Ladies and Gents, Your 1979 Tampa Bay Rays

Screen shot 2012-06-20 at 5.37.37 PM.png

Have I mentioned lately how much I love Joe Maddon? Seriously, how many other big league skippers could wear that uniform and look like they were enjoying it? Or to put it another way, how many teams would use their manager, instead of a few players, for this type of photo shoot?

My crush on Maddon notwithstanding, the Rays’ 1979 fauxback design, which they’ll be wearing on June 30 against the Tigers, is an interesting idea. Conceptually, it’s more akin to the 1999 TATC promotion than to a real throwback, because it’s fictitious conjecture, a guess as to what something might look like (or might have looked like). And as I’ve said several times in recent years, the TATC promotion was widely ridiculed by everyone at the time (myself included), but now it seems like a fun chapter in uni history, and the world would be a slightly less interesting place if it had never happened.

I suspect the same arc of assessment will take place with the Rays fauxback. Sure, it’s sort of stupid and undignified, but I think it will seem more and more like a fun idea as time goes on. (Although, admittedly, it seems more fun with Joe Maddon wearing the uni than it might if, say, Evan Longoria was wearing it.) I’m very curious to see if other teams will try something similar. Obviously, it won’t work for teams with deep histories, like the Cubs or Red Sox. But for newer/younger teams, it’s an opportunity to imagine what they would have looked like in previous eras.

What about the design itself? A few thoughts:

• They obviously just knocked off the late-’70s Padres template.

• Just yesterday I was saying how I don’t like navy blue and sky blue together, and that definitely applies here. I think they vibrate too much.

• This doesn’t feel like a home uniform. Would any team have worn a blue jersey and blue pants at home, even in 1979? I doubt it. I guess a white-based uni wouldn’t have have enough of a “Let’s make fun of the ’70s” vibe.

• Wouldn’t the Rays have been the Devil Rays back in ’79? Wish they’d gone that route.

• The little sunburst/flower graphic on the chest logo and cap isn’t bad.

• Should’ve gone with sansabelt pants, not belted.

Surprising that they didn’t go with stirrups, especially since they already have that striped design as part of their wardrobe. Maybe they’ll wise up and wear those for the actual game. I see now that he is wearing stirrups. But the dark sannies don’t work (should’ve gone with light blue or white), and the cut is all wrong for something that’s supposed to evoke 1979.

• In a nice touch, the jersey includes a sleeve patch showing the 1979 version of the St. Petersburg city seal.

• As you can see in that last photo link, the Tigers will be wearing 1979 throwbacks for this game. (As an aside, I always liked the white outlining on their road cap logo during that period. Kinda wish they’d go back to it — I always feel like the orange logo gets swallowed up by the navy background.)

What do you think of it?

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: I’ll be talking about Native American mascots and logos this morning on Connecticut Public Radio’s Where We Live program. I’m slated to be on from 9:20-10am eastern, and you can access the live audio by using the “Listen Live” button on the left sidebar of this page. … Here’s the Sixers’ draft cap (from Michael Preston). … Maryland basketball’s “pride” uniforms, or at least an early developmental rendering of them, have leaked. … Gold baseballs will once again be used at the home run derby. … New uniforms for McDonald’s workers in the UK (from Cary O’Reilly). … In the spirit of Cubees, check out these little Euro 2012 figurines (from Gretchen Mittelstaedt). … The Lightning will unveil a 20th-anniversary logo at this weekend’s draft (from John Muir). … Arkansas baseball has new cleats for the College World Series (from Justin Bates). … We had previously seen Virginia Tech’s G.I. Joe helmet, but I’m not sure we’d seen the corresponding jersey until now. “Not only is it ugly, but it’s boring as well,” says Andrew Cosentino. “Also, note that white will be worn for a home game.” … An independent minor league baseball team is wearing a sponsor’s name instead of an NOB. The article is wrong about no pro team having worn sponsorship patches on a full-time basis, of course (minor league hockey teams wear them all the time), but it’s true that this is unusual for a baseball team (from Sean Abruzzo). … In case you didn’t know, the Olympics are just a branding exercise (from Tom Mulgrew). … Looks like Martin Brodeur wasn’t wearing socks in this team portrait (from Ewan Williams). … New logo for Delaware football (from Erik Autenrieth). … Blue Jays pitcher Carlos Villanueva hit bare-handed (screen shot by Marc Bauche). … I was planning to bid on this amazing curling sweater in Uni Watch colors, but the price got out of hand. Dang. … More Olympics douchebaggery: The U.S. Olympic Committee has ordered a knitting organization to cease and desist with its “knitting Olympics.” … Some cap prank shenanigans in the Pirates dugout recently, as Brad Lincoln and James McDonald were both victimized (from Karl Anderson). … More Maryland news: In a move that doesn’t exactly qualify as a surprise, the football field won’t be black after all. Interesting to see that they’re doing the green color-blocking at the five-yard increments, rather than at the 10-yard increments. … Here’s a page that shows the uniform history of the German hockey team Adler Mannheim (from Brent Griffin). … Check out the old Brooklyn Dodgers football team with the World’s Fair’s trylon and perisphere logo on their jackets (nice find by Larry Bodnovich). … Anything Worth Doing Is Worth Overdoing Dept.: It’s bad enough that the Mets have joined the parade of teams putting colored graffiti on the mound, but now they’ve done likewise in the bullpen. Enough! … RIP, Andrew. Thanks for teaching me so much about the silver screen.

 

322 comments to Ladies and Gents, Your 1979 Tampa Bay Rays

  • Mark W | June 21, 2012 at 7:20 am |

    Look again, he is wearing real stirrups. Blue over a darker blue sani.

    • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 7:42 am |

      Oh, so he is — I thought the cut-out was just the tongue of his shoes. Will adjust the text now!

      • Boxcarvibe | June 21, 2012 at 8:58 am |

        …”As you can see in that last photo link, the Tigers will be wearing 1979 throwbacks for this game.”

        Maybe it’s a Firefox thing, or that I haven’t had enough coffee, but I’m getting no link to the Tigers throwback.

        • Chris Mayberry | June 21, 2012 at 10:03 am |

          Not working for me, either (Internet Explorer).

        • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 3:46 pm |

          “…in that LAST photo link…”

          Guys, it’s the link in the previous graf.

        • boxcarvibe | June 21, 2012 at 10:33 pm |

          My browser at work prevented that picture from loading, but it works fine at home.

        • boxcarvibe | June 21, 2012 at 10:48 pm |

          ..and lets hope they don’t use this “throwback” cap:

          http://www.krukcards...

    • Matt | June 22, 2012 at 4:04 am |

      When I first saw the “Sun” in the A in Rays, I thought it was an orange slice in half for Tropicana Field.

  • BurghFan | June 21, 2012 at 7:21 am |

    To evoke 1979, the Rays don’t just need stirrups, they need high-cut stirrups like this or even this.

  • Bas | June 21, 2012 at 7:25 am |

    I think the rays fauxback is pretty cool. Someone suggested at CC board that they should have used original colors. I think a Tequila sunrise version with those colors would have been outrageous! As far a the button up traditionalists that disliked this idea, if you played in that toilet, you’d want to have fun too .

  • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 7:31 am |

    the sanis should have been powder blue or gold, to truly make it the worst looking uni of all time (surpassing los toros)…this falls into the *so bad it’s good* category

    • Josh | June 21, 2012 at 10:30 am |

      There is NOTHING that could ever surpass this
      http://3.bp.blogspot...
      as the worst uniform EVER

    • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 3:41 pm |

      People sure like an ugly-ass uniform. Like Ricko said, it would/should have had white pants. When I imagined this uni, I had numbers on the right side & a sun that was solid gold with square beams like a cogwheel.

      The cap lettering & layout looks very Little League-ish.

  • JimWa | June 21, 2012 at 7:34 am |

    I LOVE the thinking behind the uniforms, but I’m really bummed by the execution. The Padres are a great source of inspiration. But so are the Blue Jays, the Expos, the Astros, the A’s …

    If you’re going to rip off one, rip off many! The uniforms would have been much more hideous! Seriously, I mean that in a good way.

    • Casey Hart | June 21, 2012 at 10:41 am |

      Agreed. Fun idea that’s totally in line with the personality of the team under Maddon (when he’s not embarrassing himself by sticking up for cheaters). Wish they weren’t such a cookie-cutter replica of the Pads. Should have done a mismash of several of those mentioned above.

    • Brinke | June 21, 2012 at 12:45 pm |

      Yeah I agree, looks like it’s based on the Padres template.

    • Charles N. | June 21, 2012 at 3:53 pm |

      I think these are spectacular. There was definitely some real thinking that went into the design. Anybody else notice how the yellow circle is both a sun with rays and also a citrus slice (for Tropicana Field)? Genius.

  • Blitz | June 21, 2012 at 7:38 am |

    Re: Stirrups,

    They should have either gone with Navy or navy striped stirrups over white or sky sani’s – and definitely at least a 7″ cut if not a 9″ or ribbon. Also def. should have been sans belt.

    All in all its a decent looking set though

  • mcd410x | June 21, 2012 at 7:42 am |

    If you’re going to go 70s style, you need more yellow. Either the shirt underneath or the stripes on the sleeves. More yellow!

    I think it’s a great idea.

  • Jerry | June 21, 2012 at 7:44 am |

    I like the Tigers throwback just for the simplicity of it all. It takes me back to 1979.

  • Ben | June 21, 2012 at 7:46 am |

    Olympic/Super Bowl/everything painter LeRoy Neiman has died
    http://www.bbc.co.uk...

    • Ben | June 21, 2012 at 7:47 am |

      Sorry, that was probably covered yesterday

      • Jeff | June 21, 2012 at 12:05 pm |

        Not covered yesterday, and certainly worth mentioning.

    • Craig D | June 21, 2012 at 8:41 am |

      Coincidence Dept: This weeks episode of Pawn Stars featured a print of Neiman’s – “Love Story”. The subject was tennis, of course. Cory, the boss’ son, was telling the seller that a lot of people were snatching up Neiman paintings because he was 91 and everyone knows that art value increases when the artist dies. Lo and behold, Neiman is gone just two days after the episode aired.

