Uni Watch's Newest Hosiery Hero

If slideshow won’t play for you, click here

Paul here, once again pinch-hitting for Phil. The Rangers and Twins wore 1994 throwbacks last night. As you can see above, Rangers pitcher Robbie Ross’s stirrups were more 1974 than ’94, but whatever — sure beats the pajama look.

Interestingly, the Twins wore the MLB 125th-season patch (which all MLB teams wore in 1994) on their right sleeve, but the Rangers didn’t. That’s particularly odd, since (a) the Rangers were the home team, so they had control over the throwback design, and (b) they had nothing else competing for space on that sleeve.

Phil is meeting up with me for today’s Mets/Cubs game at Shea. Let’s hope we don’t melt!

(My thanks to Paul Pass and Matt Mitchell for their observations on this game.)

+ + + + +

Screen Shot 2012-06-24 at 10.32.36 PM

Yet amazingly he’s never been asked to host Saturday Night Live…

7-8-12 s-Special ALT

Click to enlarge

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: Neglected to mention yesterday that the Astros wore their 1980s throwbacks on Friday night. … And for Second Place, You Get Two of Them Dept.: What’s with this new protocol of teams conducting pregame All-Star BP jersey presentations s to the players who’ll be participating in next Tuesday’s game? Or at least I think it’s a new protocol; if they’ve done it in past years, I haven’t noticed. Anyway: Seems like a fairly obvious ploy to goose BP jersey sales. And the fact that it’s such a widespread, choreographed thing, probably mandated via a memo from the commissioner’s office, kinda ruins any chance of it feeling special. Pfeh. … If you like MLB mascots, you’ll love this. That’s from a commercial that will run during the All-Star Game (photo by Chris DeRuyscher, submitted by Sean Kautzman). … Red Sox Oddities, Vol. 1: Remember the Fenway Park centennial patch that the Red Sox wore on their caps for their first homestand of the season back in April? That cap patch has reappeared for this weekend’s series against the Yankees. Well, mostly. Seems like a very random thing to bring back at a very random time (from Andrew Constant). … Red Sox Oddities, Vol. 2: The Sox wore their red alternates for the second game of yesterday’s doubleheader against the Yanks. “I believe this is the first time they’ve worn the current version of the red jerseys on a day other than Friday,” says Scott Davis. … Red Sox Oddities, Vol. 3: Daniel Nava batted right-handed while wearing a lefty batting helmet in the 6th inning of yesterday’s nightcap (Andrew Constant again). … Astros pitching coach Doug Brocail was wearing his G.I. Joe pandering cap yesterday (good spot by Kevin Malarkey). … Mets shortstop Ruben Tejada was using Kirk Nieuwenhuis’s bat yesterday (screen shot by Eli Swanson. … The Leeds Rhinos (that’s Super Rugby) went THOB on Friday. Details here (from Mike Miller). … When stirrups started going out of style, many first and third base coaches were the last bastion of holdouts. Now most coaches have abandoned stirrups as well, so let’s hear it for Tigers third base coach Gene Lamont, who still knows how to dress on a baseball field (from Andy Windsor). … Saw Prometheus last night. Not a very good movie, but I laughed out loud when the captain prepared for the climactic kamikaze scene by putting on a baseball cap. … “Many F1 drivers are wearing orange stars on their helmets this weekend in support of Maria de Villota, a test driver who was badly injured in a crash earlier this week,” says Dane Drutis. “Here is a screenshot of Lewis Hamilton applying the stars to his helmet during Friday’s practice session at the British Grand Prix.” … The Rochester Honkers are a summer collegiate league. I don’t know what the hell they were wearing last night, but let’s hope it was a one-time thing (from Ryan Risse). … Here are the Ukrainian Olympic track and field uniforms (from Leo Thornton). … Trey Groce got some spam from Under Armour, promoting their new Gotham Rogues gear from the upcoming Batman movie. “First time I’ve ever been solicited to purchase gear from a team that doesn’t even exist,” he says.

 

155 comments to Uni Watch’s Newest Hosiery Hero

  • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 8:47 am |

    Trey Groce got some spam from Under Armour, promoting their new Gotham Rogues gear from the upcoming Batman movie. “First time I’ve ever been solicited to purchase gear from a team that doesn’t even exist,” he says.

    I’m surprised there’s not a bigger market for movie team jerseys. I don’t particularly care for the Gotham Rogues, but there’s a couple jerseys from The Replacements and Any Given Sunday that I’d have gladly worn.

    • teenchy | July 8, 2012 at 9:20 am |

      I’m surprised there’s not a bigger market for movie team jerseys.

      EFF has been selling New York Knights apparel for years. Just sayin’.

      • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:27 am |

        And EFF has been soliciting me by post and email to buy Knights gear since 1997. Nothing new here.

    • Patrick_in_MI | July 8, 2012 at 9:30 am |

      I wonder what the helmet logo for the Rogues looks like. Anybody seen one yet? Also I find it odd that the wordmark on the jersey is “city” name + team name. Would never see Dallas Cowboys or Maryland Terrapins spelled out on a jersey.

      • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 11:54 am |

        It’s sorta visible in the one trailer, though not in enough detail to really tell what it is. It looks sorta Raven-ish to me – mostly black with yellow outline. I’m guessing it’s probably some combination of a G or an R and a dagger.

      • Mark W | July 8, 2012 at 1:18 pm |

        Can I get some New York Hawks stuff from the USA Network’s “Necessary Roughness”?

