What Will Peyton Wear to His Coming-Out Party?

Screen shot 2012-03-19 at 4.55.08 PM.png

Timing, as the say, is everything.

As you’re probably aware by now, Mr. Peyton Manning will likely be playing for the Broncos this fall. It’s supposedly a done deal, contingent on Manning and the team coming to terms on a new contract.

Let’s say they work out all the details in the space of a week. That means the Broncos would be ready to introduce Manning to the Denver media with a March 27 press conference, The Broncos plan to introduce Manning to the media this afternoon at a press conference, where he’ll presumably get to pose with a Broncos jersey that’s been lettered up for the occasion.

And that’s where the timing comes in.

In a rather delicious development, this month is about the worst possible time for an NFL team to hold a jersey-centric press conference, because Reebok is still the league’s official outfitter — but only for another 11 days. Nike’s contract kicks in on April 1, and Nike plans to unveil all the new jerseys on April 3 (yes, I’ll be attending the event, which will be here in NYC). Even worse, it’s already been reported that the Broncos will be switching their primary jersey to orange.

So when the Broncos hold their Peyton presser, do they use a Reebok jersey (like the Photoshopped image shown above, which ran on ESPN.com yesterday), even though Reebok is basically dead man walking? Do they use a Nike jersey, even though Nike won’t yet be the league’s official outfitter? Do they jump the unveiling gun and show next season’s jersey? Do they use a jersey with no maker’s mark, like the ones that were worn at the Pro Bowl? Do they go with blue or orange? Do they wait until the following week to hold the press conference? (That last option seems the most unlikely, although it’s also the most odious, which means maybe it’s actually quite likely after all.)

I put those questions to the NFL and to Nike yesterday afternoon. (In retrospect, I should have asked Reebok for their thoughts as well, to see if they still felt territorial about their last few days in the catbird’s seat.) The first response came from a Nike spokesman: “We’re not discussing our deal with the league until we get to April.” Oh, and he also asked if I wanted to have lunch, which was very nice of him.

Then I heard from the NFL: “What the team does during its ‘welcome’ press conference is a team decision.” I found that surprising. Wouldn’t you think the league would be micromanaging these last few days of the Reebok-to-Nike transition?

In any case, since the league said it was a team decision, I sent a note to Broncos communications VP Jim Saccomano. His response: “We do not have new stock in yet. So as of right now, Reebok.” Of course, “as of now” is a very provisional term, and the Broncos might new stock on hand by this afternoon.

There are other uni-related considerations here, including which uni number Manning will wear, and what will happen to all those Tim Tebow jerseys. Personally, though, I’m more interested in how the press conference shakes out, if only because it shows the degree to which corporate logo creep and related machinations now control the game.

+ + + + +

guthrie.png

Collector’s Corner

By Brinke Guthrie

The days of NFL coaches wearing suits and sweaters are long over. Remember the Tom Landry suit look, or the Bears sweater that Ditka made popular? Today it’s all swooshed-up polo shirts and khakis. A creeping corporate sameness. Of course, even in the pre-sameness days, it’s unlikely that a coach would have worn this Chiefs sweater.

As for the rest of this week’s eBay finds:

• Look at these great cardboard NFL helmets from some 1960s promo display!

• I like the look of this NBA gear bag of indeterminate vintage. Looks like 1970s to me.

• Astrological signs on a 1970 Eagles media guide? Groovy, man.

• I have my doubts about the authenticity of this patch. For one, I was an avid Reds fan in Cincinnati for 27 years and I never saw this patch. Also, the striping on Mr. Red’s uni isn’t right. But it’s still a nice patch.

• Check out this wrapper for a pack of 1967 “Official Pro National League” bubblegum cards.

• Wow, great-looking art print of a 1967 Bears/Niners game program.

• Staying in 1967, here’s a great “This is NFL Football” (Rams Edition) book, and one from the Colts.

• Here’s something similar, brought to you by Gatorade: the Illustrated NFL Playbook.

Seen something on eBay or Etsy (or anywhere else) that you think would make good Collector’s Corner fodder? Send your submissions here.

+ + + + +

I’ll be doing a live chat this Friday, 3pm Eastern, on ESPN.com. Here’s the link.

If you’re having trouble with your RSS reader and/or your bookmarks, be sure you have them configured for uni-watch.com, not uniwatchblog.com. The latter is no longer forwarding to the former.

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: Here’s a good way to beat logo creep: Crystal Palace is making its own jerseys (from Ross Hazlett). … Check out Akeem Olajuwon wearing just his first name during college (from Lou DeGeorge). … Florida baseball wore some nice throwbacks with triple-striped stirrups the other day (from Nolan Reagan). … In a related item, an unusual striping pattern being worn on the stirrups of this Florida Tech pitcher (from Josh Gallo). … Mikhail Herrera was on his way to work when he spotted someone with a handbag made from a Red Sox jersey. … Whoa, did you know St. John’s hoops used to have warm-up tops that were essentially just polo shirts? (Good find by Mark J. Galus.) … “Sevilla has found a new way to suck up more corporate money,” says Joe Hollomon. … In a move of questionable propriety, Maryland baseball has “Omaha” stitched onto the back of their caps (from my ESPN colleague Dave Wilson). … Here’s an interesting concept: sports-style pennants to celebrate non-sports activities (thanks, Kirsten). … “Over the weekend, Bolton’s Patrice Muamba collapsed on the pitch during the middle of a match,” says Chris Cruz. “The next day, his former teammate Gary Cahill scored a goal and revealed an undershirt that said, ‘Pray 4 Muamba.’ In addition, Real Madrid had both Muamba and Eric Abidal (who’s set to undergo a liver transplant) on their minds during pregame warm-ups.” … Typical douchebags. … Fun project idea from Stephen Sharp, who writes: “Ever since John Smoltz was traded by the Tigers for Doyle Alexander, I’ve always wondered what the Tigers would have been like with Smoltz on the team. The simplest way to visualize this: a Tigers Smoltz jersey. Over the years I have been mentally compiling similar possibilities. At first I thought it would be really cool to do jerseys but realized jersey shirts would be better for fans’ pocketbooks. I actually had a few conversations with Andrew McIver over at No Mas to see if we could make it happen. He said everyone loved the idea but with the licenses that would be involved, etc., it would be big headache. Maybe a Uni Watch reader will have an idea of how we can make it work!” … See the T-shaped taping or stitching on the shoulder seams? Steven Brown recently noticed it on a lot of Man U jerseys but isn’t sure if it’s functional, decorative, or what. Anyone..? … FIVB has issued some revised beach volleyball uniform rules, to allow for religious concerns (from Jeremy Brahm). … “I was at the Buffalo Bandits game on Saturday,” says Jeff Green. “They were playing the Minnesota Swarm, and I noticed Nos. 4 and 19 for Minnesota were both NNOB. Upon closer inspection, one was taped over. Not sure what that was all about.” … “Here’s another nice post from the Basement Geographer,” writes Doug Kalemba. “It includes the pre-1968 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile mandated color schemes for racing teams and some modern-day holdovers.” … As you might expect, I’m not too thrilled about the latest development in the Madoff case, since it means that the Wilponzis will likely be able to retain ownership of the Mets for the foreseeable future. Grrrrrrr. … Happy vernal equinox!

