Identity Crisis, or Just More Logos to Love?

So let’s say you’re in charge of the Detroit Tigers’ billboard projects. Which version of the old English “D” do you put on the billboards — the cap version or the jersey version? The answer, as you can see above, is that it depends. Same goes for team calendars and lots of other applications.

My latest ESPN column takes a closer look at teams that, like the Tigers, have logo inconsistencies. Check it out here. — Paul

+ + + + +

PermaRec update: A bunch of old military medals were recently found in a tree (!), and one of them — the one shown at right — is being returned to the son of the man to whom it was awarded. Full details on Permanent Record.

+ + + + +

’Skins Watch: Very interesting article about the McGill University Redmen. “The team name wasn’t originally meant to tie in with aboriginals, then it became tied in, and then they cut those ties by not using aboriginal logos,” says Chris Blackstone. … Here’s a particularly nasty version of Chief Wahoo that I hadn’t seen before (from Bruce Menard).

Baseball News: I’ve written several times about the Dodgers’ red-lettered spring training jerseys. Christina Kollas recently picked up one of those jerseys at a yard sale. Great score! … The Yankees don’t use Cool Base jerseys — but Jacoby Ellsbury seems to have one, as you can see from his armpit vents. “What’s next, beards?” asks David Sanchez. … Oliver Staleyhas decided to rank all the MLB team names. … Christian Yelich of the Marlins broke his belt during a head-first slide on Monday night (from Andre Torres). … Preparations for the Cubs’ next throwback game will include Wrigley Field’s marquee being repainted in its original colors. Further info here (from Phil and Steve Goluch). … Mariners CF James Jones says he wears stirrups because long pants don’t look good on him. Of course, that only explains why he goes high-cuffed but doesn’t really explain why he prefers stirrups over solid socks. Whatever — he looks great (from John Kimmerlein). … The Astros will be wearing Houston Eagles Negro Leagues throwbacks for the Civil Rights game on May 30 (thanks, Phil). … New ads for the video game MLB 14 The Show feature actor Danny McBride wearing a 1914 Brooklyn Dodgers throwback uni. Clever, although it looks like they got the hosiery wrong (from Brayden Ruthart). … Kevin Kleinhans recently visited the Ted Williams Museum and Hitter’s Hall Of Fame, which is located within Tropicana Field, and took a bunch of photos. … I was emailing former Yankees PR guy Marty Appel about something when he mentioned this to me: “The uniform Babe Ruth wore for appearances late in his life — the one with the ‘NY,’ which he never actually wore during his career — was given to him by the costume department when he did Pride of the Yankees. He kept it and wore it when he appeared around the country.” … MLB’s latest hosiery hero: Rays pitcher David Price who wore striped stirrups last night. Here’s a closer look at his blousing (from Phil and Mike Edgerley). … Also from Phil: a rare view of the Dodgers’ 1971 shoulder-piped road grays, a one-year style that many folks aren’t aware of. … “During Tuesday night’s Tigers/Orioles game, Fox Sports Detroit did a brief piece during the game about the 77 home runs at Camden Yards that have reached Eutaw Street and how they each have a baseball medallion commemorating the blast,” says Jeff Sak. “It turns out that the Tigers’ Mickey Tettleton hit the first one in 1992. They showed his medallion and as you can see, they spelled ‘Mickey’ incorrectly.” … Giants pitcher Sergio Romo caught the first pitch, thrown by a local politician, prior to Monday night’s game. Romo normally goes high-cuffed but he was pajama-pantsed for that first pitch. In fact, those pants were so long that it’s hard to imagine him cuffing them up to his usual game height. Does he switch to a different pair of pants when he goes down to the ’pen? (From Timothy Appel.)

NFL News: New 20th-season patch for the Jaguars. It’ll be worn on the opposite side of the jersey from the “Jags” patch. … The Jets’ mismatched shades of green are getting out of hand (from Gordon Blau). … New rookie uni number assignments for the Seahawks and 49ers (from Kyle Hanks and Brinke, respectively). … Never seen this neat little NFL helmet bottle openers before. Click on the thumbnails to appreciate them in all their niftiness (nice find by Bruce Menard). … More uni-numerical news: New Jets QB Tajh Boyd is listed as No. 3 on the roster but has No. 9 on his locker (good spot by Patrick Sesty). … Still more rookie uni numbers, this time for the Bucs, Bears, ’Skins, Dolphins, and Panthers (Phil again).

College Football News: If Texas A&M ever wants to call its stadium “The House That Johnny Built,” they may have to pay Johnny Manziel (thanks, Phil). … Also from Phil: Here’s a sneak peek at East Carolina’s new jersey design. … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: The visitors’ locker room at the U. of Iowa’s stadium is painted pink, and the school’s student newspaper thinks it’s time to change that. … New solid-red uni combo for Cincinnati (Phil again).

Hockey News: Reader John O’Leary sent along a bunch of items relating to the 1986 NHL All-Star Game, which took place in Hartford. … Good piece on the L.A. Kings’ equipment manager (from Austin Glover). … Broadcasters during the NHL playoffs have been wearing a lapel pins that apparently show the blade of a stick and a puck (from Alan Kreit).