    • Kyle Allebach | July 8, 2012 at 11:09 am |

      I think I would get a Gotham Rogues jersey, just cause I love Batman, and it would be something interesting to own.

      Also, I’d like a Shane Falco jersey. Just ‘cuz.

      • Matt | July 8, 2012 at 12:31 pm |

        There’s a website that does reproductions of most jerseys from the movies (I’m almost positive you can get a Shane Falco jersey there, Kyle).

        http://tinyurl.com/6...

        I can’t vouch for the quality, but the breadth of their catalog is pretty impressive.

    • Steve Naismith | July 8, 2012 at 10:44 pm |

      Charlestown Chiefs, anyone?

      • Matt | July 9, 2012 at 1:23 am |

        I don’t know where you would get one, but I know they exist, because I’ve seen someone in person wearing one at a high school hockey game

  • Bailey | July 8, 2012 at 8:49 am |

    Under Armour should add some red to that Gotham jersey and market it for Maryland … it’s about 1000 times better than what they’ve got going on now

  • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 9:03 am |

    Watched Robbie Ross pitch against the Twins last night. All I could think with stirrups that high and pants that baggy was, “Little League.”

    Historically speaking, that’s about the only place you’d see that look. Available stirrups allowed kids to yank them up high, but suppliers weren’t providing pants tapered like players in the bigs.

    Now, if Ross wore his stirrups about half that height, that’d be a decent MLB throwback look. As it is, it’s pretty much Williamsport in the ’70s.

    But the time somewhat tapered pants were available for kids, ribbon stirrups (and later 2-in-1’s) were the look.

    • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 9:06 am |

      Also, his left sock was backwards.

      • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 9:19 am |

        beat me to it

        and i think both rups were on backwards

        huge fail…and not just because they were on backwards or the pants weren’t bloused properly either — in 1994, a sad year for any number of reasons, players were approaching PJ length on their pants, so you saw this awful look or 2-in-1’s or worse…

        you’d have never seen rups like ross wore last night

        the pajama look, as horrible as it was, would have been more accurate than the outman look

        • Paul Lukas | July 8, 2012 at 9:24 am |

          Really interesting debate.

          Let me make a few things clear: (1) He was showing a little more white than I like. (2) I prefer that pants at Thome-level, not all the way to the kneecap. (3) I *hate* it when the elastic on the pant cuff is visible.

          But for me, all of that is outweighed by the fact that honest-to-Outman stirrups were being worn in a big league game. I’ll take my victories, even imperfect ones, where I can find them.

    • Paul Lukas | July 8, 2012 at 9:15 am |

      It wasn’t historically accurate, but it was a shitload better than going pajama-legged.

      • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:24 am |

        Agreed. And baggy knickers are heaps better than baggy full-length pants, or really any style of full-length pants. Proper blousing and tight pants are great, but not necessary.

      • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 9:29 am |

        Stirrup socks serve no purpose other than being decorative.
        That being the case, if we’re gonna wear them, shouldn’t they look good? Isn’t that part of the deal, part of being decorative? And be worn, I dunno, frontwards?

        Then again, I suppose we could say any lampshade is better than a bare bulb. But that wouldn’t make an ugly lampshade beautiful. It’s just…there.

        • Paul Lukas | July 8, 2012 at 9:33 am |

          Agreed. But I think Ross *did* look beautiful. Not as beautiful as he could have, agreed, but still beautiful.

          I think we can agree to disagree on that point.

        • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:35 am |

          We’re dealing in relatives, not absolutes. No, am ugly lampshade is not beautiful. But the ugly lampshade is more beautiful than a bare lightbulb. Similarly, Ross’ pants and socks, while not perfect, were nonetheless better than if he’d worn his pants down to his instep like most guys. The little league look is preferable to the pajama look.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 9:36 am |

          pretty sure a lampshade is more than just decorative

          but yeah, if you’re going to use a lampshade, then at least use it properly

        • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 9:54 am |

          If high cuffs & stirrups = lampshade, and lampshade = cone of shame…. well, it’s no wonder so many players go with pajama pants.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 10:55 am |

          Of course a lampshade is more than decorative.
          Duh.
          But just because it’s there doesn’t automatically make it good looking.

        • Coleman | July 8, 2012 at 11:56 am |

          I try to follow as much as possible with the hosiery status of players, but I definitely can’t say much about the history of it. All I can say is that I agree with the feeling that his attempt, even a slightly failed one, is leaps and bounds better than pajamas.

          Speaking of ‘rups, I can finally say I’ve joined the revolution! BIG thanks to the one and only “rpm”…

          http://m.flickr.com/...

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 8:11 pm |

          if you want the quick and dirty, low-down on the rup…read this … featuring the godfather of UW, ricko, the purveyor of our hosiery, robert p. marshall, the third, and a beautiful quote from our founder, paul …

          can’t get much better than than

    • Paul Lukas | July 8, 2012 at 9:32 am |

      Ricko, I’m curious: Do you also think *my* stirrups reek of Little League?
      http://static.flickr...

      See, I think that’s perfection, at least hosiery-wise. (I’m wearing a knee pad on my right knee, which is why there’s a bit of a bulge in my blousing.)

      • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 9:50 am |

        I misspoke (“mis-wrote”?). I should have said of Ross, “pants that SHORT and baggy.” THAT was the look that, had an MLBer or a even a softball player showed up wearing, would have elicited comments like, “What’re you, in Little League?”

        The sort of unwritten rule of pants-socks styling back then (which could be inferred simply by observing) was that the higher you pulled up your stirrups, the more the bottom of your pants–or the blousing of your pants–should come down to meet them…with a bit of asterisk. That being that if the socks had stripes, the pants could stay higher. All we need to do is look at photos and watch highlights of that era to see that was the thinking.