  • Pierre | June 21, 2012 at 7:47 am |

    Do college and professional teams actually believe they are honoring our troops by wearing camo uniforms? Seriously, this reminds me of Ted Nugent wearing a camo hunting hat to demonstrate his supposed patriotism. Come on, sports teams wearing camo is nothig but a cheap gimmick…and just another way to sell more fan gear.

    As I’ve suggested many times about other promotional gimmicks in sports, if a team wants to honor or draw attention and support for a particular then decorate the stadium with appropriate banners and promote the hell out of the cause. But the camo uniform crap is worthy of only ridicule.

    Thanks for allowing me to rant…

    • Pierre | June 21, 2012 at 7:49 am |

      Yea, I know…I’m ashamed of myself for hating the troops and being so un-American.

    • Tom V. | June 21, 2012 at 9:45 am |

      “…Do college and professional teams actually believe they are honoring our troops by wearing camo uniforms?…”

      Yes they do and 95% of the public buys it and then they also buy some team camo gear and some of the military guys think its cool and then 50% of the san diego little league end up requesting camo jerseys. Yes it’s here to stay.

    • Tony C. | June 21, 2012 at 1:02 pm |

      why stop at decorating the walls or field? 90% of all the focus of televised games is on close ups of the players.

      • Tom V. | June 21, 2012 at 2:41 pm |

        …They should put actual face paint and camoflauge their skin too!…now you’re speaking my language. REALLY honor the troops!

        • Tony C. | June 21, 2012 at 3:40 pm |

          probably the next step.

    • Kyle Yarbrough | June 22, 2012 at 4:13 am |

      It makes a difference when they bring to light the difficulties that wounded warriors and their families face. It makes a difference when they raise money, and then donate it to the Wounded Warrior Foundation to help the cause, and support the troops. You may think it’s gimmicky and a lame P.R. attempt. I however find it touching that giant corporations, and universities who make millions are willing to take the time to do this, and then give back to a cause, even if it’s just for a few Saturdays a year. KUDOS to Under Armor for supporting the troops, even if it’s unappealing to the trained uniform loving eye.

      Kyle (Army EOD Veteran)

  • Fred | June 21, 2012 at 7:55 am |

    Fun idea for the Rays! Looks pretty decent for a late 70s/early 80s uniform but it’s rather comical Maddon is wearing an athletic undershirt. For what purpose? Waiting for the day when baseball managers finally get out of uniforms…

    Actually in general, I get annoyed when people wear athletic undershirts as a regular shirt. If you don’t plan on doing a physical activity, please avoid wearing them otherwise you look like a joke.

    • Ry Co 40 | June 21, 2012 at 8:38 am |

      “Waiting for the day when baseball managers finally get out of uniforms”

      kinky! haha. kidding

      i’ve been saying that khakis, a team polo, and the on-field hat would do just fine for the managers

      • Fred | June 21, 2012 at 8:48 am |

        Oh ugh, haha.

        I wonder if the ground the managers stand on has anything to do with how they wear their outfits? I’m looking at basketball and hockey- coaches are in suits and ties because they’re on clean floors (assuming the coaches don’t get in front of the bench where players drip blood, sweat or spit). In football, khakis and polos are the norm because they’re on the grass on the sideline. In baseball, you’re standing on dirt and there’s all kind of spitting. The dugout is probably the dirtiest place for a manager to be in so they feel the need to put on a baseball uniform?

        • Perry | June 21, 2012 at 10:03 am |

          Lots of baseball managers actually perform baseball activities before the game — hitting infield, throwing BP, etc. Maybe not so much at the big league level any more, but I know I’ve seen Clint Hurdle throwing BP for the Rockies. As I said, not so much at the big-league level. :-)

        • Tom | June 21, 2012 at 10:55 am |

          Many football coaches used to wear suits on the sidelines. Look up George Halas, Paul Brown, Tom Landry, Vince Lombardi, et al. NFL coaches are attired now in multi-million dollar NFL-sanctioned clothing deal outfits. You’ll notice almost all the coaches wearing the same style of shirt and pants changing each year to ensure Reebok, or now Nike, showcase new stuff for people to buy.

      • Tom | June 21, 2012 at 10:49 am |

        After Connie Mack left the dugout, MLB changed the rules to require everyone in dugout to where full uniform. Somehow, this exempts trainers/medical staff. Terry Francona actually got in trouble a few years ago for wearing only a windbreaker shell instead of a uniform shirt. I imagine if left to their own choice, many managers and some coaches who don’t stand in coaching boxes on the field would opt for more comfortable team color outfits although almost all of them already go with pajama length pants.

        • Tommy Gioiosa | June 21, 2012 at 3:33 pm |

          Pete Rose also got a warning from the National League for wearing a warmup jacket and no official jersey while managing the Reds. Apparently he had put on some serious weight and didn’t like how he looked in the uniform.

        • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 3:47 pm |

          After Connie Mack left the dugout, MLB changed the rules to require everyone in dugout to where full uniform.

          There is no such rule for managers. Go look for it — you’ll never find it, because it doesn’t exist.

          It’s true that MLB has instructed many managers to wear a real uniform, instead of a sweatshirt or BP top or whatever. But it’s not in the rulebook. It’s just an edict from the commissioner’s office.

  • Terry Mark | June 21, 2012 at 8:01 am |

    It’s a fun idea that the Rays are trying to carry out. I’m curious to know if there were any other mockups that Tampa Bay considered before selecting the design. I think a cartoonish Devil Ray would have been fun to see on, say, the cap, much like the Orioles.

    • Faronicus | June 21, 2012 at 11:14 am |

      I was thinking something akin to a groovy or technicolor devil ray, perhaps shooting clouds of rainbows across the chest. But something tells me the Rays would/should have been orange-and-red, like the Buccaneers of old.

  • Joe O. | June 21, 2012 at 8:01 am |

    They are ugly and ridiculous. If they are “throwing back” shouldn’t they be the “Devil Rays”? Does everybody forget that they JUST became the Rays and that is on top of the stupidity of naming your sports teams after a nearby body of water. The Orlando Magic should change their names to the Lake Eola Magic and wear a design from the 70′s next year.

    • Edward B | June 21, 2012 at 8:33 am |

      Did you forget your Rays history? They JUST switched back to the Rays. They only changed to “Devil Rays” during the 90′s, when everybody thought you needed to be edgy. Remember, when they we founded back in 1964, the name Rays was picked for its multiple connotations with the area. The rays of the sun, the many species of rays in the waters of Tampa Bay, and Ray Charles, who got his start in Tampa in the ’40s, and who the owner at the time (Maxwell Alexander) was a big fan of. I suggest you pick up a copy of the Rays history: “A Ray of Sunshine – the birth and early history of the Tampa Rays” by Lou McClatchey (2004). It talks about all their greats, like Justin “Smokin’” Smith, Lynn Gaines, Grover Sunderland, and “Whistler” Pete Fausak.

      • Ry Co 40 | June 21, 2012 at 8:42 am |

        didn’t they also bring in Ray Kinsella to build their first field?

      • Bouj | June 21, 2012 at 8:49 am |

        Great summary. Someone at CC’s Board wrote a similar bit that explained that the Rays were the Rays until a name change in the 90′s, and the 2008 re-color was a return to tradition for them.

        All in all, a fun idea for a one-off.

        • teenchy | June 21, 2012 at 9:25 am |

          I see where you’re coming from but this is the MLB (Devil) Rays we’re talking about, the franchise that began in 1998 as the Devil Rays.

      • Juan Grande | June 21, 2012 at 9:19 am |

        “Did you forget your Rays history? They JUST switched back to the Rays. They only changed to “Devil Rays” during the 90′s, when everybody thought you needed to be edgy. Remember, when they we founded back in 1964, the name Rays was picked for its multiple connotations with the area.”

        Ummmm….. the Rays (Devil Rays) inaugural season was 1998….

        • Joe | June 21, 2012 at 9:29 am |

          Haha, Edward B., you are brilliant! (And Juan Grande doesn’t get it)

        • Nick | June 21, 2012 at 11:33 am |

          …that’s the joke

      • Chris Holder | June 21, 2012 at 9:24 am |

        Nice response. I absolutely LOVE this idea, regardless of the actual uniform. It represents a sports franchise that’s actually trying to… get ready for this… have some fun. I know, I know, they’ll probably sell a few of these on the side and make some profit from it. So what. They could have done a black alternate and done that, but they chose the fauxback instead. Kudos to the Rays.

        Diamondbacks, Rockies, Marlins… it’s time for you to step up to the plate.

        • Judy | June 21, 2012 at 12:56 pm |

          “Diamondbacks, Rockies, Marlins…it’s time for you to step up to the plate.”

          I haven’t read far enough in the comments to see if somebody has already suggested this, but this seems like a great idea for a uni design challenge: design fauxback uniforms for teams that don’t have a long history, like the teams mentioned above or the NFL Jaguars / Panthers, etc.

          While I love the idea of the Rays’ fauxback, I think one of the designers on this site could’ve come up with a much better concept. Bonus points if, like Edward B has done, you can come up with a creative faux history of the franchise.

          Now I’ll go back to reading the comments to see if I’m just echoing what others have already suggested…

        • J-Dub | June 21, 2012 at 1:15 pm |

          Seems like a great idea for a UniWatch contest: “Design the Faux-backs for the post 1980 Expansion Clubs”

      • JamesP. | June 21, 2012 at 9:45 am |

        Ok, this sold me on the ’79 fauxbacks…though they need accurate pants, stirrups, and cleats… ;-)

        Aweseome faux-history.

        • Dave Mac | June 21, 2012 at 12:24 pm |

          It’s crazy how literal everyone is on here. This was clearly a joking “faux” history.

          I don’t have a problem with Rays being on the chest. Even when they were the Devil Rays, the team was often called the “Rays” for short. It’s totally plausible that they would have had a 70s uniform sporting the nickname. How often have the Knicks been called their true name, the Knickerbockers? Everyone needs to relax. It’s a fake concept to begin with, so we don’t need to keep imposing ultra-literal rules.

      • hugh.c.mcbride | June 21, 2012 at 11:56 am |

        Edward B for QOTD!