NBA News: Big research project about to be undertaken by Mark Roberts, who writes: “I’ve been gathering information on the shoes NBA players have worn historically, hoping to create some kind of shoe/player Wikipedia that will detail who wore which individual brand during any given season (e.g., listing of every player who wore adidas during the 2004-2005 season), information on individual shoes/models (e.g., an entry on the Air Jordan 8, and every player who wore that shoe during the course of their career), and entries for every player in NBA history (e.g., being able to search for Gary Payton and having every shoe he’s known to have worn, sorted by season, brand, and model). Right now I’m looking for additional researchers and collaborators with a fair amount of knowledge regarding this subject area.” If you’d like to help Mark out, contact him here.

Soccer News: New jersey for the Baltimore Bohemians (thanks, Phil). … Also from Phil: Peru has new uniforms for friendlies against England and Switzerland. … Here’s your regularly scheduled Herculean data dump from Trevor Williams (deep breath): Lots of English clubs with new kits, including Crystal Palace, Doncaster Rovers, Bradford City, Gillingham, and Crewe Alexandra. Also lots of new German kits, for Schalke, FSV Mainz, Hertha BSC Berlin, SC Paderborn, FSV Frankfurt, and FC Ingolstadt. Also new French kits, for Olympique Marseille, Bordeaux, and EA Guingamp. And finally, new kits for three other European clubs — Sevilla, Lazio, and Motherwell. … “FIFA’s uniform assignments for the World Cup are trickling out,” says Yusuke Toyoda. “Brazil will wear its traditional yellow throughout the group stage, while England will wear all-white in all three group matches and both Korea and Iran will wear white, red, then white again.” … Also from Yusuke: New 150th-anniversary jersey for Wrexham. Wow, who knew there was jersey advertising and Nike logos 150 years ago? … “There’s discontent amongst West Brom fans, as the team had elected to ditch the traditional navy blue/white stripes next season in favor of a New York Yankees-esque look,” says Simon Harrow. “This has happened in recent years with Southampton going for all red instead of red/white stripes, and Cardiff City (nickname: the Bluebirds) changing to red beacuse it’s considered lucky in owner Vincent Tan’s native Malaysia.”

Grab Bag: I love this slideshow of old Irish handball courts. … Men’s shorts are getting shorter (from Yusuke Toyoda). … New volleyball uniforms for the Japanese men’s team (from Jeremy Brahm). … Tennis pros, with an eye toward Wimbledon, are switching to high-tech racquets (thanks, Brinke). … New logo for the motorcycle company Royal Enfield.

 

110 comments to Identity Crisis, or Just More Logos to Love?

  • Aaron | May 14, 2014 at 7:46 am |

    Grammar note: “I was email” in baseball news.

  • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 7:54 am |

    The Tigers and Yankees having multiple variations of Ds and NYs is dumb, and always has been. Just pick one, it’s not that hard. Most people don’t even realize the Yankees have multiple NYs in the first place, so they could standardize it without even telling anyone.

    • walter | May 14, 2014 at 9:21 am |

      Heresy;) Slender, spiky insignias show up better in light color against a dark background. Broad, fatter monograms tend to display better on a white background. It’s a trick of the light.

      • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 9:35 am |

        Ok, sure I guess they could fatten it up a bit for the jersey, but that doesn’t excuse how differently shaped the two are.

      • Ben Fortney | May 14, 2014 at 10:45 am |

        At some point a UWer had mocked up what the Yankee jersey would look like with the cap logo – just looked “wrong.”

        • arrScott | May 14, 2014 at 1:59 pm |

          Nah, it didn’t look wrong. It looked different. That’s a problem for the Yankees – their entire aesthetic is based not on being good or well designed but on being unchanging. So any conceivable change, even a change that would for any other team in a similar circumstance be a marked improvement, will be perceived negatively. And look, I’m just as guilty as anyone: I don’t even much like the Yankees uniforms – they are no better than the above-average end of mediocre – but my first reaction to any proposed or actual Yanks uni innovation is, “Yuck!” I have to try very hard to see past the dissonance of novelty for this team to asses any change on its own terms.

          The Yankees, A’s, Dodgers, and Braves have no excuse for not consolidating and simplifying their divergent logos into a single standard glyph. The Tigers can at least make a case that differences in medium justify their different logos. And the different Tigers D’s are so different that they almost don’t even look like two versions of the same logo, but more like the team has two completely different D’s. Granted, if I ran the Tigers, I’d pick one of the D logos and ditch the other, but I can at least buy the different-mediums argument for the Tigers. Not so much for the other teams.

        • Dan J | May 14, 2014 at 3:07 pm |

          I feel better now. I thought I was the only one in the world who thought the Yankees uniforms weren’t all that and a bag of chips. Talk about boring, bland and unimaginative…

        • Tom V. | May 14, 2014 at 3:17 pm |

          Agree with this. The fact that the Yankees have been successful and have kept the same uniform for ages gives the uniform value.

          However, in a vacuum that uniform set is no where near where it gets ranked by readers and Paul, etc.

        • Ben Fortney | May 14, 2014 at 3:39 pm |

          I think the “different mediums” is why the Yankees looks wrong when swapped out.

          The cap logo is thinner and more vertical, if it was replicated at the same ratio to the uniform it would be too tall for the chest area. The jersey logo is much fuller, filling up the pectoral area better.

        • arrScott | May 14, 2014 at 5:49 pm |

          I see what you’re saying about the fullness of the lines between the two, but I think the overall shape of each actually cuts the other way. The cap logo, too tall for the chest area? The chest area is a vertical space! A space that’s defined by strong vertical pinstripes. And with no numbers below or beside it, the taller cap logo would fill the space significantly better.

          Conversely, the squatter, more square jersey logo would be much stronger on the more horizontal cap front.

