Buried amidst yesterday’s avalanche of Cowboys/Redskins comments was a small mention of the Belleville Bulls, an OHL (Major Junior) team that’s instituted an unusual quirk this year: They’re wearing uni numbers on their shorts.
This design element (which is also featured on the Bulls’ home uniform) raises an interesting question: Are uni numbers on pants ever a good idea?
In order to assess this query, we first need to look at the history of this phenomenon. Okay, then, one sport at a time:
Baseball: The first MLB team to wear pants-borne uni numbers was the 1975 Astros. By 1980 they’d taken the number off the pant leg, but the concept was revived in 1982 by the White Sox, who kept wearing the digitized pants even after switching to a different uni design — seven seasons in all. I’d like to think we can agree that these all fail the “Is it good or is it stupid?” test. Special Uni Watch bonus points to Floyd Bannister, who somehow managed to wear every one of these uniforms during his career.
Football: I’m aware of three NFL teams that have worn uni numbers on their pants: the 1982-89 Cowboys, the 1982-86 Colts (only at home), and the 1984-87 Packers. Not quite as bogus as the MLB examples, but still pointless, needless, a solution to a non-problem.
Hockey: The Belleville design is the first instance I’ve ever seen of uni numbers on breezers. There’s a certain appealing novelty to the look (just as there was, I’m sure, when the Astros and Cowboys introduced pants numbers to their respective sports), but it still feels like over-design to me.
Basketball: Lots of NBA teams have worn uni numbers on their shorts over the years. The current trend, though, is to go numeral-free, as the Bucks, Suns, and Sonics have all abandoned their shorts numbers in recent years. For some reason these all seem less objectionable than the examples from other sports. There’s something about the number on the shorts that resonates with a “Property of Athletic Dept.” sort of feel, which I kinda dig. Wish more NBA teams would go this route.
Soccer: As most of you know by now, my scope of soccer knowledge is very, very limited. But one thing I do know is that many (most?) teams wear uni numers on their shorts. Seems harmless enough, although I think I’d prefer to see it on the side, not on the front. I trust all you soccer fans out there will post some comments filling us in on the history and protocol for this uni element.
As for other sports, like rugby, volleyball, and the like, I hereby yield the floor to those of you who are better versed in those arcane disciplines. But I think our basic point is made: Uni numbers on pants are fairly rare, and for the most part that’s a good thing.
Austin Update: Thanks to all the Austin-ites who responded to yesterday’s query about possibly holding a Uni Watch gathering on the 27th (i.e., a week from tonight). The response was pretty sizable, so let’s definitely plan on getting together that evening.
I insist that we meet at a barbecue joint, and I’m partial to the ones that are outside of town (yes, I’m familiar with the area). I’d prefer Kreuz’s or Smitty’s in Lockhart, but they both close early, so that’s no good. Let’s make it 7:30 p.m. at the Salt Lick in Driftwood. Cool?
ITEM! Membership News: For those of you who’ve been waiting for us to lift the ban on NCAA-themed membership card designs, your patience has been rewarded: As of right now, NCAA designs are kosher. Actually, we already did one of them months ago — the Yale rugby design shown at right (which I liked so much when it was presented to us that I forgot all about the NCAA ban).
A few things to remember: The more obscure the school and/or sport, the more important it is for you to provide a rear-view photo. A backup design option is always a good idea, too. And the ban on purple-inclusive designs still stands. Aside from that, it’s open season — fire when ready.
And remember, discounted gift memberships are available for the holiday season. Full info on that is here. And non-gift membership ordering info is here.