  • Garrett | June 21, 2012 at 8:02 am |

    I wonder if Villanueva batted bare-handed while he was with the Brewers. Can anyone find a pic?

  • The Jeff | June 21, 2012 at 8:06 am |

    Well… at least it does look like a 70′s uniform. I suppose they’ve succeeded in what they were trying to do. They should have been the Devil Rays and used their old colors, and they should have done something that was less of a blatant copycat uniform. The 70′s were an era of uniform experimentation, after all. Also, the Y is just wrong. It’s cut off when it should probably extend under the rest of the letter. It’s really awkward looking.

  • Gordon | June 21, 2012 at 8:09 am |

    LOVE the Rays’ fauxbacks. The whole concept of a fauxback is SO much better than TATC. Both involve conjecture as to “what if” but with the fauxbacks, that conjecture has historical context.

    With TATC, the conjecture involved wildly flailing assumptions about what the future may look like. That almost never works. Just look at the first Star Trek movie. Those hideous uniforms. Ugh.

  • Bernard | June 21, 2012 at 8:10 am |

    That big yellow 70 is screaming at me. Is that comic sans? Whatever, it sucks. I want to like this way more than I actually do.

    • Ry Co 40 | June 21, 2012 at 8:49 am |

      block numbers would have done wonders for this uni. it’s the lemon slice that’s hurting my eyes.

      mark me down for not really liking this uni. they had SOOO much wonderful shit to pick from, and so much potential.

      • Bernard | June 21, 2012 at 8:57 am |

        This uniform is more like that Brady Bunch movie from 1995 (that lampooned, rather than attempting to recreate, the TV show) than an actual exercise in “what might have been”.

    • walter | June 21, 2012 at 5:05 pm |

      No, it’s awesome. It’s also on the right, which I appreciate.

  • Pierre | June 21, 2012 at 8:11 am |

    A really nice, garish, seventies touch to TB’s fauxbacks would have been white shoes…

  • Connie | June 21, 2012 at 8:18 am |

    “… New logo for Delaware football (from Erik Autenrieth) …”

    Rats. Here we have a school with a long and distinguished football history AND one of the best and most distinctive nicknames. Blue Hens! So what do the new design boys do? A semi-abstract rendering of the blue-and-yellow Michigan-like helmet stripes. No blue hen. Sinful.

    ” … Check out the old Brooklyn Dodgers football team with the World’s Fair’s trylon and perisphere logo on their jackets (nice find by Larry Bodnovich) … ”

    One of the all-time great logos, no? I can’t get enough of that particular World’s Fair. (As opposed to the giant Meh that was 1964-65.)

    “… Have I mentioned lately how much I love Joe Maddon?..”

    He’s pretty cool, no question. What do you make of this tiff with Davey Johnson? Is he really pissed off or is this a “feud” a la Fred Allen vs Jack Benny?

    • J.R. Clark | June 21, 2012 at 8:23 am |

      Davey’s right…he looks like a weird wuss.

    • Bernard | June 21, 2012 at 8:31 am |

      A semi-abstract rendering of the blue-and-yellow Michigan-like helmet stripes. No blue hen. Sinful.

      It might just be me, but I’m also seeing an abstract blue hen in there. Yellow beak.

      • Connie | June 21, 2012 at 9:06 am |

        You’re probably right, Bernard, and good on you, but if it’s that subtle, then I don’t like it. I want a goddam blue hen.

        • Bernard | June 21, 2012 at 9:30 am |

          Well, you’re certainly entitled to that! And I agree, it’s too subtle. This logo is trying to do too many things at once (helmet stripes, football shape, abstract bird). They outsmarted themsleves.

      • Ry Co 40 | June 21, 2012 at 9:43 am |

        “I’m also seeing an abstract blue hen in there. Yellow beak”

        i don’t see it at all… it’s just abstract garbage with kind colors

      • The Rob | June 21, 2012 at 11:31 am |

        I saw it too, and I really liked it. I was prepared to be disappointed with another angry bird but this is kind of cool.

    • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 8:32 am |

      I’m disappointed in how Maddon’s been handling this. His player got caught — accept it and move on.

      However, my respect for (or crush on) Maddon is so great that I find myself wondering if I’m wrong and he’s right. Like, maybe lots of pitchers do have pine tar in their gloves, and maybe it is something that’s been self-policed for generations, just like Maddon claims. I don’t know. Even if that’s true, though, it’s hard to make a public case for something that’s been private. Maddon can’t win this fight in the media because he just comes off like a sore loser, so he should let it go.

      • Fred | June 21, 2012 at 8:52 am |

        I respect Maddon for sounding off. I don’t think he cares about his perception in the media just as long as he stands by what he believes in. If he thinks that this “standard” practice of putting pine tar in the glove is going to get you thrown out/suspended, then enforce that rule for everybody else.

        It could be that pitchers use pine tar for one or two pitches in a game and that’s pretty “standard”. Maybe Peralta uses pine tar more than others, who knows.

        He should shut up when the issue gets so strong that it actually affects his team’s play. But otherwise, rant on Maddon, rant on.

        • Matt | June 21, 2012 at 9:44 am |

          I think Maddon did what any good manager would do, deflect the fact his guy got caught cheating tar-handed (which he has never denied) and put the focus on him.

          Could he have let it go and it would have quietly fallen into a footnote in baseball history? (Niekro, Rogers, etc.) Yes. But, that’s not his style. The fact he was irked that the Nats took information based upon Peralta’s playing days with them and used it against him, seems to violate one of those idiotic unwritten rules of baseball in his mind’s eye – “Insider trading” was Maddon’s term.

          Should Peralta have not used the glove knowing this was a possibility? Of course. I see it as a classic attack the credibilty of the whistle-blower and morph the story into a bigger narrative. Maddon accomplished both. Does it come off as whiney? Of course, but it’s a lose-lose and he chose to expand it, rather than let it die a quiet death.

          I do find it fascinating that he seems to get into battles with the Daveys and Valentines of the world on these so-call “old-school” issues.

      • DJ | June 21, 2012 at 10:44 am |

        First, he used the wrong term. If he was going to criticize Johnson, he should’ve called it a “chicken shit move.”

        A bit of deflection, to be sure, which is to Maddon’s credit. But I rather prefer Steve Stone’s take during the Sox/Cubs game last night: Peralta’s pitching against his old team, who know very well how and where he doctors the ball, and Peralta goes out with the same glove, loaded up in the same way. He deserved to get caught for being stupid. Now that it’s all over, we can (or should) have a good laugh about it.

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 9:22 am |

      Connie, are you aware of this?…
      http://images.comicc...

      • LarryB | June 21, 2012 at 1:29 pm |

        Not Connie, but that is cool.

        • Connie | June 21, 2012 at 3:49 pm |

          Is it ever! Thanks, Rick. I would have tipped my hat this morning, but this social construct called “work” intervened and, sorry, I just lost my sense of priorities.

        • Connie | June 21, 2012 at 3:53 pm |

          PS to Rick: So who is The Sandman? Is his super-power the ability to put his adversaries to sleep? Or is that my college economics professor? And who is Slam Bradley, and what’s his shtick?

          I love super-heros who didn’t make it.

        • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 4:52 pm |

          Not Rick here, but yes, The Sandman (Wesley Dodds) used to put criminals to sleep with his gas gun. He was part of DC’s Justice Society, not to be confused with Marvel’s Sandman (a villain) who was made of sand and who could change shapes and density. I believe DC’s newest Sandman is a little like both of them.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 4:54 pm |

          The Sandman, who debuted in Adventure Comics, DID have a sort of gas gun that put people to sleep (much as the Green Hornet’s did later)…
          http://www.theminx.c...
          The character soon morphed in a hero of the tights-wearing variety and gained a young sidekick, Sandy (with the Jack Kirby taking over the artwork)…
          http://www.collector...

          Slam Bradley was a rough tough private eye who appeared in Detective Comics even prior to the birth of Batman, I believe…
          http://upload.wikime...

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 5:00 pm |

          I should have noted that Slam Bradley was by Jerry Seigel and Joe Schuster, who also created the slightly better-known Superman.

          And World’s Fair Comics was the precursor of World Finest Comics, a DC staple for decades, the comic that eventually introduced the Superman-Batman team up as the lead story every issue.

  • AceFace | June 21, 2012 at 8:21 am |

    The Rays uni misses just ever so slightly. I do like the lettering font, especially on the cap. And really needs the sansabelt pants. As for the Tigers, I grew up with them wearing that uniform, so of course I love it. The white outline around the “D” on the cap could be executed on today’s road uni, but if they do, I would hope that the size of the letter itself would stay the same as it is now, with a very fine white outline, not this big giant 70′s D. Now, what I’d REALLY love to see, is the Tigers throwing back to their ’68 road uni, with the simple no-frills, no piping grey flannel, the plain old “Detroit” on the chest, no NOB, and the TV number on one sleeve only. Perhaps the next time they play the Cardinals at Busch?

    • Gusto44 | June 21, 2012 at 8:33 am |

      One can understand why the Rays are trying anything on the marketing front to attract more fans, they’re still a paltry 28th out of 30th in MLB attendance. That franchise is learning the tough part wasn’t building a winner in the difficult AL East, rather, it’s getting community support.

      Ironically, the make believe 1979 uniforms are pointing to a tradition which doesn’t exist, and it’s the lack of tradition which may lead to the eventual relocation of the team. The owner has told the media years ago the Rays wouldn’t be fulfilling their use agreement without a new stadium, and there’s been no significant progress in that area.

      • Rob H | June 21, 2012 at 2:29 pm |

        Well if it’s a lack of tradition that may help lead to an eventual relocation, then making up some fictional tradition might be a good idea.

      • Ben Fortney | June 21, 2012 at 2:38 pm |

        Biz of Baseball has covered it before, Rays are stuck where they are. No city can afford a new stadium right now.

    • Chris Holder | June 21, 2012 at 9:26 am |

      I think the front panel on the cap should be white, along with some white striping somewhere on the jersey and pants. As it stands, it’s just TOO MUCH BLUE. It needs the white (or even more yellow) to break that up some.

  • Scott Davis | June 21, 2012 at 8:25 am |

    That sound you just heard was Jim Vilk starting his car and screeching the tires so he can be first in line at Sports Authority for a 1979 Rays jersey.

    • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 2:49 pm |

      You got that right!

      I have a double-blue raglan shirt which, unfortunately, is light blue with dark sleeves. Otherwise, I’d be DIYing that jersey fersure, dontcha know.

  • Michael Emody | June 21, 2012 at 8:25 am |

    Yellow belts would make a good substitute for the sansabelt’s.

  • Dumb Guy | June 21, 2012 at 8:29 am |

    Groovy. Let’s all hop in the Mystery Machine and solve a crime!!

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 9:04 am |

      Or, they coulda said they discovered that uni by using (wait for it) Mr. Peabody’s Rayback Machine.

      That will not be explained. You either get it or you don’t.

      :)

      • teenchy | June 21, 2012 at 9:29 am |

        … as described by Elmer Fudd. :)

      • JenInChicago | June 21, 2012 at 10:59 am |

        Awesome, Ricko…..

      • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

        Got it. Nice one!

        • Connie | June 21, 2012 at 3:54 pm |

          I thought it was The Wayback Machine.

  • Todd | June 21, 2012 at 8:34 am |

    I think it will look even better on a player and without the long sleeves underneath. I am assuming we should expect the usual “they didn’t get matching helmets” complaint, but you never know with the Rays. They usually are high on the style side of things. Cool idea.

  • Pierre | June 21, 2012 at 8:36 am |

    Looking at TB’s fauxback jersey I am reminded of print ads I see every now and then for blouses for teenage girls printed with cute sayings and designs and called “FUN TOPS…!”.

    No more freakin’ dignity…

  • Alan | June 21, 2012 at 8:40 am |

    The devil is in the details with those Rays uni’s. I think it’s fun, but may be ushering in a new era of overuse by other teams…we can only wait and see.

    You’ve got an extra “i” in “Lightning” in the ticker…about their 20th anniversary logo.

    • Rob H | June 21, 2012 at 2:30 pm |

      Actually the “Devil” is not in the details. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)

  • Roger | June 21, 2012 at 8:41 am |

    I love the rays retro uni. I would wear it on a train … in the rain …

  • Chris | June 21, 2012 at 8:54 am |

    I actually would like to see the Red Sox or Cubs uniforms from the mid late 70′s again. The Sox wore, up until 1978, red caps with a blue bill, polyester pull over jersey with a red and blue v-neck, with the sans-a-belt waist band to match the v-neck. I also wish they would go back to the red white and blue stirrup perminantly.

    • Shane | June 21, 2012 at 10:54 am |

      I still think the Sox should bust out that cap when they wear their red alts.

    • walter | June 21, 2012 at 11:35 am |

      Baseball people tend to get cold feet when it comes to throwing back to the sans-a-belt. The vibe is “Tacky” and “Cheap”, but it is also a vital design element that sharply divides a player into top and bottom halves, an effect which is downplayed today.

  • Mike V. | June 21, 2012 at 8:56 am |

    I love the idea of doing a ‘what if’ faux-back. Keeps things interesting. It’s all in good fun for one game. The execution is very much lacking, but that may be a good thing. If the uni ended up being great, then there might of been talk by the fans, club, etc. to use them again and again. I like this being a one and done deal.

    • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 8:57 am |

      I believe the plan is to wear them once a year.

      • Mike V. | June 21, 2012 at 9:13 am |

        Once a year is fine. If TATC taught us anything it is that things like this won’t kill baseball. If Ray fans really wanted to play along, since it is only once a year they wear these, fans should go to games dresses in 70′s attire. That would make a really fun game once a year.

        *one and done / year

    • Faronicus | June 21, 2012 at 11:24 am |

      Why not throw all the way back? See how the expansion teams would have looked in the 1880s. Imagine the fun of the “Arizona Territory Diamond-backed Snakes Baseball Club (ATDBSBC)” and the “Tampa Bay Trading Post Devilish Ray-Fish Athletic Association”, all wearing their chest-shields and straw hats.

      • ryan4fregosi | June 21, 2012 at 1:33 pm |

        Just once, I’d like to see the White Sox back in the softball-style Spirit of ’77 “South Side Hit Men” togs…but would the Sox celebrate a win by tucking their jerseys in??

        • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 2:52 pm |

          Ha!

  • Steve Cook | June 21, 2012 at 9:01 am |

    The new College World Series cleats must me Nebraska, not Arkansas, right?
    I mean, that appears to be the state of Nebraska on the tongue.

    • Charlie | June 21, 2012 at 9:04 am |

      The College World Series is played in Omaha, Nebraska. The University of Nebraska is not participating.

      • Steve Cook | June 21, 2012 at 9:07 am |

        Oooops. Thanks. I should have realized that. Duh!

  • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:07 am |

    “…the Rays fauxback. Sure, it’s sort of stupid and undignified…”

    This just means that it matches their stadium.

    • Tony C. | June 21, 2012 at 1:03 pm |

      +1000xp

  • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:09 am |

    I actually kind of like this faux-back.

    I agree with some of the statements that they could have/should have made it uglier by using other templates or combinations.
    However, I’m sure that the Rays organization wants to $ELL these jerseys, too, so they can’t make them TOO ugly.

  • Vincent Barone | June 21, 2012 at 9:09 am |

    Goodness, those Maryland Pride jersey concepts are hideous. Anyway, when will Nike’s whole tight-tops, baggy-shorts trend end? It’s ridiculous. Those models look like clowns.

    • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:22 am |

      As a Maryland alum, I have mixed feelings about a lot of the Maryland Pride junk.
      And I dislike the whole rebranding they did recently. Blech

      • Vincent Barone | June 21, 2012 at 10:12 am |

        I hear ya. It is nice when teams incorporate an aspect of their location into their designs to create a more personal brand/pay homage to the fans. And…I mean…the Maryland flag is certainly a doozie, so I will at least give Maryland kodos for trying.

  • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:14 am |

    I want to see a minor league baseball team where a bail bonds sponsor on their uniforms!

    • James A | June 21, 2012 at 10:36 am |

      In sticking to the Big 4, not only does minor league hockey have ads on the uniforms, but the WNBA as well.

  • Eriq Jaffe | June 21, 2012 at 9:15 am |

    I’m pretty sure the “sunburst/flower” thing is supposed to be a grapefruit.

  • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 9:15 am |

    Where We Live is on the interwebs now…paul to go on shortly

    • Fred | June 21, 2012 at 10:59 am |

      Thought you were too busy to go on the radio?

      • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

        i work a full-time (actually more than that, especially recently) job in addition to my UW duties, so i didn’t know what specifically my availability would have been

        turns out i probably could have been on the show, but i offered the gig to paul and he took it — and i’m glad he did — he did a great job; i didn’t need to have the distraction of the office (especially since half of the office decided they needed to be off today) possibly affect anything

  • Matthew Robins | June 21, 2012 at 9:19 am |

    Love the Rays “throwback” caps. The rest of the look is fun and a little all over the place, but why not?! Their current look, especially when they don stirrups is becoming pretty classy and tradition by today’s standards. Kudos to the franchise for a creative promotion and since we’ve seen the Smokers and Tarpons looks already, I’m happy to see what “would have been” for an under 20 year old franchise. PS: Washington is doing real throwbacks later this season. My buddy at New Era saw the caps and told me to stay tuned…

    • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:20 am |

      July 5 versus the Giants

  • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:19 am |

    In regards to the Maryland football field, if they do it exactly as shown, they ARE coloring the field in 10-yard blocks. It’s just that the first 5 yards are different. It appears to me that they want the yard numbering to be on the same color tone.

    • Nathan | June 21, 2012 at 9:31 am |

      I think you missed a key use of the word “the”.

      “they’re doing the green color-blocking at THE five-yard increments, rather than at THE 10-yard increments”

      I also like it because the color stripes are now symmetrical. Otherwise you have one endzone touching light green and the other touching dark green.

      • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:34 am |

        Thanks for the correction.

  • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:22 am |

    I’m going to the Mets-Yankees game on Friday.

    • Ry Co 40 | June 21, 2012 at 9:38 am |

      make sure you document the whole thing with pics, descriptions, everything. maybe phil will use it as a weekend post! phil?

      • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 9:43 am |

        yeah, um…no

        • Ry Co 40 | June 21, 2012 at 9:45 am |

          :-)

  • Cork | June 21, 2012 at 9:25 am |

    FWIW, here is the back of the Rays Fauxback…

    TAMPA BAY RAYS 1979 FAUXBACK BACK

    • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 9:27 am |

      Woof!

      • Mark in Shiga | June 21, 2012 at 12:07 pm |

        In 1979 that stupid MLB logo wouldn’t have been there. And even if they had to include that, they should have put it in the sky-blue part right on the collar instead of lowering it into the dark-blue part so that it really stands out.

        I still love the uniform, though.

    • Rob H | June 21, 2012 at 2:35 pm |

      I was hoping the back lettering would match the yellow in the front, but I didn’t expect it would.

    • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 2:54 pm |

      It just gets better!

  • DAG | June 21, 2012 at 9:28 am |

    I very much enjoy the Rays fauxbacks. I agree that sansibelt pants would be better. But if they are going to wear belts, let’s hope they wear a blue athletic belt. Looks like Maddon is wearing a brown leather belt in the pic.

  • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:33 am |

    “This doesn’t feel like a home uniform. Would any team have worn a blue jersey and blue pants at home, even in 1979?”

    The Phillies wore that all maroon thing. But then, they only wore it once, huh?
    The Padres and Pirates wore all yellow.
    Several teams wore the powder blue road uniforms.

    My point is… It’s quite possible that they could have worn a blue jersey and pants. Especially in the 70s.

    • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 9:37 am |

      but not at home

      that’s the point

      • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 9:57 am |

        Wow. My attention to detail must be off.

        However, the Phillies all maroon WAS worn at home.
        May 19, 1979 vs the Expos
        http://en.wikipedia....

        http://www.baseball-...

        But then again, it was only worn once due to the public backlash of the ugliness.

        • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 10:05 am |

          yes, i’m well aware of the “saturday night specials” (and they were intended to be worn more than once-as you correctly point out, the bad pub nixed that)

          my point, and paul’s, was that if the rays existed (probably as the “devil rays”) in 1979, and they had a garish uniform such as they will be “fauxbacking” to…they probably would have also had a white counterpart they wore for home games…not 100% certain, of course, but very, very likely — if they had this uni then, it would have almost certainly been a road uni

      • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 10:05 am |

        Dark jersey at home in the ’70s?
        Sure.
        But because powder blue was an alternative to road gray for every team but the Blue Jays, home pants likely would have been white.

        A rotation including dark jerseys (or non-white) at home were standard for the Indians and A’s during that era. A’s wore their whites only on Sundays at home.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 10:08 am |

          And, of course, the bumblebee Pirates.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 10:16 am |

          That’s a gray Tigers road uni.

          My point was that in the ’70s, with so many teams wearing powder on the road, the Rays likely would have opted for white pants at home rather than powder.

          I’m talking about ’70s thinking. Not what someone thinks was ’70s thinking.

        • Eriq Jaffe | June 21, 2012 at 2:05 pm |

          The White Sox routinely wore their navy uniforms at home in the late ’70s, as well. I saw them in person on numerous occasions. Don’t recall them ever pairing them up with the navy pants at home, though. Although they might have and I just don’t remember it.

        • Rob H | June 21, 2012 at 2:39 pm |

          Powder blue was the Blue Jays’ road uniform back in the day, yet when they wore it as a throwback up until this season, they wore it at home, so in a way, wearing a 70s color road uniform (even a faux one) could be expected at home. We can pretend in this fictional history that it was a road uniform in 1979, and yet still enjoy it as a home throwback today.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 3:53 pm |

          Well, yeah, because making up history is always the way to go. That way we always get what we want.

    • anthony | June 21, 2012 at 10:12 am |

      But isn’t Detroit wearing white to this game? (as shown above). Perhaps that’s the reason for TB to wear blue. Just a thought.

      • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 10:16 am |

        i’m pretty sure the rays are covering the costs of the tigers for the throwbacks, so in essence, they call the shots here…they could have put themselves in white and detroit in gray

        would it have been impossible for the rays to have worn dark blue over dark blue at home in 1979? no

        but would it have been very, very unlikely? yes

        the point is probably lost on this argument — like paul said, they wanted to pick the most garish possible uni, and wearing dark over dark worked a LOT better than wearing a typical “home” (white) uni would have

        • Nick | June 21, 2012 at 11:37 am |

          why would the rays foot the bill for detroit’s throwbacks? has a home team paid for a road teams throwbacks before? i feel if a road team willingly participates in a throwback promotion, they should make and pay for their own

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:12 pm |

          Standard procedure.
          It’s a home team promotion, so they foot the bill.

        • Nick | June 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm |

          Ahh, didn’t know that. thanks for the clarification

      • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 10:19 am |

        Detroit’s throwback is gray.

  • Roger | June 21, 2012 at 9:40 am |

    Leroy Neiman passed away.

    http://www.sfgate.co...

    • Chance Michaels | June 21, 2012 at 10:49 am |

      “We cannot risk violating the Geneva Conventions!”

  • Tom | June 21, 2012 at 9:48 am |

    I thought maybe the flower/sunburst logo could also be orange segments.

  • Kyle Beaudoin | June 21, 2012 at 9:58 am |

    Maybe this has been covered before but Im a bit perplexed as to why so many Maryland based teams (not just the Terps) feature the state flag in their uniforms? The Ravens and Orioles have both had it featured on their everyday sleeve patches at one point or another. I think the flag itself is kind of cool looking (reminds me of old European Crests) but you dont see teams in many other states doing that. I recall the Arizona Cardinals having the their state flag on their white unis prior to their overhaul but I cant think of any others teams.

    • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 10:11 am |

      That’s because you have to have a good state flag. (Maryland, Texas, California)
      Most states don’t. Most state flags are boring fields (usually blue) with a state seal (Virginia, Utah, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Kansas, New York, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Illinois).

      Other teams worked their state flag in, too. See Columbus Blue Jackets, Texas Rangers, Tennessee Titans, Colorado Rockies (the HOCKEY team).

    • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 10:11 am |

      The Oklahoma Thunder chose their shade of blue from the state flag.

    • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 10:19 am |

      Also, it’s a Maryland pride thing.
      I’m pretty sure there are some Americans who don’t know that Maryland is a state, though.

      • Frank from Bmore | June 21, 2012 at 12:49 pm |

        Not only the sports teams, tons of business in the are use some sort of the Calvert and Crossland coat of arms in their logos. Marylanders just have a sense of pride as it relates to the flag. Even the National guard units use them.

        • Judy | June 21, 2012 at 1:06 pm |

          Well, it’s a pretty awesome flag. But then, I’m a Maryland native, so I may be a little biased.

        • Tim H | June 22, 2012 at 1:24 pm |

          Even we Virginians can appreciate the coolness of the Maryland flag. Of course, ours has a boobie on it!

    • Tim H | June 22, 2012 at 1:29 pm |

      And how about that field? Like the design but, Jesus Christ, doesn’t anyone want to fucking play on real grass anymore?

  • Gusto44 | June 21, 2012 at 9:58 am |

    This will never happen of course, but it would be fun to see a New York Yankees tequila sunrise uniform. This version would have to use all the colors of the logo in terms of acquiring the look(red, and lighter blue).

    • The Jeff | June 21, 2012 at 11:16 am |

      but it would be fun to see a New York Yankees tequila sunrise uniform

      Dammit, don’t post things like that, because some nutcase like me will actually make a mock-up of it and then have to beg Paul & Phil to get unbanned for posting it. C’mon man…

      • Gusto44 | June 21, 2012 at 12:30 pm |

        Do it Jeff, and use Jeter’s uniform number for the pants. LOL

      • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 2:56 pm |

        Use the pinstripes to do it vertically instead of horizontally…

  • EddieAtari | June 21, 2012 at 10:00 am |

    Rays’ fauxback looks like retro-Padres meets Pepsi Light

    • Mark | June 21, 2012 at 11:22 am |

      That is an epic “taking the words out of my mouth” win! I thought that the yellow thing in the “rays” wordmark looked familiar!

      • Judy | June 21, 2012 at 1:08 pm |

        I was trying to figure out what it was that the uniform reminded me of, and you totally nailed it. Pepsi Light.

        And I’ll admit – I actually liked Pepsi Light. Yes, I was the one person who liked it.

  • todd krevanchi | June 21, 2012 at 10:01 am |

    Does Professor Blackhawk know how to public speak? Isnt that a prerequisite for being a professor… especially at a prestigious University as Yale? Either he wasnt paying attention, couldn’t care less about the topic, or just has no idea how to speak on the phone.

    • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 10:10 am |

      Dude, that’s harsh. Some people get nervous on the radio, some people just aren’t as directly declarative, etc. I agree he won’t win any awards for dynamic speaking, but that doesn’t mean the ideas he expressed — which were strong — aren’t worthwhile.

    • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 10:13 am |

      i thought he did fine…next time you’re interviewed for a syndicated radio show, we’ll all critique your performance, k?

    • todd krevanchi | June 21, 2012 at 11:42 am |

      Harsh? He is a Professor at arguably one of the world’s greatest Universities. It’s necessary for him to succeed at public speaking and to be declaritive when speaking about issues to groups of people.
      I’m not saying he directly has no passion for the topic, i simply offered reasons why he was so invisible on the air. Lack of preparation? I don’t know.
      Feel free to critique any time.

    • ChrisH | June 21, 2012 at 12:51 pm |

      I did not get to listen or (what I really wanted to do)call in with questions.
      Was that the format of that the program or was it a lecture-type or debate club listening experience?
      How soon will today’s the program be available for internet replay?
      I’d like to listen to hear if the professor’s on-air performance was as bad as you say and to hear how ideas/opinions were presented and supported by facts(?).

    • Christopher F. | June 21, 2012 at 3:16 pm |

      Settle down there. Public speaking and speaking on the radio are two different things.

      I’m a naturally good public speaker. Debate team state champion, given hundreds of speeches at trade shows, etc.

      Years back I was invited to be the permenent co-host of a podcast. It was run much like a real radio talk show, in a very professional manner. It took me a month or so to be comfortable doing it- and the results of the first few shows were embarassing as hell.

      First of all, public speaking is generally orating a pre-written speech. Radio is- especially for a one-time guest- exactly NOT that.

      • todd krevanchi | June 21, 2012 at 3:27 pm |

        I’m finding it odd that being critical of someone’s performance on a radio show, on this, a blog which is critical of someone’s designs, someone’s manner of dress, etc, on a daily basis, is catching this much scrutiny.

        • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 3:43 pm |

          When we critique a design, that’s exactly what we’re talking about — the design.

          That guy wasn’t on the radio because of his speaking ability; he was on the radio because of his expertise and ideas. Try critiquing those, because that’s what’s relevant here.

          It’s about what he said, not how he said it. (Same goes for everything I said too, natch.)

        • ChrisH | June 21, 2012 at 4:12 pm |

          If you know you are going to be a panelist on a media forum, whether you’re a man on the street, a celebrity or an academic, you’d probably do some measure of preparing (including how you communicate your views as well as showcasing your expertise on/experience in the subject matter) to prevent getting tongue-tied or sounding foolish and to minimize gaffes, right?

          I’d like to hear for myself what and how the arguments were made.

          As far as scrutiny goes, thesedays civility, honesty and clarity when critiquing a style/fashion perspective is easier to come by when compared to a critique of one’s social/political perspective.

        • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 4:15 pm |

          He didn’t sound tongue-tied or foolish or gaffe-ish. He was just soft-spoken.

          Listen to the audio and assess for yourself:
          http://www.yourpubli...

        • todd krevanchi | June 21, 2012 at 4:21 pm |

          And when this blog (read: authors AND readers) critiques the way a player wears his jersey, or hat/helmet, or socks, or pants, that’s a critique of the player, when it’s actually the hat/helmet, socks, pants individually which is relevant.

          As I listened, I heard you, callers, students, and another individual (name/occupation escapes me) speak on this issue. All relevant, all well prepared, all with their own opinion/agenda on this issue. I listened because I was genuinely interested in what was to be said on this issue. I heard very minimal contribution from Professor Blackhawk.

          Thanks for the debate today.