  • Michigooner | May 14, 2014 at 7:55 am |

    Ironic that the section regarding the misspelling of Mickey Tettleton’s medallion at Oriole Park at Camden Yards is on “Utah” Street. It’s correctly spelled “Eutaw Street”.

    • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 8:03 am |

      Fixed.

    • duker | May 14, 2014 at 12:56 pm |

      Here’s a really cool interactive thingy about all the Eutaw Street Home Runs.

      http://baltimore.ori...

      • scott | May 14, 2014 at 10:49 pm |

        Absolutely love being being able to see highlights of all the Eutaw Street homers. Great stuff.

  • John | May 14, 2014 at 8:19 am |

    My favorite team is the Cubs, and it’s May 14 and I’m already sick of the 100th anniversary. Just lose your 105 games and lets get to 2015.

    • David | May 14, 2014 at 9:19 am |

      Will there be a special logo for the 100th loss of the 100th season of Wrigley?

      • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 10:27 am |

        We can only hope.

    • El Duderino | May 14, 2014 at 10:50 am |

      “Any team can have a bad century.” -Jack Brickhouse

  • ScottyM | May 14, 2014 at 8:24 am |

    It’s quite possible that the variation in logos being used can be traced back to the team not buttoning up their graphic standards. i.e., forcing all vendors/partners to use the right logo in the right situation. It could also simply be BCBS of Michigan did that billboard and didn’t use the right logo. Or, the billboard company may have done the design and didn’t use the right logo.

    It happens ALL THE TIME with sign printers, etc. Greater concern for quick turnaround than adhering to brand standards. Sometimes they don’t even think about it. I’ve seen this happen on a monthly basis if we aren’t vigorous about it.

    • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 9:31 am |

      I’ve been on the vendor side, and yeah, a lot of brand managers, even for major firms, can be really lazy about consistency/updated standards.

      A not-too-typical exchange would go something like:

      Art director: “So here’s the layout. I’ve put the old logo in there for placement only, but you’ll need to send us the logo file.”

      Client: “Uh, sure. For now, can’t you grab the logo from our website.”

      Art director: “Well, we need the high-res image since this is a print ad. It’s going to the printer in 3 weeks so we have time.”

      Client: “Sure. I’ll send you the file before the end of the day.”

      3 weeks later…

      Art director: “We still haven’t gotten the updated logo. We need it right away because it’s going to the printer tomorrow or we miss the deadline.”

      Client: “I don’t know who has the logo. Whatever, just use the old one.”

  • AlMaFi | May 14, 2014 at 8:30 am |

    Those NFL helmet bottle openers are fantastic, but the Bears’ logo is backward–at least on the side that we can see.

    • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 8:43 am |

      Actually, it’s upside down, not backwards. It could only be backwards if it was for a team that used logos which were mirror images of each other, like the Vikings, Eagles, Seahawks, etc.

    • Bruce Menard | May 14, 2014 at 8:55 am |

      Another interesting point: that Broncos helmet never existed as far as I know (or did it?), blue with a white horse. http://www.legendary...

      • Bruce Menard | May 14, 2014 at 8:58 am |

        Broncos logo history – http://www.uni-watch...

      • Graf Zeppelin | May 14, 2014 at 8:58 am |

        I believe you’re right. They had an orange helmet with white stripe and blue horse, then an orange helmet with white stripe and white horse, then an orange helmet with blue and white stripes and white horse, then a blue helmet with blue and white stripes and no horse. Maybe this was produced between the ’66 and ’67 seasons; maybe the team had announced a change to blue helmets but hadn’t made it clear whether it would include the decal.

        • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 9:04 am |

          Yeah, that helmet never physically existed, but the design was used as field art as late as 1968: http://imageshack.co...

        • BvK1126 | May 14, 2014 at 11:49 am |

          We had a discussion about that same Broncos helmet design back on New Year’s Eve, when Brinke included a pennant with it in an installment of Collector’s Corner.

          I have a theory that the Broncos originally intended to use the old “Bucking Bronco” logo on their new blue helmets back in 1967, but decided at the last minute to scrap that logo and come up with a new one. That new logo, which would be the “D with Snorting Bronco,” didn’t wind up being ready until the following season, so they simply went with a logo-less blue helmet in 1967.

          Why the Broncos used the old logo on the field as late as 1968, when the new one made its debut, is still a mystery to me. My best guess is that they didn’t have a stencil for the new logo yet.

      • Ben Fortney | May 14, 2014 at 10:47 am |

        Man, that old bronco silhouette is terrible. Every time I see it, I have to remind myself that it’s a horse.

      • DenverGregg | May 14, 2014 at 1:30 pm |

        In those days – really until about 1973 – the Broncos were run on a shoestring, so the theory about the old logo being used on-field two years after it was pulled from the helmet due to lack of a stencil is quite plausible.

        . . . and the first horse logo really was atrocious.

  • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 8:47 am |

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

    • Chance Michaels | May 14, 2014 at 10:35 am |

      One thing that often gets lost in the Yankee logo discussion is that their cap logo doesn’t appear anywhere in the style guide. Instead, what the guide calls the “cap logo” is actually the print logo (which is also used on the helmets, but is more prominent in advertising than anywhere else).

      Crazy.

  • Graf Zeppelin | May 14, 2014 at 8:56 am |

    How do the Jets not see how terrible this looks? How do they not insist that Nike fix it?