 

208 comments to What Will Peyton Wear to His Coming-Out Party?

  • Matt | March 20, 2012 at 7:19 am |

    If its any precedence, when Mario William signed with the Bills last week he was wearing a new New Era hat, but did not have a jersey for him to put on/ hold up.

    http://www.google.co...

    • Jim | March 20, 2012 at 10:05 am |

      Buffalo’s website had an image of Williams in a Photoshopped Bills Reebok jersey: http://sphotos.xx.fb...
      Today it is gone from their website.

      They are telling interested customers that they will have to wait “about 6 weeks” until the new Nike jerseys are in stock.

  • Kevin Poss | March 20, 2012 at 7:27 am |

    All that Photoshopping on the lede photo and we couldn’t even get a Nike swooshtika on the jersey?? At least make it authentic, people, c’mon..

    • Luther Mahoney | March 20, 2012 at 9:20 am |

      In the Payton Manning photoshopped photo,why is he wearing a Riddell VSR 4helmet?
      Manning is the best known wearer of the Riddell Revolution helmet with the original
      facemask.

      • The Jeff | March 20, 2012 at 9:24 am |

        Because our photoshopper found it easier to put Manning’s face on a Broncos player body, rather than turning a Colts uniform into a Broncos one.

        • Christian | March 20, 2012 at 4:07 pm |

          Yeah, it’s definitely Kyle Orton with his 8 moved to the right. Not very convincing.

  • Kevin Poss | March 20, 2012 at 7:30 am |

    *Note to self: READ BEFORE COMMENTING.

    Duly noted..

  • Matthew K | March 20, 2012 at 7:33 am |

    Is the Nike jersey unveiling open to the public? Where in NYC is it?

    • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 7:38 am |

      Comment of the year.

      • AKT | March 20, 2012 at 11:17 am |

        Cynical reply of the year.

        • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 12:27 pm |

          Nah, the year is young.

  • The Jeff | March 20, 2012 at 7:54 am |

    For some reason, I’m not bothered by the giant hotdog bench roof.

    • Kyle Allebach | March 20, 2012 at 8:18 am |

      I thought it was clever. Much better than just having a damn sign on it.

    • elgato11x | March 20, 2012 at 12:50 pm |

      I’m definitely a fan of unusual or unique advertising, and this is one of those cases. I like it.

  • Gordon | March 20, 2012 at 8:03 am |

    Wilponzis…good one.

  • James | March 20, 2012 at 8:08 am |

    Isn’t Peyton sponsored by Reebok?? Makes me think the Broncos will go with a Reebok jersey if at all possible…just a thought

  • DenverGregg | March 20, 2012 at 8:09 am |

    Many possibilities for the Manning intro:
    – no jersey (that would underscore how big of deal this is);
    – a Reebok jersey that’s rapidly approaching its expiration date (just doesn’t feel likely);
    – a preemie Nike jersey (I hope that’s not the case); or
    – a fauxback.

    I’d recommend a 1983 fauxback as it would echo the hopefulness that the franchise had that summer when Elway arrived.

    • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 8:12 am |

      Also: Imagine if they just had him pose with a helmet. Wouldn’t have his name on it, natch, but still a strong image.

    • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 8:15 am |

      what about tripuka giving him his old jersey along with his blessing only to have peyton say something corny like “shucks mr. tripuka, i could never wear your number, i have too much respect for the game and its history” and just leave us hanging as to his new number and which jersey it will be

      ~~~

      or they could just hold off on the official intro until 4/3

    • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 8:46 am |

      I vote for “a”.
      No reason for him to stand there with a jersey like he’s a draft signee.

      Although, I suppose the contract with the supplier might require such a cliche video/photo op (the sports equivalent of a “grip & grin”).

    • RMB | March 20, 2012 at 9:24 am |

      I would assume it’s not business as usual for the NFL shop getting in jerseys for free agent signings right now so the question should be asked: can the NFL really be comfortable with having given the bootleggers a 2-week head start on Manning jerseys?

  • Blake Pass | March 20, 2012 at 8:09 am |

    I haven’t had time for the research, but I think the “Omaha” on the back of Maryland’s caps may be in reference to Omaha bats.

    • Adam R. W. | March 20, 2012 at 8:13 am |

      Or it could be because the College World Series is in Omaha, Nebraska. I don’t think the NCAA is big on sponsors on uniforms (except for the uniform manufacturers of course).

      • Blake Pass | March 20, 2012 at 9:10 am |

        Could be…but that would be kind of silly. Of course, Maryland has been known to do some quite silly things with unis lately.

    • Ronnie Poore | March 20, 2012 at 10:06 am |

      it’s for the goal of reaching the CWS in Omaha. Clemson did the same thing last year.

      • Trevor | March 20, 2012 at 4:24 pm |

        Clemson has been doing this for many years. I think it goes all the way back to the 90’s, but I do know that they’ve had it inside the paw-print on the back of their hats since I first inherited my family’s CWS seats in ’02.

        The really odd part is that Maryland is in the ACC with Clemson, so they stole this from a team in their own conference, and I’m fairly certain that the Terp’s have never even been to Omaha.

  • Austin Chen | March 20, 2012 at 8:11 am |

    Regarding “the T-shaped taping or stitching on the shoulder seams” of ManU, it’s actually common to a lot of new Nike soccer/football kits, e.g.

    http://www.footballs...
    http://www.footballs...
    http://www.footballs...

    I believe it’s meant to be functional… lighter shirt + new material blend (96% recycled polyester) = more reinforcement needed?

    • Adam R. W. | March 20, 2012 at 8:14 am |

      I’ll bet it makes them 30% lighter too.

    • Dumb Guy | March 20, 2012 at 9:00 am |

      I might be reaching here, but….