        Hence, the look you’ve got working for softball is right in step with those times. If you bunched your pants way up at the top of your calf, then no.

        (Which leads me to a thought I’ve had. I love the shorter pants on many MLBers these days, but as has been noted, some of them don’t seem to get “blousing”. They’re “bunching”. So maybe that’s a term would could use to differentiate the two?)

        • Paul Lukas | July 8, 2012 at 9:56 am |

          I love the shorter pants on many MLBers these days, but as has been noted, some of them don’t seem to get “blousing”. They’re “bunching”. So maybe that’s a term would could use to differentiate the two?

          Yes — bunching! I hate bunching.

          But it’s still betting than pajama-ing.

      • boxcarvibe | July 8, 2012 at 12:14 pm |

        Paul, good pic of you playing. If I may, I’d like to start from the ground up:

        1. Adidas cleats. OK. But from my view, they appear to be soccer cleats. Really? Nothing says “pick me last” than wearing soccer cleats to play baseball.
        2. ‘Rups and white socks: Nice. Navy ‘Rups match trim in uniform. Nice again.
        3. Black pants: Belong on wait-staff, ushers, hearse drivers, groomsmen and grooms, etc. Navy rups with black pants? There’s a fine for that somewhere, or there oughta be.
        4. Are you wearing a belt? Ugh. Can’t tell…because…
        5. Shirt is untucked C’mon man!
        6. Your glove needs conditioning dude! Save money and use shaving cream. Does the same job.
        7. Undershirt Looks good for practices only. Just practices.
        8. Pin striped cap Nice touch. Would look so much better with pin striped pants!
        9. Is that softball? Look here for local Mens baseball leagues in the NYC area: http://www.msblnatio...

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 12:34 pm |

          (Realizing your sarcasm tags may be in full force in subjecting Paul to uni-scrutiny, I will still make these points…)

          For one thing, steel or detachable spikes/cleats are illegal on virtually every level of softball. Must be molded. So, if we look closely we’ll see a LOT of soccer cleats being worn.

          For another, Paul’s playing in what amounts to a pick-up/choose-up game. Show up overdressed and you get looked at like, “Oooo, look who’s wearing his baseball suit today.”

          You want to wear just enough gear (and wear it properly) to show you’ve played some ball, and not so much that you appear to believe there might be MLB scouts hanging around…or that highlights of the game will be on SportsCenter.

        • boxcarvibe | July 8, 2012 at 12:50 pm |

          Oh yes, HUGE tongue-in-cheek on my part!

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 1:42 pm |

          Ah, for the good old days when softball teams wore pants and stirrups, the whole nine yards…
          http://www.flickr.co...
          (some skinny guy turning on a pitch that was WAY inside, 1971)

        • Paul Lukas | July 8, 2012 at 4:13 pm |

          Sweatpants were actually navy, not black.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 4:33 pm |

          nice white cleats, ricko

          like hondo and the 71 sens!

          (that photo and info gleaned from The Ricko Files, Vol. III)

  • Jim Buffet | July 8, 2012 at 9:07 am |

    Last night was “Life’s a Beach” night for Rochester. I suppose those uni’s are supposed to be Hawaiian shirts?

    • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:26 am |

      A lot of teams wear jerseys like that for “Jimmy Buffett Night” promotions. Personally, the Rochester jersey pattern is just about the worst aloha shirt design I’ve ever seen. Way too representational. Designed or approved by people who are aware of the concept of an aloha shirt but have never actually seen one.

    • Terry Proctor | July 8, 2012 at 10:38 am |

      Just a reminder to everyone that the Rochester Honkers are from Rochester, Minnesota. NOT Rochester, New York.

  • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:22 am |

    In mascot news, the Carolina League Potomac Nationals put their mascot, Uncle Slam, on the “60-day DL” after a fire in the team’s office resulted in damage to the outfit:

    http://www2.insideno...

    I’d been wondering why Cookie Monster was in the stands on Thursday night, but Uncle Slam was not.

    Team promises to have a new Uncle Slam next season with a new, “new age” look. Though there’s a good chance it will be the team’s last season as the Potomac Nationals.

  • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:40 am |

    Nice to see the Twins back in their road pins. Even if just for a night. Time was, the Twins had one of the most consistent, distinctive “looks” in baseball: navy cap with red logo, pinstriped uni with red script. You saw that combo, you knew it was the Twins, home or road. Now, you catch a quick glimpse of the Twins on the road, and you can’t be sure if you’re looking at the Twins, Nats, or Tribe.

    • scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:47 am |

      Definite downgrade for the Twins when they dropped the road pinstripes.

      • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 10:09 am |

        Gotta side with the Scotts on this one.

        Twins traded being unique or being unique like everyone else.

      • Terry Proctor | July 8, 2012 at 10:43 am |

        Pinstripes should be limited to home uniforms only.

        • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 11:17 am |

          Bah. BAH! I SAY.

          Pinstripes should be used wherever the fuck a team wants to use them. Why don’t the Yankees use pinstripes for their road uniform? White uniform, pinstripes and NY at home; grey uniform, pinstripes and NY on the road. Why do they need a NEW YORK script at all?

        • stlmarty | July 8, 2012 at 8:41 pm |

          I’m down with this.

    • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 10:40 am |

      “Nice to see the Twins back in their road pins.”