Uni Watch News Ticker: Steiner Sports is selling a game-worn Manny Delcarmen World Series cap, and it turns out he had lots of underbrim scribblings. … Remember Lawrence Tynes’s Umbro cleats? Joe Skiba reports that the NFL has instructed him to black out the logos. … Maybe the NFL should have a talk with Brandon Marshall, too, because the Reebok logo was missing from his sleeves last night. Wasn’t like that a few weeks ago. … Back to Joe Skiba: Remember how the “ny” logo on the Jints’ nose bumpers switched from red-outlined blue to blue-outlined red a few games ago? Skiba says he likes the latter design so much that he’s gonna stick with it. Jeez, why not just make the helmets solid red and be done with it. … Jere Smith notes that Rajon Rondo frequently wears his headband upside-down. … Cincinnati maven David Sonny (who recenty conducted an interview with the Bengals’ equipment manager — look for that to appear here soon) reports that new Reds skipper Dusty Baker has claimed his usual No. 12 from Edwin Encarnacion, who will now wear No. 28. … The Canadiens retired Larry Robinson’s number (which he never wore on his shorts) last night and trotted out all the usual trappings — the all-honoree warm-up, the chest patch, etc. Happily, Robinson wore a straight-hemmed CCM jersey for the occasion, instead of the shirttail-hemmed models being worn by the current Habs. … ¡Cuba si, capitalism double-si!: After losing in the final round of the Baseball World Cup, Cuban pitcher Pedro Lazo sold his jersey to a collector after a sotto voce negotiation in a darkened corner. … Before Lloyd Carr dressed like this, he dressed like this and this (nice find by Doug Mooney). … According to this message board post (sent my way by Andres Douzoglou), Arizona State uses tape stripes on belts as an award system, like helmet merit decals. I’ve never heard this before. Anyone know more about it?
#1 by Pete on 11.20.07 8:51 am |
Not to be a dick about it or anything but in Hockey they are not called shorts, the correct term is either buckets or shells
#2 by Jeff on 11.20.07 8:55 am |
Karate uses belt stripes and belt colors as an award system. Blue belt, black belt, blue belt with red stripes and so on
#3 by Thorold Blair on 11.20.07 8:59 am |
Actually.. the correct term is pants.
#4 by todd krevanchi on 11.20.07 9:05 am |
juan encarnacion play(s/ed) for st. louis.
edwin was on the reds.
#5 by LI Phil on 11.20.07 9:08 am |
what’s the correct term for the hockey player’s top? sweater or jersey?
#6 by jsdryden on 11.20.07 9:15 am |
Paul,
WOW! What a surprise to see my little post from yesterday as the lead topic today.
I feel honoured, and proud to see the team I proudly support featured.
Thanks,
Jonathan
#7 by josh's twin on 11.20.07 9:18 am |
what’s the correct term for the hockey player’s top? sweater or jersey?
Both were ok, and sweater made most sense when they were made out of wool. “Jersey” became more common when they switched to polyester, but many Canadians stuck with “sweater”, which was fine. As of this year, the only appropriate name is, “wetsuit”.
#8 by Tricia on 11.20.07 9:19 am |
Yeah. This is the only place I have ever heard them called ‘breezers’ and ’shells’ is only correct if they have no padding in them. I don’t believe ’shorts’ is correct in any context though.
I assume Belleville has numbers for both home and away because most teams only have one pair of pants. The pictures linked are the same in both cases, so I can’t tell if the number design is different.
Also, did anyone see Heatley sporting a new Easton helmet last night? How new are those? Looked a lot like a Mission one, but not quite.
#9 by jsdryden on 11.20.07 9:19 am |
Paul,
Looks like the link to the dark sweater (the OHL switches the colour worn at home after New year’s) points to the light. Here is the dark sweater for reference.
#10 by Matt Lake on 11.20.07 9:23 am |
I know Syracuse football used to wear numbers on their pants as well, back in the late-80s through the 90s (before they screwed everything up). I also know that the team used to give their older pants to Nottingham High School, a Syracuse inner-city high school I played against.
#11 by Paul Lukas on 11.20.07 9:23 am |
Fixed. Thanks.
Fixed. Thanks.
#12 by LI Phil on 11.20.07 9:28 am |
thanks for the clarification…i was always semi-confused, although i also thought the terms were somewhat interchangeable…
two of my canadian buddies (one from sudsbury & one from winnipeg) both refer to them as sweaters, but most yanks call them jerseys
i like your ‘new’ term: “wetsuit” even better
#13 by Steve on 11.20.07 9:30 am |
Agreed. Always, always pants. Shells only if you are wearing the old Cooperall system - protective girdle and then the outer shell (long or short).
Breezers, no. Buckets, no.
#14 by Lester Shen on 11.20.07 9:31 am |
Celtic FC used to have numbers on the back of their shorts rather than the back of their shirts. Here’s proof:
#15 by Lester Shen on 11.20.07 9:32 am |
Whoops, here’s the URL:
http://www.jimmyjohn...