      …could it be so when they hit the ball with their shoulders the ball won’t bounce off the seam on some crazy angle?
      (I know, I know, it sounds like some nth degree of advantage/control thing)

      *Can* they hit the ball with their shoulders???
      (Yes, I am an American. No I don’t have kids)

      • Perry | March 20, 2012 at 10:06 am |

        It’s legal to hit the ball with your shoulder, but nobody would do it intentionally, at least not the top of the shoulder where the seam is. Fine line between shoulder and arm, tough for the ref to distinguish, and the arm IS illegal. The only “shouldered” balls are missed headers.

    • Brandon | March 20, 2012 at 11:39 am |

      The “tape” on the Manchester United Jerseys seems to be a new design feature from Nike. They have a close up of it on the new US Away kit page here:
      http://inside.nike.c...

      Nike claims the jersey is 20% stronger, so I believe this is just a simple reinforcement. On the Nike Store website it describes the Authentic US Away 2012/2013 kit as having “strategically placed silicone t-bar prints at the shoulder seams”. Even the 2011/2012 Inter Milan jersey has the t-bars, so maybe its a feature Nike is just expanding out as they update kits over the next year.

      • Adam R. W. | March 20, 2012 at 12:19 pm |

        20% stronger and ONLY 23% lighter? Come one Nike… you can do better than that.

    • Pat | March 20, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

      I also read somewhere but can’t find it that it is essentially a seam seal. It’s put there to not only help reinforce the seam but to make the shoulders not stick out and look so boxy. So it actually provides an aesthetic purpose to make the uni fit more snug to the players body and keep the sleeve from bunching and making the shoulders poof. Like I said, read it somewhere but can’t find it now.

  • Geeman | March 20, 2012 at 8:15 am |

    Paul, re: St. John’s warmup polo shirts:

    Notre Dame had striped polo shirts as warmups, with a big fat green shamrock on the chest, the year they went to the Final Four.

    • DJ | March 20, 2012 at 8:47 am |

      The yellow shirts with green and royal blue stripes trimmed in white? Digger Phelps said those were inspired by a sweater he saw on a skiing trip to Aspen.

    • Terry Proctor | March 20, 2012 at 3:01 pm |

      Those striped St. John’s warm-up shirts plus the Notre Dame shirts were made by Sand-Knit during the uni-crazy ’70s-early ’80s. Majestic made a lightweight polyester warp-knit knock-off of the White Sox chest-stripe jersey in a polo shirt and a V-neck style in about five or six colors. They were fairly inexpensive at the time (about $10-12 team price plain) and we sold quite a few sets of them to high school basketball teams for shooting shirts.

  • Frank | March 20, 2012 at 8:18 am |

    Something looks a little ‘fishy’ with those vintage cardboard football helmets. The Dolphins’ logo doesn’t look right for that era. That logo features the dolphin essentially centered on the sun in the background, with the head on the rim of the sphere of the sun.
    But in the 70’s and early 80’s, the jumping dolphin was shifted a bit, with the dolphin’s head inside the sphere of the background sun:
    http://i.cdn.turner....

    • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 8:29 am |

      Actually, the Dolphins’ logo from that era was notoriously inconsistent (as were many other aspects of the team’s uni program).

  • Matt L. | March 20, 2012 at 8:41 am |

    Why don’t the Broncos wear white jerseys at home? I mean, the Bronco in their logo has been a white horse since 1968. It seems that white ought to be their primary color with orange and blue complementing.

    • The Jeff | March 20, 2012 at 8:47 am |

      Because… during the era that they did that, they just tormented Browns fans and lost *really* badly in a few Super Bowls. You know how superstitious sports teams can be.

      • The Jeff | March 20, 2012 at 8:53 am |

        Or I’m remembering wrong again. Just ignore me.

      • Matt L. | March 20, 2012 at 9:23 am |

        Denver wore red in their loss against Dallas, blue in their win over Green Bay and white in their win over Atlanta. That’s all three of the Broncos’ Super Bowls. (Funny, I remember six AFC titles. Maybe I’m suppressing some memories. Weird.)

        • Mark K | March 20, 2012 at 9:38 am |

          I don’t remember the red.

        • The Jeff | March 20, 2012 at 9:40 am |

          Giants, Redskins, 49ers.

          But I was mistaken about Denver wearing white at home then. I’m going to blame my faulty memory on my being less than 10 years old at the time and generally hating Denver anyway.

        • walter | March 20, 2012 at 9:41 am |

          Ahh, Denver’s inconsistent orange: One of my favorite topics!

        • Perry | March 20, 2012 at 10:08 am |

          I used to think it was red too, but it was always orange, just a lot redder orange than they use now.

        • Gusto44 | March 20, 2012 at 10:08 am |

          Wish Denver would bring back the orange pants, I think they last appeared in 1980.

        • Perry | March 20, 2012 at 10:11 am |

          Actually they’ve been in 6, losing to Dallas, the Giants, Redskins, and 49ers, before beating the Packers and Falcons.

  • ck | March 20, 2012 at 8:44 am |

    Note that in the St. John’s photo, three different kinds of shoe are being worn by St. John’s players – Adidas, Nike, and Converse. You certainly wouldn’t see that today.

  • Pierre | March 20, 2012 at 8:47 am |

    Peyton Manning should obviously take #15 in honor of Tim Tebow’s contribution to the franchise.

    • Matt L. | March 20, 2012 at 9:13 am |

      Jim Turner’s, too. Like Manning, Turner won a Super Bowl with another team.

      • Derek | March 20, 2012 at 10:47 am |

        since 18 is retired, i would say peyton should take 16. it would remind me of plummer but at least that was his college number in tenn.

    • Andy | March 20, 2012 at 11:32 am |

      Nah, they’ll definitely retire the 15 when Tebow exits.

  • Ben | March 20, 2012 at 8:56 am |

    Teams making their own kit (like Palace are doing) was a bit of a trend in the 1990s. Here’s an early 90s pic of Cardiff City. The club badge is on the left breast with the ‘manufacturer’ Bluebird (the club’s nickname is the Bluebirds) on the right. Creates the odd look of a bluebird on both sides.
    Sorry the pic is so small.
    http://www.thefootyb...

    • Chris | March 20, 2012 at 4:47 pm |

      Chelsea introduced the Chelsea Collection in the mid-80s. Photos from 86-87 show them wearing two styles – one without a sponsor and one with.
      http://www.corbychel...

      The kits even said “Chelsea Collection” on them rather than Le Coq, a swoosh, etc.
      http://www.oldfootba...

      For a while TOFFS even made retro versions of the unsponsored one.