    It’s been “out of hand” since the day Nike took over; this is how it’s always looked. Under certain lighting conditions the Jets’ jerseys look more brown than green. This has got to be rectified. It’s a shame because Nike does such a good job with the shoulder/sleeve treatment on the game jerseys (not so much on the retail jerseys, but that’s a separate issue).

    The Jets have got to tell Nike, “Look, we’re the Green and White, not the Green, Brown and White. Fix it.”

    • Jet | May 14, 2014 at 2:20 pm |

      What am I looking at here? Is that a jersey? Looks like another layer of fabric stitched on top of a Jets jersey. Sickening…

      -Jet

  • random reader | May 14, 2014 at 9:22 am |

    Good catch on the Cool Base jersey on Ellsbury. So far it’s limited to just the road jersey; he wears the double-knit version of the home jersey as that is the only version.

    I didn’t get screen grabs the past couple nights but I have noticed the Yankees are using bat knob decals now. Carlos Beltran had one Monday night and Mark Teixeira had one on his bat, too. The design is simple: dark navy blue sticker with a small white interlocking NY* on top with the player’s number in white below it.

    * – Not sure if they used the cap version, print, or jersey version of the NY. ;)

    • Chance Michaels | May 14, 2014 at 10:36 am |

      I’d be very surprised if it wasn’t the print logo.

  • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 9:32 am |

    …both Korea and Iran will wear white, red, then red again.

    That should be “then white again”.

  • quiet seattle | May 14, 2014 at 9:44 am |

    The abandoned handball courts of Ireland! Excellent.

    • Cort | May 14, 2014 at 11:17 am |

      The Abandoned Handball Courts of Ireland would be a good name for a band that played a lot of Pogues covers.

  • Jet | May 14, 2014 at 9:59 am |

    Great article about the mismatched logos! I love that stuff.

    You asked for more examples. This one always bugged me – the old California Golden Seals (my fave team – see my membership card) had a version of their wordmark that appeared in print…
    http://www.sportslog...

    that didn’t match the wordmark on their jerseys (both the teal version and the green/gold version!)

    http://www.gameworna...

    http://www.gameworna...

    -Jet

    • ChrisH | May 14, 2014 at 4:27 pm |

      Same goes for the Philadelphia MLB team’s “Whiz Kids”/pre-Vet era:

      http://www.sportslog...

      http://media-cache-e...

      It always bothered me that the script P’s used on the cap and the jersey didn’t match.

  • Connie DC | May 14, 2014 at 10:18 am |

    “… Oliver Staley has decided to rank all the MLB team names. …”

    And a nice job, too. Open to infinite second-guessings – me, I’d put the Blue Jays near the top of the list – but a fine exercise, stoutly defended.

    • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 10:25 am |

      I think that list is invalidated by the Nationals not being last. Nationals is the type of name that should be given to either an Olympic team, or the National League All-Stars, not an actual team whose games count in the league standings.

    • Judy | May 14, 2014 at 12:49 pm |

      But he makes up for it by putting the Orioles at the top.

    • Jim Greenfield | May 14, 2014 at 12:58 pm |

      I got as far as #2. How would you like to say “I’m a Twin”? A name should not depend on an explanation to make sense. Twin cities or no, I think it’s an embarrassment to baseball.

      • Joseph | May 14, 2014 at 4:14 pm |

        But Minnesota Twins doesn’t need an explanation. Who doesn’t know that Minneapolis and St. Paul are known as the “Twin Cities”?

  • just Joe | May 14, 2014 at 10:22 am |

    I have to disagree with the MLB names list. I know all rankings list are rooted in opinion, and to each his own, but to rank the Braves at number 28 simply because of any Native American association is insane. The name fits the region perfectly. No, the name didn’t originate in Atlanta, but using the lists author’s own reasoning (originality: are there any other Braves? specificity: pretty damn geographically and historically significant, and lack of marketability: merchandise sells were far from the minds of execs when the name was devised) one can make a pretty strong case for the name being in the top 10…if not top 5. Obviously, this has all been discussed too many times to count on this site, and I’m not trying to stir up any more Wahoo-esque chatter or anything. I’m just bothered that a team with a name that fits a region so perfectly is being bashed because of a perceived injustice. Now, were the team still in Boston and using the Native American iconography, I could better understand the argument. Though those involved in the Tea Party were brave, their choice of disguise was offensive. But they aren’t…they’re in Georgia, a hotbed of Native American history. Also, the “They seem to have exiled Chief Noc-A-Homa and his tepee in the bleachers, but the tomahawk and name remain” sentence bothers me. For one, the chief and tepee have not been used since 1986 and have never been in the Turner Field bleachers. In fact, the Braves have denied request by Levi Walker, the last man to depict the Chief and an Odawa Indian, to recreate the role. That’s a non-issue at this point. Two, how is a tomahawk on it’s own offensive? If you want to make it a .45′s-depiction-of-a-weapon issue, fine, but again, a Native American reference is not inherently offensive. Furthermore, what does a logo have to do with an list about names? I guess my OCD would just prefer a little consistency in the ranking process.

    • snowdan | May 14, 2014 at 12:03 pm |

      Georgia – “a hotbed of Native American history”. Yeah, how’d that turn out for the Native Americans…

      http://en.wikipedia....

      • just Joe | May 14, 2014 at 12:26 pm |

        You’re actually proving my point, so thanks. Although, I would’ve linked a more reputable source than wiki. And to answer your question, it worked out about the same as it did in Manhattan.