        • ChrisH | June 21, 2012 at 4:27 pm |

          Paul:

          I was merely speaking in generality, not trying to marginalize the Professor.

          Thank you for the audio…the frame of reference helps!

  • Capital Z | June 21, 2012 at 10:15 am |

    This should be Pauls’d next design contest… fauxbacks for recent teams…

    The Rays should have done this for a D-Backs interleague game.

  • Padday | June 21, 2012 at 10:24 am |

    I love the idea and most of the visuals but it does seem like the Rays somehow just missed the mark on the overall execution.

    Had an idea that swapping the colours on the jersey might help things so I did a quick photoshop job on it: http://farm6.staticf...

    Not sure it helps a whole lot though.

  • Cody | June 21, 2012 at 10:27 am |

    I don’t believe that is the real Virginia Tech uniform. If you look in the upper left hand corner you’ll see that they name the coach as being a John Ballien ,instead if Frank Beamer. Not sure what that is about.

    • Rex | June 21, 2012 at 1:27 pm |

      I have my doubts, considering the visibility of camouflage numbers on a white background. It’s tough enough to read them on a computer screen, but imagine the trouble the announcers will have.
      At the very least the numbers would have a maroon outline.

  • Rortega | June 21, 2012 at 10:31 am |

    “I’ve had a lucky life,” Neiman told the AP in 2008. “I’ve zeroed in on what you would call action and excellence. … Everybody who does anything to try to succeed has to give the best of themselves, and art has made me pull the best out of myself.”

    The world of sports “branding” owes Leroy an incredible debt of gratitude. Made the idea of art in sports seamless. Great job Leroy!!!

    http://www.nytimes.c...

    • Jeff | June 21, 2012 at 12:07 pm |

      Agreed.

  • Chris Holder | June 21, 2012 at 10:33 am |

    Paul – great work on the radio. For the longest I have been basically neutral on the mascot topic, and for the most part still respect opinions on both sides. It always seems like an argument carries more weight in spoken word than when typed. I can certainly understand your side of things and respect that you are standing up for it. I would enjoy hearing you more often.

    Spoken as a Braves fan who would understand if the team changed names, but would be sad to see it go…

    • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 10:42 am |

      I grew up a Braves fan, too.
      While I know that the word “Brave” connotes Native Americans, I wonder if we could argue that any warrior could be a “brave.”

      The name “Warriors” does not necessarily connote Native Americans. I would hope that we could do the same with “Braves.” Those teams just have to drop the Native American iconography.
      Now the Cleveland Indians… they’ll be the Cleveland Spiders.

      • Chris Holder | June 21, 2012 at 10:49 am |

        Yeah, I think a decent argument could be made to keep the “Braves” name, as it could be pretty generic. I suppose the cream alternate that is being worn this year could be a precursor to a uniform change, since the tomahawk would have to go. I do love the Braves’ home whites WITH the tomahawk, however.

        I guess they could go back to the old 80s slogan of “America’s team”, and wrap them up in “Home of the BRAVEs” American icongraphy, or whatever. Sounds lame, and probably would be. If that were the case I’m not so sure a full name change wouldn’t be the better idea.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:03 am |

          So maybe just drop the “s”?
          And take the tomahawk off the jersey.
          Or modify their Sunday specials.

          The “Atlanta Brave”.

          (oh, just what MLB needs, one of “those” names).

        • Jason M (DC) | June 21, 2012 at 11:10 am |

          Nah. I don’t think that the “s” needs to be dropped.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:12 am |

          Yeah, I know, it’s off-center.
          But not bad…
          http://www.flickr.co...

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:16 am |

          Just saying, it’s a valid possible marketing solution.

          They already wear the colors of the flag and, being “America’s Tean” n’all (although that’s a tough sell thesedays without all those games on TBS national cable like they used to be), the “Star-Spangled Banner” (as Chris noted) would become the hometeam song as it ended with “the home of the Brave.”

          Place would be rockin’ for playoffs, etc.

        • Chris Holder | June 21, 2012 at 11:26 am |

          Place would be rockin’ for playoffs, etc.

          Rick… you haven’t been to the Ted lately, have you? Heh.

          I don’t think the stadium has been what I would call rockin’ since… well, the “stadium” was Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium. But I guess that’s an argument for another time.

          I suppose the “Brave” would be a decent compromise, with Atlanta already having the WNBA “Dream”. They do still have the Dream, right?

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:32 am |

          Plus, with an NBA final being Heat vs. Thunder, the time is probably close to right for such a move. Could be argued there hasn’t been a BETTER time.

          And, yeah, I shoulda said, “if they ever got back to the playoffs,” shouldn’t I.

        • Douglas King | June 21, 2012 at 1:12 pm |

          I once saw someone suggest removing the S and replacing the Tomahawk with an Axe, and having the nickname refer to Firefighters.

  • Yancy Yeater | June 21, 2012 at 10:34 am |

    I actually dig the cap. That old school feeling “TB” is awesome. Understated is the use of the yellow sun and numbers. They pop off the jersey and hat.

    • ChrisH | June 21, 2012 at 3:14 pm |

      A little yellow squatchee goes a long way.

  • Skott S. | June 21, 2012 at 10:37 am |

    The new Delaware logo is a straight rip off of this Michigan t shirt. http://www.campusden...
    It’s a cool logo, but it’s not original.

  • Casey Hart | June 21, 2012 at 10:43 am |

    Funky vball uniforms in Puerto Rico: http://uncgspartans....

  • Nick C | June 21, 2012 at 10:49 am |

    I would love to see some Pony cleats on him to top off the 70′s look.

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:04 am |

      Or those early “M” Mizunos.

  • James A | June 21, 2012 at 10:50 am |

    I think I would have liked it better if the Rays wore a throwback minor league jersey (Yes, I know about the Smokers). Downside is that in 1979 St. Petersburg was probably wearing just hand-me-downs of their major league affiliate – the New York Mets. If the St. Pete team wore unique uniforms back then, I would prefer to see that over what is being offered up.

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 10:56 am |

      They’ve already done the St. Petersburg Saints (with the flamingo on the left sleeve)…
      http://farm3.static....
      Also the Tampa Tarpons…
      http://4.bp.blogspot...
      and St. Petersburg Pelicans of the Senior League…
      http://i.cdn.turner....

      So maybe they don’t have many options left.

      • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 11:35 am |

        “maybe they don’t have many options left”

        ~~~

        here’s a thought…maybe just wear your normal uni for your baseball games

        • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

          If the fauxback becomes the normal uni, then I’m with you.

      • James A | June 21, 2012 at 11:37 am |

        Didn’t know they did the Pelicans from the Senior League! Now that’s a whole different level of obscure. I think I have some baseball cards from that league buried somewhere.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:45 am |

          Great looking uni, though.
          Great colors.
          Too bad that combination isn’t part of the MLB palette.

      • JTH | June 21, 2012 at 11:50 am |

        Given the large Yankees following in the area, maybe the Rays should consider wearing Yankees-inspired fauxbacks from now on.

        Or, just do what Phil suggests…

  • Shane | June 21, 2012 at 10:51 am |

    Adler Mannheim! Nice to see their history, one of my close friends came back with a bunch of their merch (scarves, sweaters) after he got out of the Army.

    For me, the Rays uniform is so ridiculous that it ends up working. I love it.

  • mark w | June 21, 2012 at 10:53 am |

    Am I. The only one curious as to why a yellow wheel? Is that supposed to be a sun? But doesn’t that rewrite history from “ray the fish” to “rays from the sun”?

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 10:59 am |

      I think it’s an orange.

      • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:00 am |

        Well, citrus, anyway.

        • jrg | June 21, 2012 at 12:08 pm |

          All that and probably also a top view of their stadium.

          https://maps.google....

  • Gary | June 21, 2012 at 11:07 am |

    The AAA Scranton/Wilkes Barre Yankees are spending this season as a road team while their stadium is being renovated. They are(apparently strongly) considering changing the team name and identity upon their return next season. They were formerly the AAA affiliate of the Phillies, known as the Scranton/Wilkes Barre Red Barons, and there was some conjecture that the team being called the Yankees have alienate local fans of the Phillies or Mets or Red Sox that were fans of the Red Barons, but not necessarily the Yankees. They’re having a contest to rename the team – http://scrantonwilke...

    Might be another opportunity for a name/design contest.

    • Mike Weston | June 21, 2012 at 11:15 am |

      Already put in my names for the new team – SWB Coal Crackers or the SWB Steamers. Both pay homage to the great history of industry in the SWB region (coal and the steam engine). If it helps out they could change the “s” for “z” like all good minor league teams…anything but the Yankees! :)

    • Mike Weston | June 21, 2012 at 11:22 am |

      Put in my names already…the SWB Coal Crackers or the SWB Steamers. Both pay homage to the areas role in the coal and train industry (especially the steam engine). Can’t wait for the online vote!

  • Mark | June 21, 2012 at 11:29 am |

    Shame they can’t do “alternate universe” throwbacks… for like if the Giants had successfully relocated to Tampa in 1994, and San Francisco subsequently got an expansion team, maybe you’d have a Tampa Bay Giants vs. San Francisco Stingrays game.

    • The Jeff | June 21, 2012 at 11:40 am |

      Baltimore Ravens dressed as Cleveland Browns vs Cleveland Browns dressed as Baltimore Bombers.

      /what?

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:42 am |

      I still like the idea of fictional teams with local connections.

      The Dodgers in 2016 as Chico’s Bail Bonds to celebrate the 40th anniversary of THE BAD NEWS BEARS, for example.

      Or the Braves, that same season for the same reason, as THE BINGO LONG TRAVELING ALL-STARS AND MOTOR KINGS…
      http://www.thelmagaz...

      Or the Mets in 2014 as the New York Knights for the 30th of THE NATURAL.

      • Gusto44 | June 21, 2012 at 12:02 pm |

        How about the Steelers dressing as the USFL Maulers, or the Broncos as the USFL Gold?

        Would like to see the Bucs as the USFL Bandits, the Bandits had a strong following, and I think it would be popular.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:09 pm |

          Oh, man, don’t get me started on how much better off the USFL would have been if John Basset hadn’t been dying and he’d had the strength to get in Donald Trump’s face.