  • Kyle Lamers | March 20, 2012 at 9:00 am |

    The real question is: Are you going to get lunch with the Nike person?

    • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 9:18 am |

      Absolutely! Still working out the day/time.

      • jdreyfuss | March 20, 2012 at 10:52 am |

        Is the Nike person Andy? ;)

  • rm2283 | March 20, 2012 at 9:04 am |

    FWIW… Chris Mortensen reporting Manning contract will be done today and they’re aiming for a 4 ET intro conference today.

    Considering he only made a decision yesterday, I don’t know if that’s even enough time to do up a jersey. I would bet on either a hat or helmet or both.

    • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 9:18 am |

      Um, anyone with a heat press can make up a jersey in about 15 minutes (or less, in Joe Hilseberg’s case).

    • Valjean | March 20, 2012 at 1:11 pm |

      Or they could use this guy (though he’s in NY).

      Speaking of which, Paul, do you know that guy, Jim Root (@Gerry Cosby)? Seems like an interesting guy and (sorta) in your neighborhood.

  • Ben Jye | March 20, 2012 at 9:14 am |

    Clemson baseball has been doing the “Omaha” thing for years. They have the word stitched into the Tiger Paw on the back of the hat. There’s a link to a picture of it buried towards the bottom of this article here:

    http://minorleagueun...

    I graduated from CU in 2005 and I remember the team doing it at least part of the time when I was in college so it’s been going on for awhile.

    • Blake Pass | March 20, 2012 at 9:47 am |

      Copycat Terrapins

  • Matt | March 20, 2012 at 9:19 am |

    It’s “Fabrice” Muamba, not “Patrice.”

    • Chris | March 20, 2012 at 4:48 pm |

      Doh!

  • Connie | March 20, 2012 at 9:19 am |

    “… Here’s an interesting concept: sports-style pennants to celebrate non-sports activities (thanks, Kirsten). … ”

    Wonderful.

  • Luther Mahoney | March 20, 2012 at 9:35 am |

    Re.: The 1960s NFL-AFL helmet cardboard cutouts.

    They appear to be Dave Boss creations. Check out the whistling Raider.

  • interlockingtc | March 20, 2012 at 9:35 am |

    Man, these really caught my eye…

    http://farm7.staticf...

    …Gorgeous. With pajama pants I probably would’ve passed right by the image, but those stirrups/socks are killer.

    • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 10:54 am |

      the colored sani is what seals that deal

      • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 11:25 am |

        Yeah, because there’s SO much historical precedent for colored sanis. ;)

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 12:00 pm |

          well, the a’s and pads, to name two, plus the giants, brewers and chisox, and last year the ‘padres’ and ‘nationals’ both did it

          it’s a great look — not one you’d want for every team, of course, but still, a great look

          and what was the historical precedent for pajama pants before they took over?

          at least the florida sanis DO have some historical roots

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 12:24 pm |

          Still, never was even remotely CLOSE to the standard styling.
          A handful for relatively short-lived exceptions only prove the rule.

          PJs? Apples and oranges.
          Pants length, pants tightness or looseness, stirrup height and such have been–almost always–personal preference issues in MLB for more than 50 years now.
          The color of sanis is a team uni design thing.

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 12:46 pm |

          “A handful for relatively short-lived exceptions only prove the rule”

          ~~~

          what rule would that be? that you don’t happen to like the look of colored sanis?

          there IS historical precedent for it (albeit, admittedly, scant) but that doesn’t mean it can’t work — shit, the a’s have been wearing colored sanis since the mid-60s, and they look great

          you think colored sanis look like “high school musical” (im not quite sure what it is to which you’re referring, but by the inference, it can’t be good)

          again, it’s not something i want to see every (or even more than a few) teams try, but i’d rather see team colors done THAT way than garish colorways and dark softball tops

        • Jim Vilk | March 20, 2012 at 1:18 pm |

          Colored sanis? I’d wear those.

          Man, Phil and I have been agreeing way too much lately…

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 2:43 pm |

          “Phil and I have been agreeing way too much lately”

          ~~~

          i know

          did i tell you how much i love these unis?

          that better?

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 3:05 pm |

          Where did I say colored sanis had NEVER been worn?

          I said they’ve never been anything close to the typical/standard/common look.

          And, that, fersure, is a true and accurate statement.

          There are historical precedents for shorts, too, but we could hardly point to them as typical.

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 3:24 pm |

          you never said they’d never been worn, but you were dismissing their appearance, first by saying that because few teams wore them “that proves the rule” (still not sure what “rule” this is — that they don’t look good? according to whom? just because the look never caught on, doesn’t mean it wouldn’t look good) and second by equating them to something worn in “high school musical” (whatever the fuck that is)…

          we weren’t arguing about shorts, so im not sure that example is valid — i would like to think that shorts never caught on for reasons other than pure aesthetics (though they failed from that stand point as well)

          i simply started this comment string by saying the colored sanis made the uni (which imho looks good) and you, even jokingly, dismissed it because you don’t happen to like the look…i gave several examples of major league teams who have worn colored sanis and then you still dismissed it (despite the fact that, until recently and not because anything the a’s themselves did, the A’s have worn colored sanis for almost 50 years)…that’s a bit more than the 3-4 times the chisox wore shorts

          despite my like of most old-school baseball looks, i think white cleats and colored sanis can look good (not necessarily together, however), and not all colored tops are bad

          i just don’t want EVERYONE doing it, because that ruins the look…but a couple teams wearing colored sanis, a couple teams wearing white (or red or blue or gold) cleats…totally fine

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 4:00 pm |

          We got way sidetracked.

          My baseline question probably should have been, “Is there historical precedent for the Florida Gators regularly wearing orange sanis with black cleats and royal stirrups?”

          Because by far white sanis were typical of that or any era.

          As to “rule,” that was a reference to the saying about “exceptions proving the rule.” Not any uni “rule”.

      • Teebz | March 20, 2012 at 11:25 am |

        This seems like an unnecessary question, but is there a guideline on colored sani vs. white?

        The reason I ask is that I prefer colored sanis over white in almost all circumstances. I wear the secondary colour of the stirrup as the colred sani in almost all of my softball leg attire. Personally, it just looks more uniform.

        Thoughts?

        • jdreyfuss | March 20, 2012 at 11:43 am |

          The original purpose was so that if a player got spiked, the dyes that weren’t colorfast then could enter the bloodstream, so they wore a colored sock over a white sanitary sock. Players complained about the bulk so the oversock got reduced to a stirrup. Once more colorfast dyes were developed, the sani could be colored as well.