#16 by Pat on 11.20.07 9:32 am |
If by “frequently” you mean “always” then you are correct sir.
#17 by dm00n on 11.20.07 9:33 am |
Can’t we just agree that when someone says breezers/shorts/pants/shells/whatever that we know what they are talking about?
It seems like this discussion comes up from time to time, and even among people who play hockey nobody can really come to a consensus. Makes me wonder if it is a regional thing. Maybe someone could make one of those coke/pop/soda surveys that links to a map for hockey gear.
Sometimes I don’t get all the pedantry when it comes to this stuff. Like insisting on calling soccer cleats boots or soccer uniforms kits. (Although nobody seems to insist on those things, when I read something like “those aren’t football cleats, they are soccer boots, you can tell because..” it just seems odd.)
And since this seems to be a good time to ask, there was something in the ticker recently about some team having a new “strip.” What’s that?
#18 by Greg G on 11.20.07 9:36 am |
Not to be a dick about it or anything but in Hockey they are not called shorts, the correct term is either buckets or shells
Actually.. the correct term is pants.
Agreed. Always, always pants. Shells only if you are wearing the old Cooperall system - protective girdle and then the outer shell (long or short).
Breezers, no. Buckets, no.
They are known as hockey pants. I’m sick of coming on here and hearing them called something different week after week. By the way, did anyone notice the picture Manny Delcarmen’s hat where he pulled all the back plastic strings out of the inside front of his hat? This reduces the “poofy hat” look. This process have been mentioned in a previous blog, but it is a major practice by professional ball players, and that picture is a prime example.
#19 by Greg G on 11.20.07 9:36 am |
* I mean BLACK plastic strands, not back
#20 by Marty Met on 11.20.07 9:39 am |
SWEATER.
#21 by Marty Met on 11.20.07 9:43 am |
The Canadiens organization should be embarassed. 18 years to retire Larry’s number. It should have been retired the second he took it off for the last time.
#22 by Jay on 11.20.07 9:48 am |
Did you note this on the Salt Lick’s page?
The Salt Lick is located in a dry precinct. You may bring your own alcoholic beverage of choice.
BYO Shiners!
#23 by dm00n on 11.20.07 9:49 am |
Seems weird to me to be in the process of retiring a number and have four guys wearing it.
#24 by u2horn on 11.20.07 9:50 am |
Nice bbq joint selections for Austin!
By the way, Manny D. wears a 7 1/8? That might have fit me in 7th grade.
#25 by steve on 11.20.07 9:51 am |
Is there anyone with the ability to make screen captures from the NE-Buffalo game last weekend? I’m trying to get a shot from pre-game. If you can help, please e-mail me - nyclipper[at]hotmail.com
#26 by Marty Met on 11.20.07 9:53 am |
and chicken is available in season. I didn’t know there was a chicken season.
#27 by Anthony Verna on 11.20.07 9:55 am |
Duck season!
#28 by Harry on 11.20.07 9:55 am |
Putting numbers on shorts? Why would you want to do that! Are the players men or cattle?
A bit of history: the England rugby team first wore numbers at a home game on 18 March 1922. 1922. King George V, a keen rugby supporter, saiud to the secretary of the Scottish Rugby Union, J Aikman Smith, “I see England have numbers. What a good idea. When are Scotland going to get numbers?” Aikman Smith was somewhat of a conservative and replied “Sire, my players are men, not cattle.”
When numbers began to appear on rugby shirts (they were first used in 1897), players objected, considering numbers to smack of professionalism (which was a bad thing back then). Others objected because numbers made it easy for referees to identify miscreants.
#29 by Kevin F on 11.20.07 9:55 am |
As a soccer player, I think the best explanation for soccer players with numbers on their shorts is this: there needs to be a number on the front and back of every player’s jersey (so the referee can call fouls and stuff), and when a club team wears ads on the front of their shirt, it’s the most logical secondary place to put it. Of course, the picture that Paul linked to was of Brazil, a national team, who doesn’t really need two numbers on the front … go figure …
I play small-school college soccer, and the NCAA is pretty strict on what goes on a uniform. I know that my first two years, my jersey (I’m a goalkeeper) had a number on front and back — this year, my new jersey had no number on the front, but we had shorts with numbers on them.