      ~~~

      no, it wasn’t

      and the twins weren’t the only ones then or historically to wear road pins, so they weren’t *unique* (maybe they had some seasons as the only team doing it, but they weren’t the first and they weren’t the last [see, rockies, colorado ... circa 2011])

      it’s all a matter of opinion, of course, since there is no right or wrong

      i’m of the opinion that pins don’t belong on gray roadies (with the possible exception of this ting of beauty)…and pin pants sure as shit don’t belong with softball tops

      • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 10:53 am |

        So, then, road pins are kinda like monochrome dark or colored sanis with dark shoes, i.e. uncommon looks associated with a certain period of time that should stay in that certain period of time?

        Actually, I think road pins may be been more common than mono dark, but can’t check on it right now.

        • quiet seattle | July 8, 2012 at 11:02 am |

          I don’t like the look of road pins either. What the Twins did get right with those uniforms, however, was the MINNESOTA wordmark…

          http://www.imperials...

          Imagine that jersey without pinstripes and some thin navy trim on the collar and sleeves.

          This script….

          http://stmedia.start...

          …–like road pins–just seems forced, un-natural.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 12:29 pm |

          Done.

          Personally, I never liked that M cap – like it could stand for “Metrodome/Mall of America” & the solid gray nameplate on the back drove me crazy. They couldn’t cut a piece of pinstriped material & line up the pinstripes? I like the current Minnesota script that is based on an old Twins dugout jacket.

          The fact that the current road script is navy with red trim & not the more common vise versa seals the deal for me.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 12:45 pm |

          Did this a long time ago, to see what those roads would look like sans pins…
          http://www.flickr.co...

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 1:15 pm |

          I would say the pinstripes made it less boring. If it was wool flannel, then it would be a different story.

          Maybe pinstripes on gray looks too muddy.

        • quiet seattle | July 8, 2012 at 2:31 pm |

          concealed and Ricko, those look real good! Thanks.

          Yes, insert the TC hat and and the dark wool flannel gray and that’s a great road look for the Twinks.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 4:37 pm |

          Here’s one in faux wool; specifically Under Armour’s “Legend Gray”, which Paul was nice enough to provide a clean swatch sample when I asked for it, I turned it into a template idea I was working on:

          Twins road Legend Gray

          I didn’t know to include the cleaned-up blockshadowless Twins logo sleeve patch on the first one, but there it is on this version & one without.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 4:43 pm |

          nice job mark…

          now, can you substitute the original “TC” cap and the original “Twins” script?

          i’m trying to picture how that might look…

          maybe something like this?

          they got it right from the start…all they need to do is go back to it

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 6:00 pm |

          lol, I can.

          Cheesy modern sleeve patch thrown in.

          I do think the original Twins set was their best. That what, 1980-86 horror with the powder blue roads paired with the red batting helmet that’s been floating around here looks like a blue Slush Puppie with a cherry on top.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 6:06 pm |

          perfect

          and those powder roadies with the red cap fall into the “so bad they’re good” category…love those

      • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 10:57 am |

        Didn’t say they were unique; said they were distinctive. Which they were. When you saw even a quick glimpse of a Twins player in his road uni back in the day, say on Sportscenter at the gym when you were only half-looking, you knew instantly that it was a Twins player. Not a Nats player, not an Indians player, and no, not a Rox player. It’s about the impact the whole uni makes as a unit; very few teams have, or have ever had, so simple and consistent a distinctive look as the 1987-2010 Twins. Dodgers in some eras, Braves until the last few years, A’s since coming to Oakland, Giants … beyond that it gets iffy and arguable.

        If pinstripes don’t belong on road unis, the they don’t belong on home unis either. There is no conceivable aesthetic principle that allows the one and not the other. Even an appeal to custom and history fails, as road pins are just as old as home pins, and for the Twins franchise in particular just as deeply rooted in team history. And in terms of function, since pinstripes have the effect of darkening the apparent shade of the road unis, they make today’s very light gray road unis more distinct from home whites. So to the extent that good design is functional first and foremost, road pins are objectively good design no matter how much one’s personal taste finds them less pretty than unadorned gray.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 11:15 am |

          “Didn’t say they were unique”

          ~~~

          no, you didn’t

          ricko did

          ~~~

          just because a team is “distinctive” on a sportSCenter highlight is NOT a reason to laud a uni…shit, put a team in pink and they’ll be “distinctive” on SC…although i wouldn’t mind seeing one team try a fuschia pink

          i’m sure those rays fauxbacks will be instantly recognizable, but i sure as shit wouldn’t ever want to see them on the field again

          as far as “darkening” the light gray — there is a solution readily at hand, and i’d like to see that

          ~~~
          as far as ricko and his contention about colored sanis or monochrome dark — absolutely, it’s all a preference in the eye of the beholder — but i’d wager either or both of those could make a nice comeback once the rup returns to fashion (if the rup returns to fashion) … and the monochrome darks must absolutely have ruppage and not be worn pj style

          the only other time i like pins on roads is when they look like this, although those pins need to be thinner and more closely spaced

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 11:25 am |

          As to the uniqueness of the Twins road pins, it probably is worth noting that when the Twins went to road pins in 1987, the Padres were the only other MLB team that wore road pins.

          So for that era we have two, one in each league.

          The D-Backs, Angels and Rockies did it later…so they could be unique, too.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 12:15 pm |

          And the Reds, too. Briefly. Deion Sanders era.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

          Pirates, too. 1997-00.

          Deion Sanders era.

          Booooo! Run it out, you piece of shit.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 1:04 pm |

          Forgot about the Pirates. Thanks.
          Point still being, a decade AFTER the Twins.

        • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 1:49 pm |

          just because a team is “distinctive” on a sportSCenter highlight is NOT a reason to laud a uni

          …said the Oregon Ducks fan. Oh that’s right – *only* they can do it. ;)

          It was good to see the road pins again. Only one Twins roadie that’s better, as Phil knows:
          http://i.cdn.turner....

          More importantly is the issue: WHY throw back to 1994? There is NO good reason to do that. None.

          I don’t care if The Ballpark opened that year. They didn’t finish the season, so celebrate 1995 instead. Or any other year but 1994.

          They should have thrown back to the theoretical 1959 Twins and Rangers instead…

        • James A | July 8, 2012 at 1:56 pm |

          1985-1990 San Diego Padres. I hate those road unis.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 2:01 pm |

          Nobody remembers the very early TBTC game in Texas when the Twins wore their original roads, and the Rangers wore unis styled after the 1967 Senators?

          Rangers wore pins with red “Rangers” in script, multi-feathered-stripe socks and and hats with red script “R” outlined in white…with red seam piping.

          Really. They did. Having a helluva time finding images on Internet, but I have the game on VHS somewhere here.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 2:04 pm |

          Well, here’s Puckett from that game.
          http://farm5.static....
          Now to hunt up Rangers.
          Was that the same uni they later wore in a throwback game vs. the A’s?

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

          This, Ricko? Saved it on March 26, 2009 which I probably found it here.

          Blasted batting helmet!

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 3:06 pm |

          Was the home pins version of this but with “Rangers” on chest and an “R” on the hat.
          Probably game was in ’93, throwing back to ’63 (the year Senators went to that uni)…
          http://farm4.static....

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 3:07 pm |

          And I guess Rangers would have been in red cleats.
          I’ll have to dig out that VHS.

      • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 2:16 pm |

        Well, Dave Winfield got his stirrups right in that game…
        http://i.ebayimg.com...(KGrHqIOKjYE3QRb,706BN%2B-tinIH!~~_35.JPG

        And that makes it ’93 or ’94, cuz that’s when he was with the Twins.

      • LI Matt | July 8, 2012 at 5:30 pm |

        “… pin pants sure as shit don’t belong with softball tops.”

        I HATED it when the Bumblebee Bucs wore the pin pants with the black shirt. It just looked so wrong.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 6:51 pm |

          Their pins jerseys looked even dumber with the black pants.

          Or the gold pants, for that matter.

    • pushbutton | July 8, 2012 at 1:54 pm |

      ‘Minnesota’ is just not a name that looks good on a shirt. Some names do. That doesn’t. They should have left well enough alone and proclaimed ‘Twins’ on whites AND greys.

      Distinctiveness should be everything in a uniform. Teams need to stop looking at what everyone else is wearing for ideas they can use…..nobody should be adding a damn headspoon in 2012, okay? Strive for uniqueness. It is my solemn belief that the Padres could sell trainloads of brown caps and jerseys if they embraced the color.

      And there is definitely room for a road-pinstriped team in the mix.

      • walter | July 8, 2012 at 3:51 pm |

        I am in total agreement. Nearly to the point of having the league step in to prevent teams from copying one another’s intellectual property (or words to that effect), if I hadn’t witnessed the way the league can screw things up. I want teams I can tell apart. Basketball, hockey and football don’t have this problem.

      • JTH | July 8, 2012 at 7:15 pm |

        Y’know what NOBODY does anymore? Pins with a headspoon. Someone needs to bring back that look.

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 7:18 pm |

          TOTALLY agree. There’s a high school hereabouts that uses that and it looks SO great. Stripe down the pantleg, too.

        • JTH | July 8, 2012 at 8:08 pm |

          Could even work on a road uni

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 8:24 pm |

          that look might even get guys who hate gray caps and pins on roadies to like it

  • scott | July 8, 2012 at 9:46 am |

    Tri-City Valleycats of the New York Penn League wore Relay for Life jerseys last night that were auctioned off after the game.

  • Marc | July 8, 2012 at 9:52 am |

    During last night’s Cubs-Mets game, Gary Cohen and Keith Hernandez were discussing how Ruben Tejada put tape above the knob to locate where to choke up. Tejada broke his bat in an early at bat. Later, Gary and Keith noticed only that the new bat did not have tape and wondered why he did not have more than one bat prepared. They also noted that had either a “6” or “9” label. In the next at bat, Tejada’s bat had the tape on it. I also recall one of the announcers saying that it was Omar Quintanilla’s bat, not Kirk Nieuwenhuis’s. Both use black bats though Quintanilla’s has a white stripe in the middle like the one Tejada used http://www.flickr.co... while Neiuwenhuis’s does not http://www3.pictures... .

    • pushbutton | July 8, 2012 at 2:10 pm |

      Damn. I think I might notice if a player stepped up to the plate without a bat…….maybe.

      You’ve made a good argument for just one announcer per telecast.

  • Scott Davis | July 8, 2012 at 9:57 am |

    Why didn’t the Brewers wear their 80’s throwbacks?! Those jerseys are SO much better than what they have now, and would have made for a beautiful throwback game.

    • Jerry | July 8, 2012 at 1:47 pm |

      I said the same thing on Friday night. They HATE the Baby Blue in Milwaukee.

  • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 10:07 am |

    Great Benchies today, Ricko.

    Which reminds me of Bryce Harper [whom got into the ASG anyway, ugh] & his curly-W on his car: it’s difficult to root for a 19-year old who already drives a Mercedes-Benz. Like he isn’t entitled or arrogant enough already.