        • Teebz | March 20, 2012 at 11:53 am |

          I’m aware of the history, but my question is why colored sanis aren’t used more often, and why is wearing them largely still dominated by white sanis?

          I get traditional and all that, but it just is far more aesthetically pleasing to see the colors of the stirrup continue where the ankle meets the shoe in my view.

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 12:28 pm |

          Because colored sanis look like something for the baseball team in HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL.

        • Teebz | March 20, 2012 at 12:30 pm |

          Rick, you watch High School Musical???

          Whoda thunk?

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 2:58 pm |

          I have a daughter who is now 24, so, yes, I did see some of those films.

      • walter | March 20, 2012 at 11:34 am |

        So much *could* be done with colored sanis: The Mets wearing orange ones or the Pirates in yellow (gold) ones, to name two. It’s a detail overlooked in the majors, for the most part.

      • mtjaws | March 20, 2012 at 10:57 pm |

        Those are great uniforms, but it’s the Gator part that seals it for this Florida fan!!

  • Stephen Lemire | March 20, 2012 at 10:10 am |

    What was the deal with the Bulls-Magic being a color-on-color game last night?

    • MEANS | March 20, 2012 at 2:08 pm |

      probably because of the Latin Nights uniforms

  • Brendan Burke (bwburke94) | March 20, 2012 at 10:21 am |

    Re: Akeem

    Isn’t the term for that FiNOB? (since FNOB is taken)

    • Pat | March 20, 2012 at 2:38 pm |

      How about MNOB for misspelled name on back? Wow, talk about an ironic thing that misspelled is one of those awkward words to spell.

      • BuckyMorrison | March 20, 2012 at 4:09 pm |

        proper spelling at the time

  • Joseph Gerard | March 20, 2012 at 10:40 am |

    Well, it is possible that Peyton Manning could be unveiled with a Reebok jersey. It certainly wouldn’t be unprecedented. I recall after the Patriots traded Drew Bledsoe to the Bills, when they had their introductory press conference for him, they gave him a blue Jim Kelly-era “Bledsoe 11″ jersey, then less than a month later unveiled those ugly uniforms that just got retired last year. Can’t find any videos or pics, but I do remember seeing it.

    • Mike Engle | March 20, 2012 at 12:07 pm |

      A 2007 Washington Capitals draft pick (it might have been Marcus Johansson, but I have no recollection) was introduced with a soon-to-be outgoing black and bronze jersey, even when it was confirmed that the new EDGE jerseys would be red, white, and blue.

      • Joseph Gerard | March 20, 2012 at 12:41 pm |

        Still, though, it would be interesting to see what happens today.

  • Brinke | March 20, 2012 at 10:42 am |

    I’d prefer he hold up a 49ers jersey—but that’s just my preference.

    • mtjaws | March 20, 2012 at 11:03 pm |

      I think you mean Dolphins!

  • snowdan | March 20, 2012 at 10:52 am |

    Odious : arousing or deserving hatred or repugnance

    Good word!

  • Bill | March 20, 2012 at 10:53 am |

    Regarding the RSS feed change – does something need to be updated on Feedburner? The most recent post it’s displaying is March 17.

    • Paul Lukas | March 20, 2012 at 11:43 am |

      Ek is working on it.

  • jdreyfuss | March 20, 2012 at 10:54 am |

    What does Brooklyn water taste like anyway? The East River?

    • Chance Michaels | March 20, 2012 at 11:06 am |

      The Gowanus Canal. ;)

      • Chance Michaels | March 20, 2012 at 11:12 am |

        Actually, it tastes like the Croton Reservoir. But I couldn’t resist.

        The irony here is that New York City has some of the best tap water in the nation, if not the world. For all the jokes about bottled water being tap water plus a huge markup, they could actually fill those bottles with Brooklyn tap water and have a solid product.

        • jdreyfuss | March 20, 2012 at 11:44 am |

          They should use New Orleans tap water. That’s water with personality. And possibly the beginnings of civilization developing in it.

  • Brinke | March 20, 2012 at 11:09 am |

    http://bobbleheaddol...

    willya please look @ that Pablo bobble- one of the best I’ve seen.

    But why with the orange brims on those? They only wear those 1x a week max.

    • Mike Moves | March 20, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

      Giants wear the orange bills on Sunday games and the bobblehead giveaway for Sandoval is on a Sunday.

  • Doug | March 20, 2012 at 11:10 am |

    When I heard the Manning announcement and saw the stock footage of Tebow from last season in the all-blue Broncos uniform configuration (that they were keen on wearing after his initial success), my first thought was: Peyton will never wear blue pants.

    Switching to an orange jersey would eliminate those blue pants anyway, so now I say: Peyton will not wear orange pants either.

    • Chris Holder | March 20, 2012 at 11:48 am |

      As a Broncos fan, I will wholeheartedly approve both of those color developments. Just say no to colored pants.

  • Chance Michaels | March 20, 2012 at 11:15 am |

    As you might expect, I’m not too thrilled about the latest development in the Madoff case, since it means that the Wilponzis will likely be able to retain ownership of the Mets for the foreseeable future. Grrrrrrr.

    It just goes from bad to worse.

    • Joseph Gerard | March 20, 2012 at 12:48 pm |

      Meh, Fred Wilpon is BFF with Bud Selig, and aside from Madoff generally don’t have any major issues with MLB, unlike, say, Frank McCourt.

  • Andy | March 20, 2012 at 11:36 am |

    The strange stirrup stripes on pitcher in the ticker: I think this is a basic two-color Northwestern stripe (black in the middle, flanked by white, with the maroon sock color in between). The pants are covering the top portion of the design is all. You can see a small bit of the upper white stripe on his trailing leg.

    • Simply Moono | March 20, 2012 at 12:53 pm |

      That was my thought too, which is why I hate ‘rups with soccer-style stripes. Either do them the way Florida does, or don’t do them at all. Also, for drummers who use Pro-Mark sticks (like me), the striping pattern isn’t all that unusual, as it’s on most (if not all) Pro-Mark sticks.

      • interlockingtc | March 20, 2012 at 7:52 pm |

        I really like those Florida Tech stirrup stripes–even if portions aren’t showing. Stirrup stripes of all and any kind, I say…

        http://3.bp.blogspot...

        • Wheels | March 20, 2012 at 8:11 pm |

          Now that’s a uniform.