#30 by Anthony Verna on 11.20.07 9:58 am |
And my English friends steam up at my when I call it a “cleat.” Ah well. I tell them that they can use the Queen’s verbage and I’ll understand as long as I use American words and they can understand it, also.
(Though, a friend of mine was telling me about tea with jam and he was trying to tell me jam meant “jell-o.” I immediately started cracking up. He quickly corrected himself, as jam is jam in both countries!)
#31 by Moose on 11.20.07 9:59 am |
Actually…the correct term is breezers.
#32 by dm00n on 11.20.07 10:00 am |
Anyone know more about this?
link.
#33 by Kyle Shannon on 11.20.07 10:00 am |
Just a bit to go along with the number on the soccer shorts. I played in college for a small D-1 school and there were numbers on everything that the school provided. Our bags had our numbers, training shirts had numbers, warm-up suits, and even socks. I think the biggest reason for this is that when they order clothes they order everything in XL and the only way to distinguish whose is whose is by player number. I know that in some of the top flite leagues in europe the managers will wear team clothing and they have their initials put on the clothes rather than a number. Thought this may provide some insight.
#34 by dm00n on 11.20.07 10:01 am |
(That Waratahs story is from 2006, but is an example of both numbered shorts and uni weirdness)
#35 by Paul Lukas on 11.20.07 10:02 am |
Whoa, I’d forgotten all about that. But yeah, the last time I was there (four-ish yrs ago), lots of people brought their own COOLERS! Which actually made things feel extra-festive.
#36 by Moose on 11.20.07 10:03 am |
Actually…let me correct myself. I’ve played hockey since I was 8, played through high school, played DIII for a few years, and have played on various clubs since in Wisconsin. MOST people I know call them “breezers;” however, “pants” isn’t uncommon. Our equipment guys at UWSP always called them breezers, as did our European recruits and the Canadians on the team, however.
#37 by Mark in Shiga on 11.20.07 10:05 am |
Unrelated to today’s comments, but those of you who are interested in baseball jerseys with (1) vertical writing, (2) a cool calligraphic font, (3) embroidered borders for the lettering, (4) a nice sleeve patch, and (4) a funky collar, should check out this baseball jersey from Nara Women’s College Preparatory High School. More here:
http://page18.auctio...
#38 by Shaeff on 11.20.07 10:08 am |
I actually like the names on pants - its different. When done right (Cowboys and Hockey team) - it looks pretty cool.When done wrong (Astros), it does look ridiculous.
By the way, anyone notice the use of white space in the old White Sox logo?
#39 by Shaeff on 11.20.07 10:08 am |
#40 by Shaeff on 11.20.07 10:09 am |
how do I get the link to work???
http://www.sportslog...
#41 by Shaeff on 11.20.07 10:11 am |
never mind - i got it
#42 by Perry on 11.20.07 10:12 am |
Strip = kit = uniform.
#43 by Mike Engle on 11.20.07 10:13 am |
Allow me to add another NBA team that used to have numbered shorts. (Don’t think they do anymore.)
The New York Knicks.
#44 by Tim on 11.20.07 10:23 am |
I don’t mind the numbers on the hockey breezers. I actually kind of like it. It would look better without all those Reebok logos. I count seven on that one player.
#45 by Miguel on 11.20.07 10:24 am |
Sweet, I’ll see ya’ll at the Salt Lick. Make sure you bring beer and come hungry. Family-style dining is not for delicate eating.
#46 by Neil on 11.20.07 10:26 am |
Check out the 19 on the Larry Robinson banner. The number is not centered over the striping. However, the current players on the ice have the 19 centered over the stripes. I believe the banner is correct, at least back to the days Robinson played.
#47 by jsdryden on 11.20.07 10:29 am |
I agree, when I first posted the pictures yesterday, I noticed the many logos too, but what can you do.
When you are watching from the press box keeping stats (which I do for the OHL) you can’t see most of the Reebok logos, and having the numbers on the pants certainly helps at times when you can’t see the arm or back numbers.