        Try these:

        http://www.cherokee....

        http://www.explorege...

        http://www.georgiaen...

        http://chieftainstra...

        • just Joe | May 14, 2014 at 12:40 pm |

          That’s not intended as a cheap shot at NY, I could’ve just as easily said LA or basically anywhere on the East Coast. My point is Native Americans were screwed everywhere in this country. That doesn’t negate their historical significance to the Atlanta area, thus contradicting the author’s ranking system.

      • PaulS | May 14, 2014 at 12:54 pm |

        Umm… shouldn’t that read “North America, a hotbed of Native American history”?

        I found the list absolutely brutal, for, well… probably many of the same reasons I come here. Number one, it’s completely subjective, one man’s opinion. Number two, his reasons for marking teams up or down are based on misinformation.

        He hasn’t done his homework: his reason for downgrading the Tigers, for example: ‘there are no tigers in Detroit.’ No shit? Geez, for the money I paid, I expect to see real honest-to-God tigers playing baseball. Not a word about the fact that the name Tigers had to do with their orange and black striped socks and/or stirrups of their new uniform. This is the theme of the entire article; I want the ten minutes I spent reading it back. (He can keep the twenty that I spent for the retort!)

    • Le Cracquere | May 14, 2014 at 12:38 pm |

      He can rank as he pleases, but he comes across as a fellow whose bottom five any sensible man would be proud to see his team occupy. Épater les jejunes, says I!

    • Percival Henry | May 15, 2014 at 10:17 am |

      Hi, as the author of the rankings in question, I sought to respond to some of these comments on my blog. You can check it out here: http://percivalhenry...

  • Connie DC | May 14, 2014 at 10:25 am |

    “… ‘FIFA’s uniform assignments for the World Cup are trickling out,’ says Yusuke Toyoda. ‘Brazil will wear its traditional yellow throughout the group stage, while England will wear all-white in all three group matches’…”

    I think every time Brazil plays any other country that other country should wear whatever uni of theirs contrasts most effectively with Brazil in yellow. This rule could be easily incorporated into international law.

    • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 10:30 am |

      I think the countries involved should all be creative enough to come up with unique uniforms that contrast with each other so as to not need FIFA to decide anything.

      • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 11:35 am |

        How is it humanly possible for 32 different teams to come up with uniforms that provide contrast with all 31 other teams? You think 32 NFL teams can come up with unique enough uniforms that they never have to wear their road jerseys?

        • The Jeff | May 14, 2014 at 12:36 pm |

          When you factor in horizontal and vertical stripes, as well as differing shirt/short colors, I think you can come close.

          Honestly, the whole “change kit” thing with soccer really bugs me. If your team colors are “red and yellow” then your uniforms should be primarily… (wait for it) …red or yellow. If you’re playing a team that wears “red & blue” and they’re in red, you should wear yellow, not black or green or white.

        • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 1:19 pm |

          Part of it is that FIFA requires “predominantly light” and “predominantly dark” kits, so stripes and such won’t solve clashing. You need two distinct unis.

        • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 1:24 pm |

          Also, your complaint about teams not using team colors doesn’t really apply to national teams (which is what we’re talking about here) for the most part.

          England’s home shirt is white, and the away shirt is red – both are the colors of the St. George’s flag. Brazil’s blue alternate shirt is part of the yellow/blue/white color palette. Italy’s change kit is basically the inverse of the normal blue/white/blue. Etc ad infinitum.

          So not sure why you’re bring this particular complaint here.

    • Padday | May 14, 2014 at 11:08 am |

      I think seeing Brazil in blue is a nice treat when it happens. The match against England in the 2002 World Cup for example perhaps sticks in the mind more for the fact that Ronaldinho was in blue when he caught David Seaman on his heels with that free kick from 35 yards out. Of course, the very fact that it is rare is what makes it beautiful.

      • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 11:39 am |

        The blue jerseys are almost like a good luck charm for Brazil – until they lost to the Netherlands in 2010, I’m pretty sure they were undefeated in the World Cup wearing blue (putting aside the small sample size, Brazil’s traditional dominance and all that).

        England has similarly done well wearing red (though like Brazil, they lost wearing their away kit in 2010).

        I remember in 2002, both Brazil and England actually asked FIFA to wear their away colors.

    • DJ | May 14, 2014 at 11:43 am |

      And when Brazil is playing a World Cup qualifier at either Colombia or Ecuador, both of whom normally wear yellow shirts and blue shorts?

      Brazil’s yellow is iconic. But common sporting courtesy suggests that in those cases, a visiting Brazil switches to blue. They did win their first World Cup in blue and white, after all (over the home team, Sweden).

      • DJ | May 14, 2014 at 11:49 am |

        One exception just came to mind: the New Zealand All-Blacks regularly make European tours. When they play at Scotland, the Scots don’t wear their standard dark blue, but whatever change kit they’re wearing at the time, so that their fans can see the visitors’ iconic uniforms.

        • Padday | May 14, 2014 at 12:06 pm |

          Actually, that’s really a lot more to do with the tradition in Rugby Union (mostly at international level) for the home team to change rather than the away team. For example, this year in the Six Nations Scotland wore white when they hosted France, Italy wore white when they hosted Scotland and France wore white when they hosted Italy.

          And just for good measure, here’s a video from Scotland’s 1975 tour of New Zealand featuring the All Blacks in white tops versus Scotland in their traditional blue tops: https://www.youtube....

