2011 at 9:02 pm |

      Yep, and quite similar to the Columbus Blue Jackets NOB font, not exactly the model to copy

  • Steve | September 7, 2011 at 5:05 pm |

    did anyone mention that Pitt changed from black cleats/socks to white cleats/socks?
    http://scores.espn.g...

    • Simply Moono | September 7, 2011 at 7:08 pm |

      Good move on the socks, bad move on the cleats.

  • Simply Moono | September 7, 2011 at 7:06 pm |

    The Mothership just did a “Top 10 Worst Uniforms” poll. It sucked huge monkey balls, although I did agree with the Seabirds at #1.

  • LarryB | September 7, 2011 at 7:17 pm |

    Alabama at Penn State this week. Phil and Jim V give that game an A+++++

    • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 7:55 pm |

      if i were doing a 5&1, you could put that one down in pen

      the mothervilker…he’s not that predictable — two A+ uniforms matching up don’t equate to a top game in his book — i’m not even betting on it making his top 3 (now, he’ll put it at #1 just to spite me) — but he needs things like snow or mud, contrast, schizophrenic shoulder panels (like red & white on one side, black and gold on the other) to really make him damp

      in fact…he’s often not keen on two teams wearing white pants…since he frequently watches the game from below the waist…and both teams wearing black cleats? that might knock it out of the top five

      nay…the movi may like (even love) each uni individually, but he’d rather the opponent of either be wearing something like bright orange or something shiny…

      top 5…probably a lock for him…#1? i wouldn’t bet on it

      • LarryB | September 7, 2011 at 7:56 pm |

        Good point. Jim V does change things up at times. I think he even based some choices on the weather?

      • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 10:31 pm |

        I love how befuddled you sound. At first I thought you were trying reverse psychology, but you seem genuinely unsure. As always, until Sunday, no comment.

        “but he’d rather the opponent of either be wearing something like bright orange or something shiny…”
        You say that as if it’s a bad thing…

        • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 10:43 pm |

          no man, not trying any reverse psych

          psu-bama #1

          i truly have no idea what you’ll like…even if i think i have you figured out, you’ll pick some shit like this for a top 5 because well, you like shiny orange things

        • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 11:27 pm |

          Ooooooooo…nice…

  • Pat | September 7, 2011 at 7:23 pm |

    Sportscenter just ran a top 10 worst unis of all time list. The inspiration being all the crazy uniforms from this weekend(i.e. Maryland, Oregon, Boise State and Georgia)
    Here is the rundown
    10 Tampa Bay Bucs Creamsicles http://www2.tbo.com/...
    9 Vancouver Canucks 78-84 http://images.wikia....
    8 Eagles Throwbacks 2007 http://www.chrisgeno...
    7 Toronto Raptors 1997 http://cdn.bleacherr...
    6 San Diego Padres 1972 Mustard Yellow
    http://cdn.bleacherr...
    5 Baltimore Orioles all orange
    http://a323.yahoofs....
    4 Denver Nuggets Rainbow Unis
    http://cdn.bleacherr...
    3 White Sox Shorts unis
    http://1.bp.blogspot...
    2 New York Islanders 1995-97
    http://cdn.bleacherr...
    1 Seahawks Neon Green
    http://blog.seattlep...

    I totally disagree with the Nuggets Rainbow unis being included but to each their own.

    • Rob S | September 7, 2011 at 8:31 pm |

      That whole White Sox fauxback era, with those fake collars, deserves to be in there, not just the shorts.

      Sorry, but if you’re going to do an old-timey collar, at least make it look like a complete collar going all the way around the back, instead of stopping at the top shoulder seams!

    • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 10:17 pm |

      Agreed on the rainbow Nuggets. They should be on a Ten Best list.

      Although that’s the lesser of the two versions. My favorite was the first one:
      http://i.cdn.turner....
      http://www.1043thefa...