The numbers on the helmets help to, but of course being a Uniwatcher on top of a stat’s guy has me looking at these things from two different perspectives…
#48 by Tim on 11.20.07 10:29 am |
Being a WVU grad, I was interested in the helmet decal that WVU wore after the Marshall tragedy. Does anyone know if photo evidence exists of it? I haven’t been able to find any.
#49 by Pat on 11.20.07 10:31 am |
I’m not seeing any special use of white (negative) space. I’m just seeing some negative space below the player’s arm.
#50 by tim ahner on 11.20.07 10:34 am |
In soccer, the NCAA mandates that there be a minimum 4 inch number on the front of the uniform, and an 8 inch number on the back of the uniform. The team can choose to put the number on either the shorts or the front of the jersey. As far as the international rules, I believe that they are simmilar rules to the NCAA.
#51 by Anthony Verna on 11.20.07 10:34 am |
And that’s a nice touch. I love it.
(You know what still ticks me off? If I go to Philly to see the 76ers play and I gaze up, the logo on Charles Barkley’s retirement banner has the current logo that he NEVER played under. Bugs me to no end.)
#52 by Randy Miller on 11.20.07 10:34 am |
When I was in grad school in Austin, we used to have an end-of-the-semester student bash at the Salt Lick. I wonder if they still have the hummingbird feeders in the trees.
Logistically, the digitized pants would seem to be problem for professional baseball and football managers. Too many players and too many size changes, I would think.
OTOH, numbers on workout sweatpants work fine.
#53 by seven on 11.20.07 10:36 am |
RE. Rajon Rondo’s head band. The Raptors’ TJ Ford seems to wear his headband inside-out as the NBA logo is never visible. Sorry no pics.
#54 by Kevin G. on 11.20.07 10:36 am |
Wasn’t there also a time in the mid-80’s that the Colts had gray in their color scheme? It looks like the pants in that one photo are gray. I also remember very vividly that their “UCLA-type” shoulder stripes on the white unis were blue-gray-blue instead of the standard blue-white-blue. Does anyone else remember this?
#55 by Kevin G. on 11.20.07 10:43 am |
Also, I seem to remember that at one point, the Colts of the mid-80’s did not have any holes in the horseshoe on their helemt.
#56 by Monte on 11.20.07 10:43 am |
Sorry if this has been mentioned before.
I usually do not get to read all the comments- too busy at work -in case they are watching me :)
But check out this guy’s name
Over the last two years, Alabama State head coach Lewis Jackson likely has signed more players than probably any other college coach in the country. When Jackson’s Hornets hit the floor for an exhibition game tonight against Georgia Southwestern, he’ll have 20 players suited up and ready to go.
He’s got four or five guards and more forwards than the average NBA squad. He’s got returning stars and incoming scorers. He’s got guys who can knock down the long-range shots, some who can slice their way to the basket in any situation and others who can find an open teammate anywhere on the floor.
But all anyone wants to talk about is the one guy who can’t do any of that stuff — “Chief,” the Hornets’ 7-foot-1 transfer center.
Or, if you prefer to use his given name, Grienntys Kickingstallionsims.
“I’ve never seen anything like the attention this guy has been getting,” Jackson said. “Every day somebody asks me about Chief. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that he’s just so danged tall. People are excited over having a true big man in there. Plus, he’s so easy to spot that everybody sees him, so everybody thinks they know him.”
But so few really do.
While he might be the talk of the ASU campus, Kickingstallionsims isn’t much of a talker himself. Described by his coaches and teammates as a “quiet giant,” he sees himself as simply “laid back.”
“I’m not big into the attention,” Kickingstallionsims said. “I don’t mind it at all. But I’ve never really sought it out. It’s just sort of come my way.”
With his name and his size, extra attention isn’t exactly a new phenomenon for Chief. He dealt with it most of his life growing up in Florida and he learned early on the best ways to deflect some of it.
“I just go by Chief most of the time because that helps people out,” he said. “They see the name and they think I’m messing with them or something. You can see the look on their faces when I tell them my name or they see it.”
There’s not much that can be done to mask 7-foot-1, however. So, Kickingstallionsims has gradually learned to embrace his height and the attention from it.
The only problem is that that increased attention often translates into increased expectations for Kickingstallionsims on the court.
Here’s the link to the article but they don’t get into the origin of his name.