        • El Duderino | May 14, 2014 at 12:36 pm |

          New Zealand football are the “All-Whites”. They couldn’t wear all black because that what the referees wore. They’ve been wearing the “All-Black” kits more because referees where florescent top over black nowadays. Yet, white/white/white is still their primary.

      • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 11:57 am |

        In qualifiers, there’s a home team and an away team, so the home decides what the colors are. About 90% of the time, the home side wears the usual colors, but on rare occasions (i.e. right after a kit launch), the home team might wear the “away” colors.

        FIFA and UEFA assigns colors for tournaments where there’s no obvious “home” or “away” team, and try to provide maximum contrast. So in a theoretical Colombia vs England match, FIFA would ask England to wear red, even though yellow doesn’t really clash with white.

        • El Duderino | May 14, 2014 at 12:38 pm |

          Thank you, Sweden!

        • Iain | May 14, 2014 at 12:48 pm |

          The attempt to provide maximum contrast is the problem & is completely unnecessary. According the Mirror article that is linked in the ticker, England can’t wear red against Uruguary (sky blue) because of a potential clash with the referee.

        • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 2:20 pm |

          Seems like they should pick the referee’s shirt to accommodate the players, not the other way around. Plus, the goalie shorts are somehow an issue as well.

          But maximum contrast is very important. There are still like 3 people watching the World Cup in black and white!

  • Chance Michaels | May 14, 2014 at 10:28 am |

    Preparations for the Cubs’ next throwback game will include Wrigley Field’s marquee being repainted in its original colors.

    Talk about burying the lede! Returning to… green and gold?

  • Ben Fortney | May 14, 2014 at 10:54 am |

    I know a lot of folks think Strasburg is the standard bearer for good looking high-cuffery, but Price with a little bit of bagginess looks much better. Stras’s pants have always been too tight IMHO.

    Yes, I’m a Mets fan, but I’m more partial to EY Jr. and Granderson who go even baggier. Gives them that classic 1950s look – they just don’t take as much care to blouse.

    • Padday | May 14, 2014 at 11:42 am |

      I’m the opposite. I think the absolute aesthetic acme of high-cuffery is to be found in the 70s with Roberto Clemente as the archetype. The major problem with the baggy look in modern times is that it only really worked in the 50s and earlier because you had the naturally bulky flannel material providing the baggyness. The modern materials are much tighter and the result is that when you try to bunch them up at the cuffs they only really end up just looking untidy. Similarly, the baggyness is being achieved by Price, Granderson, Jones and co by the fact that they’re really just blousing too high. Again, referring to Clemente we see how he bloused so as to have the bottom of the pant leg come to a natural end at the bulge of the calf creating a much smoother and tidy lower leg profile. AND it also helps to balance the proportion of colour on the stirrup (see how there’s too much blue above the stripes on Price’s stirrups).

  • Dave G | May 14, 2014 at 10:58 am |

    Is that Bobby Valentine in the ’71 Dodger uniform???

    • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 11:09 am |

      Yes.

    • ChrisH | May 14, 2014 at 11:10 am |

      At Shea Stadium?
      Count me as one of the folks not aware of that design.

  • MPowers1634 | May 14, 2014 at 11:00 am |

    NBA Sneaker Wiki…here I come!

    • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 11:10 am |

      Ha! Matt, I was thinking you’d be perfect for that. Have fun with it!

    • James Burke | May 14, 2014 at 11:30 am |

      Good luck!

  • Thresh8 | May 14, 2014 at 11:25 am |

    Royal Enfield gets a new design, but it’s not a motorcycle.

    The beloved Bullet has been in production about since India became India.

  • Kyle G | May 14, 2014 at 12:01 pm |

    Culture vs Consistancy

    The Evolution of the Tiger D displayed in at Comerica Park:
    http://mittenhistory...
    (It is not perfect – but you can see at the bottom it shows the 2 current D’s and are labels them jersey and cap)

    The Uniform D has been consistent for several decades – during that time there have been some funkier looking cap D’s. The two D’s give off a different message. The cap D shows action and the uniform D shows tradition. You can see it in the two billboards.

    I like the cap D more but to put it on the jersey would be to reject seventy years of a consistent home uniform. To put the jersey D on the cap would look bland.

    In addition, the Old English D means more than Tiger baseball, the D means Detroit. Detroiters put it on their cars, wear it on their caps and tattoo it to their skin proudly to identify themselves as Detroiters (non baseball fans largely included). Culturally the D belongs to Detroit even more than it belongs to the Tigers. In a preachy way, the community likes and embraces both so why ruin a good thing in the name of marketing consistency.

    • Ben Fortney | May 14, 2014 at 12:22 pm |

      Another oddity:

      That Comerica display just made me realize that the 1990s road cap features the tiger crawling through the jersey logo, not the cap logo.

    • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 12:37 pm |

      Damn — wish I’d known about that logo timeline. Would’ve included a link to it in today’s column.

    • David Gratt | May 14, 2014 at 4:07 pm |

      the old english D might mean detroit…but if you try to sell something with an old english D on it, even it it’s different, mlb properties comes after you with a cease and desist.

      it might be possible to fight trademarking an old english letter, but most places don’t have the scratch to scuffle it out with mlb in court.

      If I am not mistaken, the connecticut tigers (AA Eastern League) use a cleaned up variant of the mirror image D as a C because the reds have the lock on the old english C.

      crazy.