    • Mike Engle | July 8, 2012 at 11:11 am |

      Disagree. It’s actually Harper’s earned money, so let him spend and/or save it as he pleases. We’re not talking about LeBron James in high school driving a Hummer and wearing Mitchell and Ness throwbacks.

      • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 12:37 pm |

        And honestly the whole “arrogant” and “entitled” thing seems mostly to be a fabrication of the New York media. Sure, as a 17-year-old, he talked like a 17-year-old. But beyond that, the whole narrative of Harper’s inflated self-regard seems to be based on two instances of showing off in the early days of his minor-league career. In the bigs so far, he’s played and spoken to the press with exactly the sort of attitude that we usually bemoan for its absence. I get the apprehension – I’ve been a fan long enough to know that 19-year-old phenoms rarely turn into admirable, lasting players. And his whole thing with eyeblack on his cheeks like he’s auditioning for a community theater production of “Last of the Mohicans” rubbed me the wrong way, like it did a lot of fans. But so far, we just haven’t seen the kind of ego and tantrums the sports commentariat promised. At the big-league level, Harper just hasn’t behaved like, say, any of the mid-1980s Mets prodigies.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 4:23 pm |

          “a fabrication of the New York media”

          ~~~

          don’t let your northeast coast bias sway your opinions arrrrr

          i’m sure no media in any part of the country have ever said anything bad about harper

          such a clown response, bro

        • Arr Scott | July 8, 2012 at 6:22 pm |

          Right, because ESPN is headquartered in Idaho, and the big national sports talk radio programs broadcast from studios in Fayetteville and Tucumcari.

          I’m old enough to remember Don Mattingly winning Gold Gloves with his bat because, hey, New York! The sports media really does have a New York-centered top tier, and then everyone else. And the Harper-is-the-second-coming-of-Idi-Amin thing really is an artifact of the national sports media’s echo chamber.

      • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 12:42 pm |

        I don’t like young athletes getting paid big bucks before they even step on the field/court/ice. I say you have to earn your wage first before you get handed a big check. I was actually excited when the NFL implemented rookie wage scale until I saw this:

        “According to an NFL source, the Packers’ “year one rookie compensation pool” for its eight picks is $4,849,267. It’s “total rookie compensation pool” is $26,670,969.

        So, in other words, they can spend up to a combined $4,849,267 on first-year compensation for their eight picks. The total value of every year of every rookie contract cannot top $26,670,969.”

        Bah. What’s the damn point if it’s so high?

        • scott | July 8, 2012 at 6:19 pm |

          Junior Griffey was driving a Mercedes-Benz when he was in the minor leagues. I wonder if he was considered as arrogant and brash as Harper is; I seem to remember people fawning over the kid.

      • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 1:21 pm |

        It’s actually Harper’s earned money, so let him spend and/or save it as he pleases

        Yeah because young people deserve to be millionaires. Not.

        It’s precisely why I despise celebrities, young top pick athletes & reality stars. People like Lindsay Lohan prove young people shouldn’t have so much money.

        • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 1:36 pm |

          Most of Hollywood shouldn’t have that much money, but we’re far too gone to worry about that now.

          It doesn’t matter anyway, the world ends in another 5 months.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 1:45 pm |

          I quit going to the movie theater 2001 after I was dragged to this abortion & haven’t rented a single tape or DVD since. Been just too disappointed with movies in general that I met my breaking point. Just saying I practice what I preach.

  • Peruna88 | July 8, 2012 at 10:25 am |

    The Rangers uniform was correct. They only wore the 125th patch on their batting practice and road jerseys, not on the home whites. I have one of each (authentic, game-worn with tags). I was at the game last night in my Steve Dreyer #24 home white. So great to see the Rangers & Twins in those unis.

    • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 1:37 pm |

      Very nice catch! A 1994 search with Mr. Steroids confirms it.

    • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 1:39 pm |

      Very nice catch! A 1994 search with Mr. Steroids confirms it

    • Peruna88 | July 8, 2012 at 4:15 pm |

      Forgot to add that the Rangers should’ve broken out the red shoes & belts for the true 1994 look.

  • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 10:32 am |

    Gene Lamont! Boy if that doesn’t bring back The Strike & 1994-95 memories along with the Twins & Rangers…

    • boxcarvibe | July 8, 2012 at 12:22 pm |

      I’m still trying to forget 1994. Haven’t purchased an MLB ticket since 1994. Haven’t bought MLB licensed merchandised (at retail) since 1994.

      “Let’s bring back the strike year!” Who the f___ suggested that idea?

      • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 12:28 pm |

        Why wouldn’t they want to bring back the strike year? Baseball is all about Strikes. Three of them, and you’re out. I mean… duh.

        ;)

      • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 12:35 pm |

        That was Selig’s biggest black eye & lead to his 2nd biggest black eye with a franchise relocating on HIS watch. Probably grumbled to himself until he thought “Wait a minute! I could make MONEY on this! Stock the gift shops! ‘1994’ full speed ahead!”

        • Jerry | July 8, 2012 at 1:52 pm |

          The Strike is what killed the Expos. They had to move, the city wasn’t going to give them a stadium, the fans weren’t coming out. They had the best team in baseball in ’94, and had to blow it up, because of the strike.

        • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 1:59 pm |

          Last night I was thinking the only reason to throw back to ’94 would be to have the Yanks and Nats “re-create” the never-was Yanks/Expos World Series. But even that isn’t a good reason. “1994” to baseball people should be like “Macbeth” to actors – you just don’t mention it.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 4:52 pm |

          Nope, not a good reason. World Series could had been Indians/Reds, Dodgers/Royals, Rangers/Braves, Astros/Orioles, White Sox/Expos or A’s/Giants, we will never know. Just completely inexcusable to stop in the middle of a season – at least finish the season out & crown a champion & do the business afterwards. The worst thing of all, the Strike accomplished absolutely nothing. Nothing. The resentment lasted for years and for some, still. If the Expos were still around, we’d probably be seeing another Oakland Coliseum situation of Selig trying to swindle taxpayers & Gov’t into building a new stadium & maybe the A’s could have ended up in D.C.

        • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 4:56 pm |

          “maybe the A’s could have ended up in D.C.”

          ~~~

          and the nats would never throw back to the a’s either

  • Original Jim | July 8, 2012 at 10:55 am |

    Before the first Sox-Yankees game on Saturday, Fenway Park was names to the National Register of Historic Places (Link here: http://boston.cbsloc... )

    Maybe that’s why the Red Sox had the patch on the caps for this series?

  • Phil Hecken | July 8, 2012 at 11:32 am |

    aight uni bretheren…

    off to shea

    play nice

    • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 11:40 am |
      • Coleman | July 8, 2012 at 12:27 pm |

        Why am I not surprised that you have pictures of ponies on hand?!

        /kidding

        • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 12:35 pm |

          Google image search, yo.

          /and I do happen to like the newest version of the show.

          //Seriously, it’s made by some of the same people that were involved with the Powerpuff Girls (which Paul even stuck in a COTD a while back). Most of the toys are incredibly lame, yes, but the cartoon itself is very watchable.

          ///if the internet of today existed in the 90’s, we’d have had “Brainiacs” flooding the web with captioned pictures of Pinky & the Brain.

        • Coleman | July 8, 2012 at 12:44 pm |

          Funny thing, regarding the toys for that ponies show, I just found one of my nieces toys from it, and yes, it’s pretty lame. Haha.

          I much prefer something like this…

          http://cdn2.mixrmedi...

        • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 12:51 pm |

          Go ninja go ninja go?

          /sorry

          I did love me some turtles growing up… I do remember hating that the Shredder figure had a freakin purple helmet when it was supposed to be silver. I mean, what the hell was up with that?

        • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 1:16 pm |

          I remember seeing first issues of the Turtles and their sister pub ADOLESCENT RADIOACTIVE BLACK BELT HAMSTERS.

          Wish I’d bought them.

        • Coleman | July 8, 2012 at 1:20 pm |

          Best thing Vanilla Ice ever did.

          Do you think Paul hates the Shredder AND Donatello then?

        • stlmarty | July 8, 2012 at 4:17 pm |

          Mmmmm… Brainiac.
          http://www.youtube.c...

  • Gusto44 | July 8, 2012 at 12:18 pm |

    The 1994 Twins-Rangers throwback game was a disappointment in the sense insufficient time has elapsed since we saw those uniforms. In fact, the Twins were wearing those road unis as recently as 2009, while the Rangers were donning those home unis as recently as 2000.

    It just didn’t feel like a true throwback game.

    • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 12:22 pm |

      Nothing to make you feel old like teams “throwing back” to the 1990’s, eh?

      • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 1:54 pm |

        Yeah. And when 90s music starts creeping onto my oldies station it’s over.

        • The Jeff | July 8, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

          Sorry Vilk, if you’re listening to an actual radio station, you’re already too far gone.

        • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 2:01 pm |

          Yeah, I need satellite radio or something. Tired of punching the buttons on my car radio trying to 1) find a station not playing a commercial, and 2) find a good song.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 2:41 pm |

          No NPR, Jazz or Blues station to get it done, Jim?

          I O.D.ed on Classic Rock stations almost a decade ago. False promises of “deep album cuts” & hearing ‘Brown Sugar’ for the nth time was not going to get me through the commute anymore. The worst two years was a station who had a deep fetish for the anniversary of Floyd’s ‘The Wall’.

          1990s music? Blech. No thanks.

        • stlmarty | July 8, 2012 at 4:26 pm |

          “1990s music? Blech. No thanks.”
          I hope you are only referring to popular music.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 4:57 pm |

          I don’t like 1990s or 21st century music, stlmarty. Prefer older stuff.

        • stlmarty | July 8, 2012 at 8:48 pm |

          I usually prefer older stuff, but there is a lot of bad older stuff, too.
          Decades are like genres. No more than 10% of either is any good. The 90’s weren’t great, but I managed.

        • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 9:14 pm |

          Smooth jazz, baby.

    • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 12:32 pm |

      I agree, Gusto. Just like with the Diamondbacks throwing back to their 2001 unis. They had that scheme only 6 years ago. Just not enough time has passed. Things don’t become “classic” after only 10 years.

      • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

        All relative. And it depends on who you’re talking/selling to.

        If you’re 30, unis of 18 years ago are, “Wow, from way back when I was a kid!”

      • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 2:03 pm |

        But the Diamondbacks *should* throw back to that…and then keep it…because it looks so much better than what they usually wear now.

        • concealed78 | July 8, 2012 at 2:43 pm |

          Sorry Jim. They need to blow it all up & start over. Crimson & Athletic Gold, man.

        • stlmarty | July 8, 2012 at 8:49 pm |

          I’m down with this as well.

  • Shane | July 8, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

    WEEI noticed Nava’s helmet mishap, and Dave O’Brien said he’d talked to Nava the other day about how he has specific bats for when he bats righty or lefty. I guess he prefers a thinner handle batting lefty.

