There was a classic moment during yesterday’s press conference to unveil the Blue Jays’ new road and alternate uniforms. It came when they trotted out old-timers Lloyd Moseby and John Mayberry to model the team’s new 1979 powder blue throwbacks, which will be worn for Friday home games. At one point Moseby was asked what it felt like when he first wore that uniform back in the day. The prop boy must not have been holding the cue cards high enough for Moseby to see, because instead of giving a scripted reply, he chose to ad lib: “The uniform sucked, okay? So we ain’t gonna go there.”
After a moment of nervous laughter from the audience, followed by a beat or two of silence, Moseby added, “’Course, it was big to put on any uniform,” but it was too late — his point had been made, namely that these things were ugly back then and they’re still ugly now. I know many of you have some sort of nostalgic and/or kitschy fascination with this uniform, but come on — it’s totally minor league. With the centered crest and the pullover style, it looks and feels more like a hockey jersey than a baseball jersey. Plus they’ll be wearing it at home, which means we’ll be treated to blue-vs.-gray games — ugh. (Moseby, incidentally, gave some additional choice comments about the design to a Canadian reporter after the unveiling ceremony.)
While the original design had pants with a double-snap waistband, the throwback has more traditional belted pants (Moseby approved of this change: “When dirt got in your snaps, they wouldn’t work”). The mock-up in the MLB Style Guide shows a striped belt, presumably to simulate the striped waistband, but the belts at the unveiling were solid blue, which is probably for the best. On the other hand, I give them credit for sticking to one aspect of the original design: NNOB.
As for the new road jersey, I like it. Yeah, it doesn’t match the home design, but I count that as a plus, because the home design blows. I see at least four reasons to like this revision: 1) vertically arched lettering; 2) the ascension of blue from trim color to main color; 3) uni numbers finally appearing on the front of the jersey; 4) a pretty cool number font (soooooo much better than the old one). Problems? I count one: They’ve retained the super-clunky NOB typography. But at least it’s blue now, which is mild improvement. Now if we could just get them to wear a blue cap.
Finally, if you believe in omens, there was a bad one: The “N” in “Toronto” is supposed to look like this, with the shadowed side of the bevel down and to the right. But the “N” on the jersey that Jeremy Accardo was wearing was upside-down. Nice going, guys.
(Special thanks to the Chris Creamer board, where many of the above-linked photos were first posted.)
Uni Watch News Ticker: Homeless man update from Mike Hennessy, who writes: “At a news conference sometime over the weekend, Belichick wore his regular sweatshirt with the hood cut off. I think with this he has hit rock bottom.” … Speaking of Belichick, for a few weeks now his headband has featured a Pats logo that I haven’t seen elsewhere. I kinda like it, especially since the “New England” part of the team’s name usually doesn’t get much play. Anyone know more about this logo? … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: Steve Smith threw his cleats into the crowd after Sunday’s game. … Great catch by Jeremy Iwen, who noticed that the first “R” in Dominique Barber’s nameplate was backwards a few weeks back. … Ray Lewis memorialized Sean Taylor on his eye black last night.
#1 by emeyel on 12.04.07 8:07 am |
The Patriots have been using that logo (though sparingly) since at least the Pete Carroll era. I bought a cap with that logo on it back in 1999 (although of course it was royal blue, not the current navy).
#2 by Leo on 12.04.07 8:11 am |
I love the return to blue, but I don’t envy the person that has to cut those letters/numbers nor the person that has to put them on. Upside down Ns and Os will be everywhere.
#3 by Shane on 12.04.07 8:23 am |
Love the new Blue Jays alts.
At least they’re getting back to blue.
#4 by Chris Doran on 12.04.07 8:24 am |
I don’t think the sweatshirt in the Belicheck press conference photo is the hooded model.
Look at the placement of the NFL Equipment logo.
Here it’s on the collar: http://farm3.static....
and here it’s on the pocket: http://espn-i.starwa...
I think it’s this shirt http://www.nflshop.c... with the collar cut off.
#5 by Zack Bennett on 12.04.07 8:27 am |
I took all of those numbers on the back of the Pats’ helmets last night and played the lottery with them.
#6 by Marcus Sharp on 12.04.07 8:29 am |
Did anyone else notice that Tom Brady did not have the Sean Taylor decal on his helmet during warm-ups, but did have it on for the Pats first drive?