  • Sean | March 20, 2012 at 11:57 am |

    Important question:

    How concerned should we be that Baylor, Louisville, and Cincinnati all advanced to the Sweet 16? That is, will the fact that all three teams wearing the hideously awful Adidas “Zubaz” template advanced cause a proliferation in other teams sporting the same look next season?

    I’m scared.

    (excuse me if this has been discussed here already)

    • Adam R. W. | March 20, 2012 at 12:21 pm |

      It has been discussed, but not much. Those gaudy uniforms are a company trying to get attention for the sake of attention. They’re like a child throwing a temper tantrum. Talking about them only encourages the behavior.

      • Andy | March 20, 2012 at 12:26 pm |

        Not unlike another company trotting out all its former Championship teams in grey uniforms

        • Jim Vilk | March 20, 2012 at 1:13 pm |

          Zing.

          I’ll be honest, I really like the neon Baylor unis, but Not. On. Baylor. You put that on some team named the Tigers and you got something. But it just doesn’t look right for the Bears.

  • Gusto44 | March 20, 2012 at 12:24 pm |

    Two future hall of famers today making two different announcements. Hines Ward has just retired as a Steeler, and Peyton Manning will be continuing his career in a different uniform.

  • michigooner | March 20, 2012 at 12:28 pm |

    Is that a new Steelers logo?

    • Ray Barrington | March 20, 2012 at 2:32 pm |

      For those of you who don’t know what he’s talking about, check this picture: http://sports.espn.g...

      Sorry, but its the best pic I could find – there should be others elsewhere.

      All-caps STEELERS with the hypercycloids, although the stencil Steelers is still on the background.

    • shaftman | March 20, 2012 at 3:47 pm |

      Here’s a better shot.

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

    • DJ | March 20, 2012 at 4:36 pm |

      Looks like the microphone flag still has the Steelers logo with the Steelers word mark.

    • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 5:32 pm |

      http://www.toledobla... – From Tomlin being introduced as Head Coach.

      No it isn’t, they just have a weird version in their press room for some reason. Wonder why. Maybe Paul or our ‘Sburgh friends can tackle this inconsistency…

      • interlockingtc | March 20, 2012 at 7:55 pm |

        That is realllly weird. Disturbing, even. Why would they do that??

  • duker | March 20, 2012 at 12:39 pm |

    Similar to the Brooklyn Water thing, you wouldn’t believe how many people come to visit Philadelphia and ask where they make the cream cheese.

  • Jim Vilk | March 20, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

    Check out Akeem Olajuwon wearing just his first name during college

    Looking for a photo, but I’m pretty sure on the 81-82 team, Rob Williams wore just his first name, too.

    • Jim Vilk | March 20, 2012 at 1:03 pm |
      • Jim Vilk | March 20, 2012 at 1:09 pm |

        Man, those Houston unis were sweet.

        Notice on the road unis, Olajuwon and Drexler wore 35 and 23 respectively, but on the home whites they wore 34 and 22.

        • Wheels | March 20, 2012 at 8:27 pm |

          Phi Slamma Jamma!

  • KT | March 20, 2012 at 1:34 pm |

    Manning newser is at 1pm MT, in about 90 minutes.

    Denver Post reports Manning has personally spoken with Frank Tripucka, and that he’ll wear #18 (cue the righteous indignation and those saying they’d get it in writing that their number could never be un-retired for any reason). Which is what it is, but I’ll always remember Montana going to #19 when he went to KC.

    And I’m going to guess the Broncos will offer a pre-order of the new Manning #18 jerseys for delivery after April 1 and make a ton of cash just on the float alone.

    • Gusto44 | March 20, 2012 at 1:44 pm |

      I really don’t see a massive reaction in the Denver area about using Tripucka’s old number. Manning is in the Elway class of elite QB’s to ever play the game, while Tripucka’s time in Denver only lasted a few seasons, about a half century ago.

      • Joseph Gerard | March 20, 2012 at 2:18 pm |

        I second that. I think that unless there was a player that wanted to wear number 7 in Denver (and I can only think of one player that would be deserving enough to wear Elway’s number 7 if he were to somehow end up in Denver), then it shouldn’t be a big deal.

        • DenverGregg | March 20, 2012 at 2:42 pm |

          This guy wanted to wear 7 for the Broncos a few years ago and said he’d make the fans forget John Elway. It had been his number in college, but it didn’t quite work that way for him.

      • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 4:01 pm |

        Oh, well, if it was long time ago, who cares.

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 5:34 pm |

          exactly

      • Perry | March 20, 2012 at 4:07 pm |

        And more importantly, Tripucka said he was fine with it. If he wasn’t, or if he was deceased, then they shouldn’t give it to Manning, period, and I’m sure they wouldn’t. But with Tripucka’s blessing, everything is jake.

        • scott | March 20, 2012 at 4:20 pm |

          I disagree. If there’s any honor in having numbers being retired, it’s certainly undermined by this type of action, whether or not the person whose uniform number is retired is “fine with it” or not.

        • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 4:25 pm |

          His number was only retired because he was their first QB ever. Look at his numbers, he sucked. his QB rating in his Denver career was like 50. That’s Rex Grossman territory.

        • Ryan A | March 20, 2012 at 5:53 pm |

          In fact Peyton, said it was Frank Tripucka’s wish. Peyton said that with his respect for the game he feels a number should stay retired, but Frank Tripucka told him he wants him to wear HIS (Frank Tripucka) number. A lot of respect to Manning for this and for making it essentially the focus of his statement before the questions.

        • DenverGregg | March 20, 2012 at 6:00 pm |

          The interview with Tripucka said that he had been hired as a coach, but was a better qb than any they had, so he suited up. Football was a little different back then.

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 6:54 pm |

          “His number was only retired because he was their first QB ever. Look at his numbers, he sucked. his QB rating in his Denver career was like 50. That’s Rex Grossman territory.”

          So, “On second thought, we’ve decided you aren’t worth remembering after all” is acceptable?

          Classy way of thinking, that.

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 7:01 pm |

          And Bart Starr threw for more than 2,400 yards only twice in his entire career, and had a 57.4% lifetime completion percentage.

          Obviously, he needs to be downgraded in our thinking.

          (As noted, the game was considerably different in the early ’60s.)

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 7:32 pm |

          Point being, “It ain’t about statistics.”

        • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 7:34 pm |

          Ricko, as rude as it may seem, he sucked and never won anything. He hasn’t earned the honor. They were just trying to manufacture history and nostalgia,.

        • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 8:22 pm |

          Ricko, I wasn’t talking about passing %. I was talking about QB rating and Bart Starr (other than being a two time SB winner) had a career 80.5 passer rating.