    • Kasey vP | September 8, 2011 at 3:56 am |

      What, no mention of the tassles on the Colorado Caribou unis from NASL days??
      http://www.nasljerse...

  • Ricko | September 7, 2011 at 7:37 pm |

    Patches, anyone?…
    http://www.ebay.com/...

  • LarryB | September 7, 2011 at 8:01 pm |

    The Wolfpack helmet cart is nice. I was not aware of the past ones they had.

  • LarryB | September 7, 2011 at 8:04 pm |

    I had asked in here a week or so ago if Nike will mess with the unis. meaning pro pro combats?

    One advantage the NFL had over college football was that the NFL wore throwbacks. College football which I love wears more creations.

  • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 8:06 pm |

    all things considered…

    paul lukas kicks ass…on NPR

    “seventeen-year-olds respond to shiny objects”

    QOTD right there folks

    • Kyle Allebach | September 7, 2011 at 9:20 pm |

      Hey! I’m 17, and I don’t respond to shiny objects!

      …all the time.

      • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 9:26 pm |

        17 really?

        damn, i had you pegged for at least 18…

      • Ricko | September 7, 2011 at 10:05 pm |

        So you’re saying Paul should have turned down the interview? Or at least refused to answer when the host asked him for his take on the “why” of current trend in unis?

        He answered the question. He didn’t critique the designs, didn’t go into the elements of them other than saying Maryland’s were based on the state flag (which was a good move cuz, y’know, they can’t show photos on the radio), just gave the radical unis’ reason to exist…the same contention he’d offered here.

        Likewise for Georgia’s unis. Didn’t attack them, just described them. Again, an advisable move for radio.

        As to stirrups, I don’t see anyone attempting to influence and manipulate the pro-stirrups crowd. Not much to be gained from it. Terribly small market segment, after all.
        :)

    • Jason | September 7, 2011 at 9:41 pm |

      So let me get this straight.

      Paul Lukas spends yesterday repeatedly (and petulantly) saying he’s not interested in talking he’s not interested in discussing or watching things marketed to 17-year-olds.

      But the very event that causes his bursts of petulance generates more comments than any single post in his blog’s history.

      Then, as soon as other media outlets seek his commentary, he begins jumping at every conceivable opportunity to expand his own brand by doing exactly that. And his co-proprietor shills for the “kick ass”-ness of it all.

      It’s hard not to laugh at the ridiculousness of the attitude around here.

      • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 10:38 pm |

        oooohhhh…im a co-proprietor??? can you tell paul that please?

        but to borrow something paul is fond of saying to folks like you…

        it’s a big interwebs…if you don’t like how paul runs his little teensy corner, you know where you can go

        • Jason | September 7, 2011 at 11:35 pm |

          Whatever you are. I don’t know, or much care, what your title is, or why your posts show up beige like Paul’s.

          “Shill” is the salient — and accurate — term.

          And thanks for the advice for “folks like me.” I’ve actually read this site, off and on, for years. But likely not much longer, given the “agree or get lost” attitude that pervades this site’s comments.

          More than anything else, though, the astonishingly thin skin of Paul and his acolytes — “folks like you” — is just mesmerizing. For somebody who thinks mockery of teen-agers is the “quote of the day,” you’re acting like an adolescent at the slightest disagreement.

    • Jason | September 7, 2011 at 9:48 pm |

      And what can you say about the condescension towards “shiny objects” from someone who has a Pavlovian response to chain-stitching and high baseball socks?

      • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 10:56 pm |

        goddamit…they’re not high socks .. all socks are high

        they’re high PANTS

        if you’re going to criticize, at least get the terminology correct

    • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 10:22 pm |

      More than twice as old as 17 and I still love shiny objects…

      • Paul Lukas | September 8, 2011 at 12:04 am |

        I like shiny objects myself! When I said 17-yr-olds respond to shiny objects, it wasn’t a negative comment; it was a simple fact. Kids like flashier stuff. Is anyone really gonna say that isn’t true? And is anyone really gonna say that isn’t what’s driving college football uniform design?