#7 by LI Phil on 12.04.07 8:30 am |
if it’s not the hooded model, why would angry homeless man cut off just the collar? (other than the fact that he’s angry and homeless)
/nothing on the bart scott affair paul?
#8 by /a on 12.04.07 8:40 am |
Have they dropped the small MLB logo on the back of the neck for the ‘08 jerseys?
#9 by Mr. Man on 12.04.07 8:40 am |
And now we just wait for the Royals to unveil their powder blue home alternates …
#10 by Kevin Mericle on 12.04.07 8:44 am |
Two things I noticed during last nights game. Derrick Mason was missing the “B” logo from at least one side of his pants. Willis McGahee was missing “Ravens” from the front of his jersey, and his front jersey numbers seemed bigger than the others (almost like they put the rear-jersey numbers on the front).
#11 by Robert on 12.04.07 8:44 am |
Maybe it is because the photo quality wasn’t as good in the old days, but the Blue Jays’ new powder blues look to be a tad darker than they were in 1979.
#12 by steve on 12.04.07 8:45 am |
Yes
#13 by Paul Lukas on 12.04.07 8:46 am |
Nice catch, confirmed here.
#14 by Minna H. on 12.04.07 8:50 am |
Thank you, Moseby, for speaking the truth. Those things are ugly, dog. I got no love for the powder blues. I like the grays, though. Very nice.
The guy in the middle (Accardo?)looks like Gary Gaetti. I was racking my brain trying to figure out when The Rat had played for Toronto, then I realized it wasn’t him.
#15 by teamcinnamon on 12.04.07 8:51 am |
The only jersey issue that I see w/the Blue Jays is that there are Matt Stairs jerseys available to purchase - with anti theft sensors attached!
#16 by Robert on 12.04.07 8:52 am |
In the 1970s and early 1980s, when I railed on Uni Issues to my disinterested friends, my biggest complaints were powder blues, pullovers and elastic waistbands. As teams slowly began to get away from these, I celebrated.
As these styles begin to creep back onto the baseball diamond, I can only hope that they are used for the occasional alt and do not see a full-blown return. I can’t wait out another twenty years of bad baseball fashion.
#17 by teamcinnamon on 12.04.07 8:53 am |
Mr. Ovenmitts got some tv time last night when confering with the refs after what I believe was the Pat’s last TD.
No screen cap.
#18 by Minna H. on 12.04.07 8:54 am |
Oh, the Ravens wore all-black last night? Very nice. I like it sans ‘Ravens’ on front. I like their all-black a tad better than New Orleans’ all-black, but all-black is always all-good.
Anybody know if the Raiders ever wear all-black? If so, photo proof?
P.S. Paul, for the link for the belt prototype, you have stripted–which makes me think of strip-tease for no reason.
#19 by chris omps on 12.04.07 8:56 am |
The pat’s logo on belicheck’s headband came from back when Nike did NFL sideline caps. I believe the hat that emeyel says that he has, is probably one with the three stripes in the brim, and three more on the back, right below the nfl shield. I have an Eagles cap just like it, Mcnabb wore it his first two years in the league, so around ‘99-00 era.
#20 by Jet on 12.04.07 9:06 am |
Amen, bro. Those were dark days indeed.
-Jet
#21 by PJ on 12.04.07 9:08 am |
That NE logo was one that was created back around 2000, when almost every team had an “alternate” logo that was used on hats, etc. I think one of the equiptment suppliers at the time (Puma, Nike, Reebok) came up with them. I specifically remember them on hats. They usually incorporated something about the primary logo (The top of the “N” in NE has the Pats hat incorporated). I remember the Cardinals, Vikings, dolphins, and atlanta had interesting versions. I have to keep looking for examples.
#22 by Pat on 12.04.07 9:10 am |
And he was fake crying during the moment of silence for Sean Taylor. Is anyone else tired of Ray Lewis’ attention seeking antics like this?
Maybe he shed some real tears for Sean Taylor, and I respect the man for having his beliefs. But, to me, I can’t see him doing all of this stuff with a camera pointed right at his face. He just strikes me as clownishly over the top. And the pre-game moment of silence move was a prime example.
But, as for the game… fuck Don Shula.
#23 by LI Phil on 12.04.07 9:13 am |
anyone notice shula got in a plug for nutrasystem at the end of his MNF segment?