  • Dante | May 14, 2014 at 12:16 pm |

    A big place I see logo disparity is in college baseball, and I absolutely love it. For some reason, I’ve always felt that baseball teams need a classier branding for their graphics, especially when compared to football helmets. There’s just something about an Old English cap logo that to me is inherently baseball.

  • daveclt | May 14, 2014 at 12:52 pm |
  • BvK1126 | May 14, 2014 at 1:00 pm |

    I spent a number of my formative years in Iowa, and I remember the chatter around the pink visitors’ locker room in Kinnick Stadium back when Hayden Fry was still the coach. It was always couched as a nod to the the psychological theory of the calming effect of pink, i.e. “drunk tank pink.”

    The notion that the locker room was painted pink as a jab at the opposing football team’s implied lack of masculinity was never mentioned. Ever. Not by the press, not by Fry during his tenure as coach, and not by the fans. It wasn’t until after Fry retired and his autobiography, A High Porch Picnic, was published in 1999 that there was any suggestion of other intentions.

    In a rather thorough discussion of his decision to have the visitors’ locker room painted pink, Fry explained in detail all about his background as a psychology major at Baylor and the scholarly literature about the pacifying effects of the color pink on the brain. At the end of it all, he included the sentence, ““Also, pink is often found in girls’ bedrooms, and because of that some consider it a sissy color.”

    Opponents of the pink locker room have latched onto that one sentence as proof of the primary intentions behind the locker room. It ignores several other paragraphs of rationale that have nothing to do with the implied feminization of male athletes. Nonetheless, there’s no getting around Fry’s written words, and that one sentence makes a great soundbite for the anti-pink locker room crowd.

    Should Iowa’s locker room be repainted? I admit to some ambivalence. It always seemed like a harmless bit of gamesmanship and one of those quirky little traditions that makes sports (and athletics aesthetics) enjoyable to follow. I’m still inclined to think that the logical leap from a pink locker room to the promotion of a mysoginistic, homophobic culture of “pink-shaming” is pretty attenuated.

    Nonetheless, the pro-pink locker room crowd hasn’t necessarily done itself any favors in how they’ve responded to opposing voices. A visiting professor at Iowa who first sparked the controversy in 2005 when she spoke out against the locker room was inundated with death threats. I have trouble standing on the side of the argument that includes that contingent, so I’m willing to listen to the more reasoned arguments in this debate and see if it colors (pun not intended but recognized) my opinion.

  • BvK1126 | May 14, 2014 at 1:06 pm |

    I spent a number of my formative years in Iowa, and I remember the chatter around the pink visitors’ locker room in Kinnick Stadium back when Hayden Fry was still the coach. It was always couched as a nod to the the psychological theory of the calming effect of pink, i.e. “drunk tank pink.”

    The notion that the locker room was painted pink as a jab at the opposing football team’s implied lack of masculinity was never mentioned. Ever. Not by the press, not by Fry during his tenure as coach, and not by the fans. It wasn’t until after Fry retired and his autobiography, A High Porch Picnic, was published in 1999 that there was any suggestion of other intentions.

    In a rather thorough discussion of his decision to have the visitors’ locker room painted pink, Fry explained in detail all about his background as a psychology major at Baylor and the scholarly literature about the pacifying effects of the color pink on the brain. At the end of it all, he included the sentence, ““Also, pink is often found in girls’ bedrooms, and because of that some consider it a sissy color.”

    Opponents of the pink locker room have latched onto that one sentence as proof of the primary intentions behind the locker room. It ignores several other paragraphs of rationale that have nothing to do with the implied feminization of male athletes. Nonetheless, there’s no getting around Fry’s written words, and that one sentence makes a great soundbite for the anti-pink locker room crowd.

    Should Iowa’s locker room be repainted? I admit to some ambivalence. It always seemed like a harmless bit of gamesmanship and one of those quirky little traditions that makes sports (and athletics aesthetics) enjoyable to follow. I’m still inclined to think that the logical leap from a pink locker room to the promotion of a mysoginistic, homophobic culture of “pink-shaming” is pretty attenuated.

    Nonetheless, the pro-pink locker room crowd hasn’t necessarily done itself any favors in how they’ve responded to opposing voices. A visiting professor at Iowa who first sparked the controversy in 2005 when she spoke out against the locker room was inundated with death threats. I have trouble standing on the side of the argument that includes that contingent, so I’m willing to listen to the more reasoned arguments in this debate and see if it colors (pun not intended but recognized) my opinion.

  • Josh | May 14, 2014 at 1:18 pm |

    Through the 80′s into the early 90′s the Cardinals used a Different helmet logo than their normal Cap Logo

    At different times both logos appeared on their batting practice jerseys
    BP Top with helmet logo
    BP Top with cap logo
    another look at helmet logo and BP top

  • mike d | May 14, 2014 at 1:21 pm |

    World Cup jersey rankings

    http://mashable.com/...

  • arrScott | May 14, 2014 at 1:24 pm |

    Germany, Argentina, Holland, and Mexico should be higher, and the too-much-black Brazil and Spain should be dropped much lower down the list. Otherwise, this is very close to how I’d rank the pool.

    Fun note: At 18, USA’s uni ranking doubles as a credible prediction of where the team will actually finish in the tournament. Though 18th is arguably a generous score on each criterion.

    • Padday | May 14, 2014 at 2:05 pm |

      I don’t think it’s any coincidence that most of the rankings correspond fairly closely with typical predictions for performance. It’s really just an example of someone confusing prestige for aesthetics.