        It’s not a particularly astute observation on my part. It’s pretty self-evident. I’m genuinely surprised anyone — old or young — would find it controversial.

        • Jason | September 8, 2011 at 11:52 am |

          Now that Paul’s on OTL, NFL Uni-watch, etc. commenting about the uniform’s aesthetics, I suppose it’s safe to say his sanctimonious “refusal to discuss the merits of a PR event, marketed to teen-agers” was pretty disingenuous.

  • Oakville Endive | September 7, 2011 at 9:06 pm |

    Non uni-related comment

    After watching off and on my Blue Jays against the Red Sox over the last 3 days, I’ve come to the conclusion that the Red Sox play the baseball equivalent of hockey’s neutral zone trap – they literally bore you to death – working every count to the point of ad nauseum, yes it’s very effective – just like the New Jersey Devils – but is it good for the sport?

    • Phil Hecken | September 7, 2011 at 9:28 pm |

      you think that’s bad, try watching a yankees-red sox game

      i think they’re on espn every sunday night

      • Pierre | September 7, 2011 at 9:37 pm |

        You can watch a few innings, take a nap, and when you wake up they’re just starting the sixth inning. How long have Yankees/Red Sox games been lasting…like about four hours?

    • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 10:24 pm |

      Soccer’s more exciting…unless Wakefield’s pitching.

      • Oakville Endive | September 7, 2011 at 10:36 pm |

        He was tonight, his knuckleball was all over the place.

        We’ve just completed the 8th, many fans came appropriately prepared to the game as they brought sleeping bags, and slept through much of the middle innings have now come back to life.

  • lane | September 7, 2011 at 10:26 pm |

    I’m watching the Cardninals game tonight and the benches just cleared after the first out in the ninth. The thing is, broadcaster Dan McGloghlin was in the middle of reading the broadcast sponsors. So he is saying, “this game is brought to you by…” when the benches clear, so he says “and now the benches are clearing; what started this is…” Here he stops mid sentence and instead of continuing to talk about the action on field he awkwardly reads the rest of the sponsors, “bank of america, at&t…” before continuing.

    • Ricko | September 7, 2011 at 10:35 pm |

      That had to be a hoot.
      You can imagine his mind racing…
      “Oh, god, what do I do now? Do I keep reading? Do I stop the promo and describe the brawl? Do I read really, really fast and hope the brawl goes on long enough that I can catch up??? Oh my, oh my, oh my…”

    • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 10:36 pm |

      If I were him, I’d keep reading the list of sponsors. Ignore that stuff on the field, the way the TV crews avoid showing when someone runs on the field.

  • Jim Vilk | September 7, 2011 at 11:53 pm |

    Anyone watching the Wednesday night game?
    What’s with the pink glove?
    http://a.espncdn.com...

    • Nosferatu | September 8, 2011 at 2:09 am |

      I don’t see his puka shell necklace. Would have gone well with the glove.

  • Alan | September 8, 2011 at 2:47 am |

    It’s fine to have a different opinion. And expressing it in a polite, respectful way is great- that makes things interesting. But leaving hostile, critical comments (that seem to be intentionally trying to provoke a reaction) doesn’t really accomplish anything. Sometimes I read comments and think, If this site is so unpleasant to you, why are you here?

  • TJ | September 8, 2011 at 6:48 am |

    I’m not sure if anyone’s responded but to answer Paul’s question about the Rangers’ shoulder patch it’s for the Garden of Dreams foundation. A non-profit charity started by MSG and the Rangers. That logo has appeared on the back of the rangers helmets for years but this is the first time I’ve seen it on the uniform. But at least they somewhat kept with protocol and placed it on a shoulder. Patches are usually placed on the player’s right shoulder, not the left.