#57 by Monte on 11.20.07 10:44 am |
http://www.montgomer...
there’s the missing link
#58 by The Ol Goaler on 11.20.07 10:50 am |
Rabbit Season! (obligatory Looney Tunes quote!)
On this morning’s main topic, having numbers on the outside of a football player’s pants made a certain amount of sense, since they usually have each player’s number in Magic Marker on the inside, so each player gets “his” pants!
#59 by Shaeff on 11.20.07 10:51 am |
The white space under his arm is a baseball
#60 by Robert on 11.20.07 10:52 am |
Dusty Baker is taking one of his player’s number? That is so weak. It might be different if Baker had played for the Reds or was a Hall of Famer associated with a particular number, but neither of these exceptions applies.
#61 by Tao of Stieb on 11.20.07 10:59 am |
@ Tricia re: Heatley helmet
Noticed the new brain bucket on Heatley on Saturday, and scoured around for any sort of info. It’s apparently not even going to hit the market for another six months, so Heatley’s the first out of the box to wear it.
Also, Alfredsson went with a Mission helmet a few nights ago (a one off, apparently) before switching to a new version of the Bauer 5500. Finding it hard to get a good pic of it, although you can see it clearly on the cover of the Ottawa Sun.
#62 by Stuby on 11.20.07 11:04 am |
My wife can’t watch games in which Dusty Baker manages because she’s afraid he’ll get that toothpick lodged in his throat. Very weak that he would steal a player’s number, unless that player willingly gave it up.
#63 by Kenny on 11.20.07 11:05 am |
Heard an interview yesterday here in Chicago with Rex Hudler talking about Orlando Cabrera. He was saying how he (OC) liked to skew away from the ordinary and that led to the untucking of the jersey after the game. Hudler also said how it related to the old days. Anyone else hear that interview yesterday on Mac, Jurko, & Harry??
#64 by Joe Drennan on 11.20.07 11:05 am |
Not to be a dick, but in all the years I’ve played/coached hockey, I’ve never heard breezers/pants refered to as buckets. I’ve heard a helmet refered to as a brain bucket though. I’ve heard some non-hockey folks refer to them as shorts though for obvious reasons.
Other fun hockey terms.
Twig - stick
Nut cup - obvious
Shinny - pick up pond hockey
I’ll think of more.
#65 by Kenny on 11.20.07 11:06 am |
These Starburst are juicy.
Good thing we are wearing these wetsuits.
#66 by Kenny on 11.20.07 11:11 am |
Rabbit season!!
#67 by Kenny on 11.20.07 11:12 am |
Excuse me…Wabbit season!!
#68 by Lincoln on 11.20.07 11:12 am |
I haven’t seen a mention of this yet this year, but I have noticed it a lot recently: Has the NCAA put a ban on basketball players wearing headbands? I have watched many games this year including my Michigan State Spartans and I cannot recall seeing any players wearing headbands. Travis Walton, Marquise Gray, and Raymar Morgan were all headband wearers last year, but not this year. It is just not Michigan State either. I can’t recall anyone wearing headbands this year. Anyone know more?
#69 by Frank Mercogliano on 11.20.07 11:14 am |
Interesting change last week for the big rivalry game between the University of Idaho and Boise State. The Vandals, who normally have a helmet that looks like this, changed to this one for the game … not sure why they made the change though…I’ll try to find out.
Frank
#70 by Phil on 11.20.07 11:17 am |
I personally would rather see them put the numbers on the pants than on the front of the jersey like the islanders.
I think it adds a nice touch to the pants which at times seem bare. Obviously It would need to remain fairly neutral like Belleville did.
#71 by Harv Antle on 11.20.07 11:21 am |
The numbers on the pants never bothered me, in fact they were somewhat welcomed when there was no number on the front of the jersey. Helps for identification purposes for media types.
#72 by jim borwick on 11.20.07 11:23 am |
This from a website (based in Minnesota, naturally)
Breezers: Hockey pants are know as breezers (based on our anecdotal research, they are only referred to as Breezers in Wisconsin and Minnesota) they are shorts that come down to the top of the knee and extend high over the waist. Breezers have padding in many places in order to cushion shots and falls. Because breezers are usually very wide in the legs, a fair amount of “breeze” will blow into them when a player skates - hence the name.