    • terriblehuman | May 14, 2014 at 2:24 pm |

      Germany and Argentina should have points deducted for giving into Adidas’s “All In” marketing gimmick and going monochrome (same for Spain).

      Colombia (even with the white shorts) and the US should be higher.

    • DenverGregg | May 14, 2014 at 2:31 pm |

      I thought Nigeria and Iran were rated too low and I wonder how much of that is politics coloring the aesthetic question.

      • Connie DC | May 14, 2014 at 3:06 pm |

        What Gregg says. Which is not far from what Padday says.

      • arrScott | May 14, 2014 at 5:41 pm |

        I see his point with Nigeria – it’s a decent but ultimately “meh” set. I’d be more inclined to drop Italy down toward Nigeria than vice-versa, given their near-identical “not bad but meh” status for me. From Nigeria, I expect better. Iran, though, I’m with Gregg – that’s a decidedly underrated set. No way is it that far below Columbia. Still, overall pretty good unis this World Cup, so whoever is at the bottom is still going to be a nice uniform.

        I’ll own up to one political bias: I have hard time not mentally ranking Russia as worst uniforms, just because it’s Russia. The Russian uniforms have a number of characteristics that I don’t like, but I’m having a hard time separating my critical view of uniform elements from my visceral dislike of the Russian state.

  • MEANS | May 14, 2014 at 1:33 pm |

    The Flyers logo on their uniforms is different for the logo provided on their style guide which get’s used on all merchandise…etc.

  • DenverGregg | May 14, 2014 at 1:41 pm |

    New Lazio jerseys are outstanding, even with drop-shadow.

  • BvK1126 | May 14, 2014 at 2:03 pm |

    So I had a rather lengthy and philosophical comment about the Iowa pink locker room issue, but the moderating software appears to have thrown it into purgatory. Regardless, I found an interesting story about how the South Bend Silver Hawks minor league baseball team have also have a pink visitors’ locker room:

    http://www.ktnv.com/...

    Apparently, it’s not just an Iowa issue.

  • Michael Hersh | May 14, 2014 at 2:51 pm |

    “… Oliver Staley has decided to rank all the MLB team names. …”

    I did my own rankings that Paul posted last year. Obviously our criteria was completely different since everyone has their own opinions. But the weird thing is that we both arrived at the Orioles and Twins being the best 2 names in baseball.

    Oliver also rated my Dodgers much higher than me and I rated his Yankees much higher than him.

    My biggest disagreement is over the Tigers since the Tigers were named in honor of Michigan’s oldest military unit so I ranked them 8th. Although I guess that doesn’t matter much if Oliver had known that since he has an issue with popular team nicknames.

    I also disagree with the Angels being so high since I ranked them last but that was partly based on their lame official name LA Angels of Anahiem.

  • George N. | May 14, 2014 at 7:21 pm |

    Mets are definitely wearing their 59Fifty alternate BP caps instead of their usual caps tonight.

    I wonder if that’s going to signal the move away from the current polyester material to that diamond weave for 2015?

  • allen | May 14, 2014 at 8:19 pm |

    OMG that Dodgers Spring Training jersey! With a W!! And my size.

    Christina if you’re reading this and want to sell for a profit please email me allenwhy at gmail. This is a huge grail of mine.

    • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 8:30 pm |

      I’ll pass your email address along to Christina.

      • Paul Lukas | May 14, 2014 at 8:51 pm |

        She says she’s going to put it on eBay. She’ll send me the link once it’s up and I’ll link to it here.

        • allen | May 15, 2014 at 1:04 am |

          Thanks Paul. it will be mine… oh yes… it will be mine. Unless it sells for a ludicrous price.

  • Ryan | May 14, 2014 at 8:33 pm |

    I think what I find most interesting in today’s ESPN column is the pics of the Hebrew Hammer, Gehringer, and Jennings–specifically that, while Greenberg & Gehringer’s logos match what’s worn today, it actually appears to be reversed in Jennings’ case.

    It makes me wonder if, at some point between when Jennings’ photo was taken (he last managed in 1920) and Gehringer’s (first year was ’24), that somehow the logos were accidentally flip-flopped. Like, say the team has separate manufacturers for hats and jerseys. And one year, the hat-maker references an old jersey for the logo, and it sticks, then later (or perhaps even the same year) the jersey manufacturer does the same with the hat, simply assuming they used the same style ‘D.’ That would be pretty wild (to me, at least).

  • JTH | May 14, 2014 at 10:45 pm |

    Blackhawks — it’s nearly impossible to find a souvenir with the secondary logo on it that matches the ones they use on their jerseys.

    That sans-serif C shows up all over the place.

  • Taxman | May 14, 2014 at 11:10 pm |

    I was at the game when Mickey Tettleton hit the first ball on Eutaw St at Camden Yards. Right down the RF line. Very exciting even for an O’s fan to watch a ball leave the new yard. Orioles still have only hit about 40% of the balls to go out there.

  • diggerjohn99 | May 15, 2014 at 1:08 pm |

    That “ranking of MLB names” that you provided a link for is horrible. It could have been put together by a 12 year old. There was no research done for the article, it was just an uninformed opinion of someone who knows less about North American sports history than a Tibetan goat herder. Paul this blog is amazing, full of great information, opinions and scoops by people who love sports and usually have invaluable information that makes the joy of watching sports a pleasure for those of us who understand that ascetics do indeed matter, that link you gave us was not up to that caliber.

  • pgolfco | May 15, 2014 at 11:38 pm |

    What makes that version of Chief Wahoo “particularly nasty”?