          Mr. Tripucka’s rating was 52.2 and his season by season QB rating was over Starr’s CAREER average only once in his entire career, and that wasn’t when he was with the Broncos. He was bad. He didn’t deserve the honor.

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 8:38 pm |

          Yet you still base it on statistics.

          Retiring numbers is up to the team, and if they felt the need to honor one of the more notable of their “pioneers” (no matter how he may have been perceived by anyone else, and if for no other reason than to point out how far the franchise had come after such woeful beginnings) that’s their prerogative.

          For anyone to later suggest re-thinking the decision because they have more insight into the situation, what, 30 years later, is arrogant, presumptuous, self-absorbed and more than a little unfeeling.

          “Oh, hell, he’s an old guy who wasn’t really that good anyway; let’s just undo it. Besides, he’s almost dead.”

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 8:46 pm |

          “Besides, he’s almost dead”

          ~~~

          isn’t that usually the reason they retire a number…not the other way around?

        • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 8:56 pm |

          So, Ricko, everyone who has ever had a number retired deserved it even if they weren’t actually good in comparison to the peers of their era? What about if it is found out later that they cheated or gambled or shaved points?

          People make mistakes, corporations are people and NFL teams are corporations:: NFL teams make mistakes.

          He played terrible for them (which is why i bring up statistics because it is impact on the field of play which should matter when it comes to retiring a number, like why the hell can’t Pat Kane wear 99 for the Blackhawks, Gretzky didn’t break any barrier nor did he play for the ‘Hawks…), he isn’t a hall of famer and he never won jack shit.

          You say this is arrogant and unfeeling, I say its clear headed and without bias. I don’t have to watch tape and be alive during his stint of four seasons in Denver to know they got it wrong. He was bad to mediocre even for his era and doesn’t deserve the honor.

        • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 8:59 pm |

          Sometimes people are too close to a situation and a player, this is why there is a waiting period (usually five year) for almost every significant HOF. This is so people can get some perspective without bias.

          Tripucka’s number was retired very soon after his playing days ended and it probably was too soon.

        • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 9:01 pm |

          timE

          i was on your side until you wouldn’t let ricko get the last word, so let me posit you this…

          casey stengel, based on his numbers as the manager of the mets, was horrible…his team lost 120 games in his first season

          in fact, he lost 111 and and 109 games in his second and third seasons as manager, and finished with a career winning percentage of .302

          compared to the managers of his 3+ seasons in a mets uniform, he was the worst…he was bad to mediocre even for his era and doesn’t deserve the honor

          yet his #37 is retired and no other met has ever worn that number

          did the mets get it wrong?

        • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 9:03 pm |

          “Y’know that Miss Congeniality Award your mom won in 1962? Well, some the girls got to talking last week, and they decided she was really kind of a bitch, so we’d like it back.”

        • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 9:14 pm |

          Being that Stengle lost so much in a Mets uni, never won a pennant and had an otherwise unremarkable career with the Mets, I would say – unless there is something significant I’m missing – the Mets got this wrong.

          HOWEVER,

          Because of Mr. Stengle’s playing career in NY with the Dodgers and Giants and his managerial success with Yankees, Mr. Stengle seems to have earned a spot in New York City baseball lore and based on the entirety of his career (and the fact that two of those NY teams now play in Cali) I understand and approve (not that my approval means anything…) of the retirement of his number.

          But just know, the only thing Stengle did with the Mets was lessen his HOF case rather than bolster it…

          To me this is a lot like Favre with the Vikings, only they actually played well for a season, but I don’t think the Vikings are considering retiring the #4.

        • Joseph Gerard | March 20, 2012 at 11:24 pm |

          Chris Kluwe wore number 4 last year after he gave up his number 5 for Donovan McNabb, so it’s already been reissued in Minnesota.

  • rm2283 | March 20, 2012 at 2:37 pm |

    Albert Breer just tweeted pic of orange Manning #18 jersey:

    http://lockerz.com/s...

  • DenverGambler | March 20, 2012 at 2:37 pm |

    From @postbroncos on twitter “The jersey on display today is the old Reebok version. But the new orange Nike jerseys will look very similar.”

  • Mike Engle | March 20, 2012 at 2:45 pm |

    Well, here it is.
    https://twitter.com/...
    Looks like they used an old Reebok jersey.

    //Boy, it’s gonna take a while to get used to the sight of that.

    • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 3:17 pm |

      http://yfrog.com/jyw...

      Looks like its sans-maker mark.

      • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 3:28 pm |

        NM, I see the maker mark now. Reebok.

    • Jason M (DC) | March 20, 2012 at 4:31 pm |

      It won’t take me very long. I’ve never really liked the Broncos in blue. I feel orange is their proper color and I’m glad that they’re switching back.

  • Silver Creek Dawg | March 20, 2012 at 2:58 pm |

    I swear I read that Peyton said 18 was staying in Indy and he’d be wearing a different number this season.

    • rm2283 | March 20, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

      They were reporting that on ESPN yesterday morning, listing it as a factor against the 49ers, with 16 being retired in SF.

      Mortensen/Schlereth were saying he wanted to go back to his college # (16). I figured it was pretty credible info seeing as it was on sportscenter, so I put it on this site.

      Turns out ESPN was wrong

      • Lee | March 20, 2012 at 5:20 pm |

        I cannot imagine a uniform number would bear one iota on a player’s decision on which team he’d play for. And especially a player like Peyton Manning.

        Lee

        • The Jeff | March 20, 2012 at 9:00 pm |

          I cannot imagine a uniform number would bear one iota on a player’s decision on which team he’d play for.

          Chad “I-legally-changed-my-name-to-match-my-number” Johnson thinks you need a better imagination.

        • diz | March 21, 2012 at 3:16 pm |

          heh, that reminds me. In my Madden franchise game, Johnson moved to the Pats – and they gave him number 84

  • Christopher F. | March 20, 2012 at 3:08 pm |

    I just realized that Manning is going from one team with a horse mascot, to another team with a horse mascot.

    Wonder how often that’s happened (I mean with any type of mascot.)

    • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 3:25 pm |

      Jon Gruden from Raider HC to Buccaneer HC, just off the top of my head.

      • Adam R. W. | March 20, 2012 at 3:52 pm |

        Warren Sapp, Bucs to Raiders

      • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 4:05 pm |

        Tim Brown, Raiders to Bucs.

      • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 4:08 pm |

        Don Maynard, Giants to Titans (of New York) sorta.

      • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 4:11 pm |

        Ricky Watters, seahawks to eagles.