I doubt the Canadians on your team used that term. This is the only place I’ve ever heard it and I’ve lived in Canada forever and have been playing for 35 years.
Never, ever shorts though.
#73 by Brian Kallion on 11.20.07 11:23 am |
Hey Paul, was there ever any explanation from Reebok as to why they have the rounded hemlines on the new crap jerseys? Only reason I can think of is to discourage teams from having horizontal stripes at the bottom, yet a lot of teams have done it anyway.
#74 by Mike Engle on 11.20.07 11:31 am |
Well, we all know that the RBK jerseys were originally designed to be tucked in, but the players disapproved, so either the designers didn’t bother to change back to a straight hem or they decided that it would be a “cool” subtle ad for RBK (think Nike World horns–technically not swooshes but the design sure does scream Nike).
#75 by Steven on 11.20.07 11:31 am |
Clinton Portis has been wearing these hideous cleats all season, or at least in a majority of the games. They seemed “extra flashy” Sunday in Dallas. I looked through many pics only to come up empty… over 50% of the shoes were yellow accents.
#76 by Robert on 11.20.07 11:35 am |
It is a good thing that U.L. Washington has been retired for a long time, because your wife would have been even more tense watching him play shortstop with a toothpick in place.
#77 by John M on 11.20.07 11:36 am |
Wasn’t there also a time in the mid-80’s that the Colts had gray in their color scheme? It looks like the pants in that one photo are gray. I also remember very vividly that their “UCLA-type” shoulder stripes on the white unis were blue-gray-blue instead of the standard blue-white-blue. Does anyone else remember this?
The Colts pants in the photo are gray, and the color scheme you describe was in use when the Colts moved to Indianapolis. I’m curious where the photo was taken. The game is outdoors, so it couldn’t be the Hoosier Dome, and it’s on artificial turf, and I don’t recall Baltimore Memorial Stadium ever having the fake stuff. It could be a road, game, of course. Back then it seems to me that there were fewer NFL teams wearing white at home (Washington and Dallas are the only ones I recall–it could be Dallas). Or, it could have been an exhibition game on a neutral field somewhere. Any thoughts?
#78 by Jerry on 11.20.07 11:48 am |
Before Lloyd Carr dressed like this, he dressed like this and this (nice find by Doug Mooney)
Finally some Northern Michigan University references. Good to see the alma mater on the website.
For those of you from Michigan. How ironic is it that Lloyd Carr and Tom Izzo went to the same school?
BTW, Jerry Glanville, Dallas Drake, and Steve Mariucci also attended NMU.
#79 by James Craven on 11.20.07 11:50 am |
Duck season!
Rabbit season!!
Elmer season!!!
#80 by Mike Engle on 11.20.07 11:51 am |
Anybody have a close-up of the Larry Robinson patch?
#81 by Stuby on 11.20.07 11:53 am |
Ah, U.L. with the toothpick. One of those 70s-80s oddities like Joe Morgan’s chicken wing, Yaz’s extra large ear-hole, and Billy Martin’s hat crosses that made baseball great. I don’t recall U.L. actully flipping the toothpick around in his mouth like Dusty does. His was cemented in the corner of his mouth.
#82 by John M on 11.20.07 12:01 pm |
Upon further review, the Colts did play at Dallas in 1984. They played at various other outdoor, artificial turf stadiums in 1982-1985 (the player pictured, Mike Pagel, wasn’t with the team in 1986): NYJ, BUF, NE, CIN, PHI, PIT, KC, CHI. Other than Dallas, I don’t recall any of those teams wearing white at home in the mid 1980s. So, unless it was an exhibition game (or unless I’m mistaken about artificial turf in Baltimore), Dallas 1984 seems like the most likely.
#83 by Christopher on 11.20.07 12:09 pm |
Yeah. I’m curious if Encarnacion will take it back after Dusty is shipped out in 2 years.
#84 by Ronnie Poore on 11.20.07 12:19 pm |
here’s what the 82-86 colts wore:
http://s5.photobucke...
in 87 they dropped the grey pants with horseshoe and went with the white with blue/grey/blue stripe pattern both home and away. in 88 they dropped grey entirely, returning to the traditional, best known colts unis.