        • walter | June 21, 2012 at 2:20 pm |

          Everybody knows the Jacksonville Bulls ruled and would be 100x better than the Jaguars.

        • Rob H | June 21, 2012 at 2:45 pm |

          They’ve been dressed as the Bandits since 1997. They should go back to dressing like the Bucs more than just one game a year.

  • ThresherK | June 21, 2012 at 11:37 am |

    As the last remaining Expos fan in my non-border state, I had to suffer them becoming like everyone else (pinstripes home, gray road) in 1991, then the indignity of the Expos “throwbacks” in gray, rather than the sky-blue I loved.

    Anything that adds more sky blue, I’m in favor of.

    (Of course, in two or so years we may reach the point of “too much”. It’d be nice to stop before that point, but fashion is fickle.)

  • bmw | June 21, 2012 at 11:42 am |

    love the tigers throwback hats. the “big D” on the hat was so much better. magnum PI-style.

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:52 am |

      Magnum actually wore that orange and white “D” hat in one episode. But just the once. Wore it for Kamehameha Club co-ed softball team practice. Otherwise, was the white “D”.

      • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 11:59 am |

        I think that episode also was the only time Magnum ever wore a USC hat, too (Selleck’s alma mater, as opposed to Magnum’s, which was the Naval Academy).

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:00 pm |

          And where are Magnum’s red parrot shirt and Tigers hat now?

          In the Smithsonian.

        • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 4:40 pm |

          I used to have a Tigers adjustable hat, mostly because of Magnum. Last time the Tigers were in the World Series, for that Halloween I grew out my mustache and wore the hat with my Hawaiian shirt.

    • Boxcarvibe | June 21, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

      I could be wrong, but Magnum wearing a fitted Detroit Tigers game cap on TV started the whole fitted cap craze. They weren’t available on the retail market in the early ’80s. I remember it well…CUZ I WANTED ONE! I’d go into the souvenir shops around the stadium and they had the mesh-backed adjustable straps all over the place. But no fitted caps. I finally bought one from Manny’s Baseball Land, who ran an ad in The Sporting News.

      • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 2:12 pm |

        No, that’s probably reasonably accurate.

        Show premiered in 1980 or so, and before that was pretty much nothing retail anywhere but snapback meshback MLB hats. And usually it took a LOT of hunting to find anything but the local team. I remember cuz in late ’70s was on the West Coast a number of times and hoped I might have better luck finding fitted in another town (we always think like that, right?). Anyway, no such luck. Meshback snapbacks, that’s all there was. And only local. Giants and A’s in Bay Area. Dodgers and Angels in L.A.

        • DJ | June 21, 2012 at 2:56 pm |

          It could be done, though. I bought both home and road 82 White Sox caps from New Era. They had a small classified ad in the Sporting News. Heck of a lot different than going to the Lids store at your local mall.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 3:17 pm |

          Nobody said it couldn’t be done.

          New Era advertised “game hats” in TSN about as far back as as I can remember, and I ordered a few. Also had a couple bought at Gerry Cosby when I was in N.Y. in early ’70s. Back then I was looking for fitted retail in hopes of foregoing the mail order crap.

          The contention was that MAGNUM, P.I., accelerated the demand for fitted, and that eventually helped lead to them being available at the mall. And that’s entirely true.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 3:26 pm |

          Shoot, I remember seeing the little kid in John Wayne’s DONOVAN’S REEF wearing a fitted red-brim Cardinals hat (cuz his favorite player was Stan Musial) and thinking how hard such hats were to find.

          I mean, back then, if you didn’t know someone associated with the team, mail order through TSN was about your only shot at getting such headgear.

          Twins didn’t even sell ‘em at Met Stadium. Was hoping they would, being the new team in town n’all, but nope.

  • Marc Nucup | June 21, 2012 at 11:43 am |

    My apologies if this is the wrong place to post. Does anyone know what helmet/facemask combo Takeo Spikes has been wearing at Chargers minicamp? Photos of the helmet AND a closeup of the mask are in the Chargers Team Page Photo Gallery on SI.com (photos 23 & 24). My thanks.

    http://sportsillustr...

  • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 11:47 am |

    Well, as I said last night, I think it looks like “Ray’s Lemonade”, the “sun” sorta looks like an anus & it’s a Padres rip-off that meets 1977 Mariners roads.

    Had time to digest it. Still hideous & lacks originality. As Paul said, it’s missing some key late 1970s quirks. It seems like an empty attempt at a fauxback like the Mavericks “Mavs” green alternate.

  • Le Cracquere | June 21, 2012 at 11:49 am |

    I’m trying really hard to dislike the Rays’ “throwback,” and failing: it’s just too much darned fun. I can live with it for a single game.

    Paul’s right about the sansabelt, though. And in a quasi-tribute to the Devil Rays’ original ’98 duds, I would’ve found some way to include some eye-punishing touches of neon green.

    • walter | June 21, 2012 at 1:41 pm |

      The 1978 Padres were obviously the big inspiration, and the Rays used their template, but I like these just fine. Mind you, the home uniforms of this supposed squad probably would have been yellow. Trying to whip up a whole fake history with unique uniforms strikes me as a fool’s errand, just try to evoke the mood and the fun of the decade.

    • walter | June 21, 2012 at 5:13 pm |

      Mind you, I’m hard on the case of whipping up fake historical uniforms for any team of post-1977 vintage. Nor am I limiting myself to baseball; for some reason, I want to know what a 1972 version of the Miami Heat would’ve looked like.

  • Dave F. | June 21, 2012 at 11:51 am |

    I actually LOVE the navy blue-sky blue combo on anything. Just throwing that out there. That is all.

    • Glenn Simpkins | June 21, 2012 at 3:57 pm |

      Totally! Navy and Powder Blue vibrate too much? Au contraire, the two colors work wonderfully together. Count me as a fan of this look.

  • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 11:54 am |

    Hey Ricko – any flooding by you?

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:05 pm |

      Nope. Up by Duluth.
      Kinda sad. Among other things, the zoo got flashflooded-out a lot of animals drowned.

      • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:06 pm |

        And before the jokes start about the likely size of the zoo, Duluth has pretty good, and well-respected, zoo.

        • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 12:09 pm |

          I’ve been to that zoo. Enjoyed it. Really sad about the animals.

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:19 pm |

          One of the three seals was lost. Another was found half in the water, half out, lying in a street. The third was rescued from a rush of water heading toward Lake Superior.

          Polar bear was saved. Dwarf horse swam (they figure) about a hundred yards to solid ground. Lost most from the farm exhibit: birds, goats, sheep, a donkey.

          Many that survived have been moved, temporarily, to the Como Park Zoo in St. Paul.

        • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 12:57 pm |

          wait…a seal drowned?

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 12:58 pm |

          For one thing, a lotta things underwater to get caught in in a situation like that.

          And they DO have to come up to breathe.

        • Tim E. O'B | June 21, 2012 at 12:59 pm |

          Seals are notoriously bad swimmer, not like those dwarf horses, they’re the Michael Phelps of the animal kingdom.

        • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

          awwwww…that’s a cute seal

        • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 1:02 pm |

          too bad this seal didn’t drown

          /i kid, i kid

          //maybe

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 1:03 pm |
        • HHH | June 21, 2012 at 1:09 pm |

          The 1979 version of the St. Petersburg city *seal* had no problem resurfacing.

          See what I did there?

        • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 1:12 pm |

          I wasn’t aware or setting up of any zoo jokes or zoo bragging.

          And apparently Phil really hates Seal.

        • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 1:12 pm |

          HHH, you’re out.

        • Tom V. | June 21, 2012 at 2:36 pm |

          Drowned seal…that flash flood was probably similar to a tsunami, in that you’re inundated with muddy brown murky rushing water that quickly overtakes you. If you’re not getting smashed up by the other stuff floating in the water you’re getting bounced off of telephone poles, stuck under cars or fallen trees, etc.

  • Ryan L | June 21, 2012 at 12:08 pm |

    As a Rays fan… shut up and take my money! Ill take an XL please

    • Ryan M. | June 21, 2012 at 2:19 pm |

      I am not a Rays fan, but if I could find a way to find an easy fitted version of that cap TODAY I would have already sent them my money. Tomorrow the fever will have died down, and it’ll be too late to get my money. Wouldn’t they be better served by making the merch available immediately after the unveiling? If they can do it for championship merch, they should be able to do it for a scheduled unveiling.

  • Tim E. O'B | June 21, 2012 at 12:30 pm |

    Apparently the (amazing) band Wilco was sponsoring a baseball team in Massachusetts. https://www.facebook...

    I would want one of those jerseys.

  • marc | June 21, 2012 at 12:36 pm |

    Love the Rays’ fauxbacks… but am i alone in thinking the whole look was inspired by this:

    http://www.flickr.co...

    • Ryan M. | June 21, 2012 at 12:49 pm |

      I don’t know about inspired by, but it’s close enough that I’m prepared to call them the Rays’ Pepsi Light unis.

    • John English | June 21, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

      The DO evoke Pepsi Light…that’s great.

      Count me as another that thinks the Rays did an awesome job here. I love it – really looking forward to this.

    • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 2:18 pm |

      Blech. The Diet Lemony Malted Battery Acid tasting soda. At least the 16 ounce returnable bottles were cool. Miss that the most.

    • ChrisH | June 21, 2012 at 2:40 pm |

      While posting a pic of Lauren Hutton is as tempting as she was when she was product spokesperson, that would not be uni-related.

      That said, here’s the ’83 NY Giants D singing and throwing back some Pepsi Light:

      http://www.youtube.c...

      #’s 80 and 10 for defensive players…now that’s real throwback!

  • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 1:01 pm |

    Interesting website…
    http://99designs.com...

    • Ben Fortney | June 21, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

      I’ve used them a number of times for projects. Depending on how “hands on” you are with the project you can get some really good designs at a decent price.

  • HHH | June 21, 2012 at 1:03 pm |

    Nothing says 1979 like Under Armour sneakers.

  • DJ Doc | June 21, 2012 at 1:30 pm |

    That link to the story about the “Knitting Olympics” left me in stitches!

  • walter | June 21, 2012 at 1:32 pm |

    I’ll come out and give a big up to those NBA draft caps. Colorful and classy.