    Any other switch hitters do that?

  • Kate | July 8, 2012 at 1:44 pm |

    Upon closer inspection of the Rangers photos from last night, all of the usual proper-pants wearers (Murphy, Kinsler and, for last night, Holland) were wearing stirrups, though at a lower height than Ross, as seen here in this photo of Ian Kinsler missing a ground ball. http://cdn0.sbnation...

    • Ricko | July 8, 2012 at 1:55 pm |

      Indeed. Kinsler and the others looked really good. Although that was hardly a 1994 look. Then again, neither was ankle length.

      As throwback games go, was interesting but not anything to be placed in the upper echelons.

      • Kate | July 8, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

        It was a bit sentimental for me, because those were close to the uniforms that I first saw the Rangers in, and I do wish they’d go back to having “Rangers” on the front of the home uniforms, but I can see how it’s not one of the “banner” throwback games.

  • Joe F. | July 8, 2012 at 2:30 pm |

    Paul I can remember going to a game back in ’07 with my dad on the Sunday before the break and the Phillies presenting they’re all-stars with bp jerseys, so they’ve been doing it for at least 5 years now

  • cab647 | July 8, 2012 at 2:45 pm |

    Obnoxious detail guy here. Leeds is part of the UK based Super League, a rugby league competition. Super Rugby is rugby union competition in SA, NZ, and AUS. Not that anyone really cares…

  • Eddie | July 8, 2012 at 2:46 pm |

    My guess on the ASG BP top presentations is that it’s a gesture to acknowledge the fans for stuffing the ballot box and/or sitting in front of their computers to submit thousands of votes for “their guy.”

  • Matt | July 8, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

    On the Red Sox oddities:
    1) The patch is back for this weekend because they are playing the Yankees. As you remember, Fenway opened against the Yankees in 1912. Presumably, it will be worn for the final Yankees series too. No word on whether or not Ortiz will wear it Tuesday.
    2) The Red Sox always wear their alternate jersey for one game of a double header at home. It’s been that way since 2003 when they first introduced the red alternates. Although it is usually the afternoon game…
    3) Nava wore the wrong helmet for one pitch. He originally came into the On Deck circle expecting a RHP, but Girardi made a switch to a LHP, and Nava didn’t make the connection until after one pitch was thrown. Time was called, and he switched helmets for the rest of the AB.

  • matthew | July 8, 2012 at 4:42 pm |

    The Red Sox actually have worn the Red on a day other than a Friday because I went to a game last year.

    • scott | July 8, 2012 at 6:24 pm |

      The Red Sox also wore red jerseys on the final day of the 2007 season against the Twins, and that was a Sunday afternoon.

  • Wheels | July 8, 2012 at 8:49 pm |

    I always thought the gold-tinted, MLB 125th anniversary patch looked sweet. Too bad we only got to see them for half a season.

    • JTH | July 8, 2012 at 9:10 pm |

      I also thought the brass logo on the backs of the caps (covering the regular logo) was pretty cool.

      • JTH | July 8, 2012 at 9:18 pm |

        Brass? Or maybe bronze?

        • Wheels | July 8, 2012 at 9:56 pm |

          I completely forgot about those.

        • concealed78 | July 9, 2012 at 11:30 am |

          I remember being asked in 1994 if I wanted that on a new navy blue Padres cap that I purchased. Said it would be a dollar extra. I said no. Caps were $21 back then with mostly (superior) flat embroidery. I remember looking at these new cap stores that popped up & wanting to buy every single cap on the wall. I remember buying a few including the dreaded teal/black brimmed Marlins road & almost bought a Rockies one if it had a purple brim. What a stupid kid I was.

    • Ben Fortney | July 8, 2012 at 10:46 pm |

      Those didn’t cover up the regular MLB logo, that was the first time they had a logo on the back of the cap.

      Have an inaugural Rockies cap (’93) no logo on back, still green under brim.

      • JTH | July 8, 2012 at 11:56 pm |

        My inaugural Marlins cap (’93) begs to differ.

        And are you sure that’s an actual honest-to-goodness official Rockies cap and not something that was rushed to market before they started playing?

        Because the 1993 Rockies had gray underbrims and I can’t find a conclusive pic, but I’d be willing to bet good money that there was a logo on the back of the cap.

        In fact, I don’t think any team had green underbrims in 1993. I know that was the year the Cubs went from green to gray and they definitely had the logo on the back that year.

    • Wheels | July 9, 2012 at 1:49 am |

      Good view of the 125th anniversary patch: http://mariners.free...

  • Jim Vilk | July 8, 2012 at 9:52 pm |

    Seattle Rainiers took on the Oakland Oaks today:
    http://cache.daylife...

    • Ben Fortney | July 8, 2012 at 10:47 pm |

      TBTC helmets!

  • stlmarty | July 9, 2012 at 1:09 am |

    RIP Norman Sas
    http://www.nfl.com/n...

  • Insomniac186 | July 9, 2012 at 2:20 am |

    The MLB logo started showing up on the back of the caps in 1992. At first they were patches that were glued on. Keep in mind that Rockies and Marlins caps began to be sold in retail in 1991 and the Rockies at first had a green underside. Things changed when New Era started insisting that all teams switch from gray to green undersides (the least team with green being the Yankees in 1995).

    New Era provided the bronze MLB logo pins for the 1994 season and they were made to be fastened around the embroidered MLB logo. In the packaging of the bronze MLB logo pins it comes with instructions showing this. You can still find them on eBay.