        • stirpey | March 20, 2012 at 4:37 pm |

          um…John Elway…colts to broncos?

    • Simply Moono | March 20, 2012 at 3:33 pm |

      I know we’re talking mascots here, but I know that Brandon Marshall has played with three consecutive teams that use navy and orange in some iteration: the Broncos, the Dolphins (even though it’s very minimal trim), and soon, the Bears.

    • Ray Barrington | March 20, 2012 at 3:36 pm |

      So who wants to start the rumor that Nike will change the Broncos helmet and put a horseshoe on the side? Hmmmmmmm?

      • Tim E. O'B | March 20, 2012 at 3:39 pm |

        Apparently you…

    • Rob S | March 20, 2012 at 4:26 pm |

      John Elway from the Baltimore Colts to the Denver Broncos…

      Yeah, he never suited up for the Colts, and threatened to stay in the Yankees organization if he wasn’t traded after being drafted. But he was still a Colt, if only on paper, for a short time.

      • DenverGregg | March 20, 2012 at 5:59 pm |

        Part of that trade, IIRC, was Chris Hinton and Mark “Rag-arm” Herrmann from Bronx to Colts.

    • CD | March 20, 2012 at 7:52 pm |

      Kevin Kolb, Eagles to Cardinals

    • David B. | March 21, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

      Rich Gannon, Redskins to Chiefs!

  • Kevin Poss | March 20, 2012 at 3:25 pm |

    ITS A REEBOK!

  • KT | March 20, 2012 at 3:26 pm |

    Looks like a Reebok he’s holding up, doesn’t it? Just took an existing jersey and did it up.

    http://www.kenn.com/...

  • KT | March 20, 2012 at 3:27 pm |

    Manning said “It goes against what I believe, as someone who respects the history of the game,” but that after talking with Frank Tripucka, he’ll wear #18.

    • scott | March 20, 2012 at 4:24 pm |

      How much longer will the Yankees hold onto their tradition and not let any of their sacred numbers out of retirement?

  • Kevin | March 20, 2012 at 3:42 pm |

    Jersey looked like it was pulled out of a storage bin. Couldn’t they have run a iron over that real quick?

    • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 4:06 pm |

      It’s to keep us from noticing that Bolen and Elway are getting pretty wrinkled, too.
      (and don’t give me any shit about me looking old, I live with every damn day, lol)

      • Kevin | March 20, 2012 at 4:16 pm |

        Heh, so maybe one of those “make the other things around us look worse than us so they won’t notice how bad we are” moments? Well played Denver…

  • Jordan | March 20, 2012 at 3:51 pm |

    Manning with the orange #18 jersey.

    • Oakville Endive | March 20, 2012 at 4:20 pm |

      Sans unnecessary side panel?

      • Simply Moono | March 20, 2012 at 4:22 pm |

        No, it’s there.

    • Corey | March 20, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

      Manning’s tie looks like Indy colors.

      • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 4:48 pm |

        Or a Cowboys jersey.

        (Let’s don’t reach too far here, folks).

  • Simply Moono | March 20, 2012 at 4:21 pm |

    “I gotta rely on my job as to make the best decisions to put ourselves on the right guys and the right decisions and to be the best that they can do. I enjoy doing that. And uh, so.. uh, the difference is I don’t get to touch it, and is it tough for that? Is it — yeah, I’m used to touching it. Would I rather touch it? Sure, I’d rather touch it, but I’m 52, or 51, so I don’t…” *trails off* ~John Elway

    Do with this what you will.

  • Andy L. | March 20, 2012 at 5:07 pm |

    Re: Swarm NLL numbers –

    Minnesota added two players – Pat Smith and Josh Gillam – so they may have just used the jerseys of two players who were scratched. Joe Cinosky is No. 4, and Jamie Shewchuk wore No. 19 until he was traded to Colorado today.

  • James A | March 20, 2012 at 6:02 pm |

    Looking at the trailer for the better version of Angels in the Outfield (1951), I noticed just how accurate they were with the uniforms. They actually included the 75th Anniversary patch for the National League (1951) on the sleeves. I’m just not use to that kind of detail in the older films (Although Bing Crosby being an owner of the Pirates at the time helped, I’m sure: http://www.youtube.c...

    • Ricko | March 20, 2012 at 7:37 pm |

      Probably a better-than-even bet they filmed in the winter at L.A.’s Wrigley Field and used actual Pirate uniforms.

      Entirely possible. Film production schedules were much shorter, and budgets significantly lower, than they are today.

      • James A | March 20, 2012 at 10:05 pm |

        imdb does list L.A.’s Wrigley Field as well as Forbes and Comiskey as filming locations.

  • Rydell | March 20, 2012 at 8:25 pm |

    The responses from nike and Broncos are hilarious. In other words, “we have no idea what you are talking about and we are entitled to plead ignorance in case of a lawsuit and the person questioning probably knows more then he should”.

  • GTV | March 20, 2012 at 8:47 pm |

    It was a Reebok orange #18 jersey. Surprised Reebok would go to the trouble with just days left on their deal with the NFL. But I guess they don’t want to burn bridges.

    • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 8:56 pm |

      pretty sure reebok had nothing to do with it…

      the broncs have, no doubt, dozens (if not more) blanks lying around, and they simply got their equipment manager to heat press the #18 and NOB for the presser

      since reebok is STILL the official supplier, the broncos were probably prohibited from using a nike jersey, and may have been prohibited from even using a blank

      but to say the guys at reebok whipped this up is probably not the case

  • Rydell | March 20, 2012 at 9:03 pm |

    Never liked the rounded Bronco numbers, the orange makes it worse.

  • Glenn | March 20, 2012 at 9:21 pm |

    interesting article, for what it’s worth

    http://www.9news.com...

    • Rob S | March 20, 2012 at 9:31 pm |

      “Doesn’t start until June”? Err, yeah, it might take that long to get authentic product into wide circulation, but obviously Denver Athletic’s not up on the actual transition date (of which Paul has reminded us, along with the date of Nike’s formal unveiling).

    • Rydell | March 20, 2012 at 9:38 pm |

      interesting, good catch Glenn

  • Rob S | March 20, 2012 at 9:51 pm |

    So… legendary scumbag hockey coach Graham James gets two years in the clink.

    The red mask is reminiscent of a certain pulp hero

    • Phil Hecken | March 20, 2012 at 10:15 pm |

      don’t worry, they’ll take good care of him inside

    • James A | March 20, 2012 at 10:19 pm |

      He better hope there aren’t any Flames fans in the joint.