  • ryan4fregosi | June 21, 2012 at 1:35 pm |

    Colored graffiti at Citi Field? BAH! Back in the day (1972 to be precise; scroll to 0:46), Shea Stadium made do with good old fashioned monochrome graffiti!

    http://mlb.mlb.com/v...

  • Mallrat92204 | June 21, 2012 at 1:37 pm |

    I’m not a fan of the fauxback. I would rather them just do a real throwback, and wear these:

    http://cdn.bleacherr...

    I think they should save it for interleague play with the D-backs and they can both wear their 1998 uniforms.

    • Ryan M. | June 21, 2012 at 1:48 pm |

      All I can think of when I see those, and the Rockies purple monstrosities, is that one of those teams should have gone to my beloved Buffalo, who surely would not have produced uniforms half as ugly. (Not that I’m biased or anything.)

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 1:54 pm |

      Ironically, one of the criticisms of that original Rays uni (well, the colorization of the chest lettering, anyway) was that it was “too ’70s.”

  • Ryan M. | June 21, 2012 at 1:45 pm |

    In regards to today’s installment of Olympics douchebaggery, I know a couple of Ravelry users, including my wife, and they’re pretty dumbfounded by the whole thing. My favorite passage was this:

    “In a sense, it is disrespectful to our country’s finest athletes and fails to recognize or appreciate their hard work.”

    Really? Doesn’t this kind of penny pinching douchebaggery go MUCH farther towards the devaluation of the Olympics?

  • Frank Doyle | June 21, 2012 at 2:14 pm |

    I think the “sunkist” logo or what-not is actually just an homage to the roof of the stadium…

    • concealed78 | June 21, 2012 at 2:29 pm |

      For a stadium that was built in 1990?

      Where did the supposed 1979 Rays play? Al Lopez Field?

      • Rob H | June 21, 2012 at 3:11 pm |

        Actually the 1961 expansion Tampa Bay Rays played in Al Lopez for two years, then a new stadium was built and opened in 1963 on the site where Tampa Stadium didn’t get built in 1966. Because of this the NFL’s 1976 expansion teams went to Seattle and Indianapolis, the Colts moved to Phoenix in 1983, and the Cardinals moved to Memphis in 1987.

        (The Rays added “Devil” to their name around the time Ronald Reagan was elected president.)

        Around this time, in the mid-1980′s, the area wanted to attract an NFL expansion team, so they built a domed football stadium in St. Petersburg.

        The Tampa Bay area, however, got snubbed repeatedly by NFL expansion and relocation, as the L.A. Rams moved to Jacksonville after the NFL chose Charlotte and St. Louis for 1995 expansion.

        But after the 1995 season, the Cleveland Browns moved to Tampa Bay, where they play until this day. The Houston Oilers, after the 1996 season moved to Baltimore.

        The Tampa Bay Browns, who won Super Bowl XXXIV against the Jacksonville Rams in January 2000, have slumped in recent years (went 4-12 in 2011) and ownership has been complaining about the drab, dreary, cookie-cutter stadium and wants the local government to built a multi-use retractable roof stadium on Dale Mabry for both the Browns and the Rays (whose own 48 year old stadium has also been called outdated) and all indications are that the Browns are headed to Los Angeles in time for the 2013 season.

  • Chad | June 21, 2012 at 2:21 pm |

    The Rays aren’t the 1st team to wear jerseys from a time before they existed. The Rangers wore a fauxback uniform in 1996 against the Orioles. Scroll down this link about halfway to see a jersey with an old English “T”

    http://blog.heritage...

  • Chris K | June 21, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

    In the photo link of the Razorback cleats, those socks the dude is wearing are strange. They’re sort of rolled down or something. Anyone know why? It’s a crummy picture, so it’s hard to really tell what the reason would be.

    • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 3:41 pm |

      Probably taken at practice the first day the cleats were issued…and the player had his socks rolled down. It’s been about a bazillion degrees everywhere lately.

  • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 3:10 pm |

    SO many things to love about that Rays uni!

    - One of my favorite color schemes of all time (just glad Paul doesn’t outlaw double blue…I may have to get another membership card with this design).

    - The number font, and the fact that it’s in yellow.

    - Pullovers, so no “Raays” effect on these jerseys.

    - Sleeve stripes (could have had the middle in yellow, though).

    Shoulda been sansabelt pants and yellow sani socks, but that’s it. Easily my favorite Rays uni ever.

    • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 3:18 pm |

      I may have to get another membership card with this design

      Jim, before you commit to that, have you seen the rear view?:
      http://farm8.staticf...

      • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 3:22 pm |

        That’s what sealed the deal!

        • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 4:05 pm |

          MoVi wasn’t just born in the wrong decade…he’s on the wrong planet too

        • Ricko | June 21, 2012 at 4:11 pm |

          Not to worry. The mothership will be back any day now.

          Or so he keeps saying.

      • JimWa | June 21, 2012 at 6:20 pm |

        Ok …where did the screenshot come from? It looks like he wrote it in the middle of a game!

    • Jim Vilk | June 21, 2012 at 3:21 pm |

      Just looked on the team’s web site. Not only are they wearing these fantastic unis, but Earth Wind & Fire are performing after the game. UW road trip!!!

    • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 7:03 pm |

      “Easily my favorite Rays uni ever.”

      ~~~

      not really saying a whole lot, is it…

      although this one was their best

  • Christopher F. | June 21, 2012 at 3:20 pm |

    I dig the Rays uni. It fits their personality. Its cheesy as hell… but so is the team (the antics they pull with their travel costumes, etc.)

    I see it as an over-the-top mockery of late 70′s design, which is cool with me. Baseball, remember, is a game in the end.

  • Paul Lukas | June 21, 2012 at 4:08 pm |

    Audio of the radio show I was on today:
    http://www.yourpubli...

  • Scooter31284 | June 21, 2012 at 4:11 pm |

    FWIW, the Rangers did a similar “throwback to a non-existent era’ promotion in the 90′s. 1993 on this picture,

    http://blog.heritage...

    • Chance Michaels | June 21, 2012 at 4:43 pm |

      As I just posted above, that was a home-and-away series against Milwaukee. The Brewers wore their own 1920s-inspired uniform (not all that dissimilar to what the Milwaukee Brewers of the American Association actually wore at the time), the only time the Brew Crew wore gray at County Stadium.

      • Phil Hecken | June 21, 2012 at 4:56 pm |

        pat listach’s and greg vaughn’s high tops really make that period perfect

  • Ben Fortney | June 21, 2012 at 5:18 pm |

    Modern monochrome in action. That’s Team France, and while the jersey is a bit busy, it ain’t that bad.

    • JTH | June 21, 2012 at 5:57 pm |

      white socks with three stripes would improve that uni tremendously. I wonder if their uni manufacturer makes anything like that?

  • Joe | June 21, 2012 at 6:37 pm |

    I wonder when those Rays fauxbacks jersey and hat go on sale. I really want to pick up one of those hats.

  • dae | June 21, 2012 at 6:39 pm |

    I must say, as a long-time Tigers’ fan, the old-school block-style “DETROIT” name was so much better than the script-style “Detroit.” I wish the Tigers would switch back to the 80s block lettering. (Or, change the script to the Old English font used for the hat?)

    • Patrick_in_MI | June 21, 2012 at 8:07 pm |

      I agree. I’ve always hated the script road unis, especially because the word gets broken up by the buttoning of the jersey. However, I much prefer the current road cap over the 70′s version. That white-outlined D looks too clunky and reminds me of some cheap knockoff from KMart.

      • JTH | June 21, 2012 at 8:47 pm |

        I can’t say that I have a real preference for the radially-arched wordmark of the throwback over the current script. I definitely do not care for the double outline on the letters on the modern jersey, though.

        The white border is completely unnecessary and just clutters things up. It looks so much better with just the blue and orange.

  • Christopher F. | June 21, 2012 at 6:43 pm |

    Late to the game here… real good interview this afternoon. Its stuff you’ve said before, but it was nice to hear it in roundtable fashion.

    And I really dig your refreshing outlook. Rather than focus on whether its offensive or not… its not our imagery to use.

  • odessasteps | June 21, 2012 at 8:27 pm |

    Slam Bradley appeared in Detective Comics #1, along with 7or 8 other stories, including Dr Fu Manchu, who was on the cover.

    The “current” sandman (the neil gaiman one) is the lord of dreams, one of the mythological endless, along with characters like desire, destiny and death.

    ____

    Re: the SWB name. Isnt “crackers” one of those names often used in the indian nickname debate as what an inappopriate name for a team would be, like “n___s” or “k—-s”?

  • Wheels | June 21, 2012 at 8:31 pm |

    New Bobcats unis… Rays fauxback… who’s up next on the unveiling front?

  • Domenico Delgado | June 21, 2012 at 9:14 pm |

    You cant have dark sanis the point of sanis is that they cant be dark so the dye doesnt mix with your blood when you get spiked. I know its no longer an issue but it was back in the 70s and thats what they’re trying to recreate.

    • JTH | June 21, 2012 at 10:19 pm |

      Back in the 70s it might have been an issue — the 1870s. But by the 1970s it was no longer a concern.

  • urbanleftbehind | June 22, 2012 at 11:38 am |

    The Cubs have some inane promotion annually in mid-July called 70s night. But only some of the fans actually sport 70s attire and the two teams stay in present day unis. The Cubs should instead sport the late 70s powder-blue/white pinstripe road jersey and provide the visting team with their corresponding late 70s uniform (AZ and CO could wear Phoenix and Denver AAA unis from that era. WAS could be Montreal again and MIA I dont know-they had an A level team during that era). PHI, MILW and STL would have clash potential, but I think only STL would not be allowed to wear its home whites.

  • Chuck rios | June 23, 2012 at 10:27 am |

    Those rays fauxbacks look great, though your assessments are right on. They still look fun, it’s the spirit of the event. I hope other newer team do this as well. As far as the riverhawks wearing a corporate patch, I think our windy city thunderbolts wear on as well

  • Travis | June 24, 2012 at 1:20 am |

    I absolutely love the Tigers’ pull overs from that era. It’ll be really hard not to go after one with Cabrera or Fielder on the back.