#85 by todd krevanchi on 11.20.07 12:20 pm |
according to the football uniforms site, the colts indeed wore gray pants for a few years in the early to mid 80’s, however finding concrete photographic evidence has proven fruitless…
#86 by Jordan on 11.20.07 12:21 pm |
Following the rugby sub-topic topic, dap to my un-named Second Row brother whose membership card is featured on the front page today. To this day, in Rugby Union and League each position wears an assigned number (4 & 5 are worn by the locks, who form the second row of the scrum), so the Waratahs plan seems a little progressive for my taste. What other sports follow this system of specific uniform numbers? At the moment, only Polo comes to mind.
#87 by Josh Petty on 11.20.07 12:23 pm |
The following is a link to the pdf file of the 2007-08 Barclays Premier League handbook.
http://www.premierle...
Starting on page 125 of 509, there are 4 pages about player uniforms. Hope that helps Paul!
#88 by jsbean on 11.20.07 12:33 pm |
Celtic FC used to have numbers on the back of their shorts rather than the back of their shirts. Here’s proof:
This was just after it was made mandatory to have numbers on the back of players/ Celtic were too proud of their hoops to deface them, so put the numbers on their shorts.
Other numbers on shirts are Athletics name numbers.
#89 by jsbean on 11.20.07 12:34 pm |
sorry, shorts (damned I and O being too close together)
#90 by Philly Bill on 11.20.07 12:37 pm |
Well, Dusty was a pretty fine player in his day, but my image searching isn’t turning up any evidence whether he always wore #12.
In a somewhat related story regarding Dusty’s hiring, Austin area native Homer Bailey’s right arm just detached itself and hid under the sofa.
#91 by Bernard Shakey on 11.20.07 12:43 pm |
Not to be a dick…if the Colts only had their numbers on their pants at home (as indicated), and the picture linked shows the numbers on the pants, then something doesn’t match up. The linked photo is definitely an outdoor game being played on artificial turf. The shade of the turf looks similar to the carpet at Bush II in the mid 80s. Any experts?
#92 by Kenny on 11.20.07 12:53 pm |
So remember the Chaminade University logo contest where the winner was going to be announced at the Maui Invitational? It looks like they already put the new logo up on their website…LINK
#93 by Joe Drennan on 11.20.07 12:53 pm |
Good news for those who dislike the Blackhawks black alternate jersey which one would assume would return next season when alternates are allowed again. Cups president John McDounough (the guy who put the kibosh on the Cubs blue alternate) is to be named Blackhawks president at a noon CT news conference today.
This might be a ditch the black (although it made sense in this case and I own a black Blackhawks jersey) victory.
#94 by Jim on 11.20.07 12:56 pm |
Sorry - can’t find one, but if you want to see one up close, you can place an order here!…
http://canadiens.nhl...
#95 by Zach Smith on 11.20.07 1:00 pm |
Really Really wish I could be in the Austin area next week, as the Salt Lick just might be one of my favorite places ever. Oh well…whatcha gonna do.
#96 by Philly Bill on 11.20.07 1:04 pm |
It’s surely a clone of the previous two for Savard and Dryden… en Francais seulement!
I’d drive the four hours down there if it was on a weekend. Learn from my mistakes: if you love barbecue, don’t shack up with a vegetarian.
#97 by todd krevanchi on 11.20.07 1:06 pm |
hows this!
http://www.baseball-...
#98 by Philly Bill on 11.20.07 1:09 pm |
Wow, he’s never worn any other numnber!
His superstition in wearing the number 12 is a good indicator of his managing tactics, ie, wholly illogical. Hey, when does Neifi Perez’s steroid suspension end?
#99 by subway on 11.20.07 1:11 pm |
The Jets did wear white jerseys at “home” from 1985-1989 or 90. Maybe it was because they had just moved to GIANTS Stadium and they did’nt feel like they had a home. (Still don’t btw)
Other teams like Cincy, NE and Buffalo would wear the white jerseys for the first month or so back then before going to darks.
#100 by Stuby on 11.20.07 1:12 pm |
Dusty has always worn #12, including his previous 2 stints as a manager. He says it is to honor Tommy Davis, his favorite player growing up.
#101 by Robert on 11.20.07 1:15 pm |