#24 by /a on 12.04.07 9:15 am |
I’m willing to admit that my fondness for the Jays alts has everything to do with a fuzzy nostalgia for the team - remembering Moseby’s heyday, for example - but I distinctly remember being overjoyed when baseball gradually did away with the pullover look.
As for the road uni, it’s a fine jersey in and of itself. Nice font, numbers on front, more blue - all good things. But it adds too many new elements to the overall look. With the stupid ‘J’ hat on, players will be sporting no fewer than 3 differing fonts (cap, ‘Toronto’ and the nameplate). There is no uniformity in the uniform.
And all of it seems to come with fine print attached, i.e. “Blue Jays management reserves the right to alter any of these elements at any time should merchandise sales sag, thus rendering your precious overpriced teamwear obsolete…”
#25 by Mardi on 12.04.07 9:15 am |
I was at the bengals steelers game on sunday. Did anyone see the gloves chad johnson had on in the first quarter? they looked like they had gold on them. He changed them in the second quarter to regular gloves.
#26 by Justin on 12.04.07 9:18 am |
My guess, and this is completely a guess. He may use a different non-radio helmet during warmup. And since there is no reason he would use this during a game, they wouldn’t bother to put the decal on it. Was the little green sticker on his helmet for warmup?
#27 by Kek on 12.04.07 9:20 am |
I like the powder blue Toronto unis. I guess that’s just what I grew up on when I got into collecting baseball cards. I’ll be picking up a replica of that cap.
Regarding the photo of Barber and his nameplate, what is the decal at the rear of his helmet. It’s the state of Minnesota but what is it symbolizing? The bridge accident perhaps? (sorry if this has been addressed already)
#28 by Duckstyle on 12.04.07 9:21 am |
I noticed at least one, possibly two, Ravens defenders using bright orange mouthpieces(Miami tribute maybe). Is there any rule regarding the color of mouthpieces? I realize many are so small they don’t see the light-of-day, but these were of the large, over-the-lips variety. Anyone?
#29 by werthj on 12.04.07 9:21 am |
The Badgers wore there 1941 ‘throwback’ socks last night.
#30 by werthj on 12.04.07 9:23 am |
their, not there obviously
#31 by Jason G. on 12.04.07 9:30 am |
They actually get more airtime than you would think. Players often take them out between plays. Having seen this a million times a game, I can tell you that if there is a rule about colors, no one is following them. I’ve seen a lot of two toned mouthpieces (right half one color, left half another color). Often times they don’t even match the team colors. I have no pictures to prove any of this and don’t have time to look for them, but if you watch the games and look for them I’m sure you’ll find many examples.
#32 by Marcus Ramsey on 12.04.07 9:30 am |
Anyone else catch Ed Reed with an orange mouthguard?
Was that him honoring his old Miami teammate? Or does he do that often?
#33 by Mike on 12.04.07 9:30 am |
The Ravens “unitard” look last night reminded me of my 7 yr-old’s dance class…
#34 by Miguel on 12.04.07 9:32 am |
The Patriots were an adidas team. That’s why they have three stripes on their road socks. It’s subtle corporate branding that Reebok never let go.
#35 by Nolan on 12.04.07 9:34 am |
I confirmed it here, they don’t have black pants. They haven’t changed anything about their uni in years so it may not be something you see for a while, if ever.
#36 by J-P on 12.04.07 9:34 am |
As a kid, it never made sense to me why the Jays had their LNOB on the home uni but not on the road. I always thought that at home, fans should know the players and don’t need the NOB but on the road, a NOB would help fans identify the players.
#37 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 9:36 am |
It has shoulder seams like the hoodies though.
#38 by GC on 12.04.07 9:36 am |
I have to admit…I am partial to powder blue.
#39 by Nick on 12.04.07 9:37 am |
FWIW, Ray Ray wasn’t the only one with 21 on his eye black. I know I saw it at least one other time, if not more.
#40 by Paul Lukas on 12.04.07 9:38 am |
This, of course, is how the Giants and Red Sox still do it. But it makes little sense to me. If you’re attending the game in person, you can’t read the NOB from the stands anyway (unless you have a much better seat than I ever get). The NOB is really there for the people watching on TV, and since every game is now televised, you’re just as likely to watch your team on the road as you are at home. I see no reason to have different NOB standards for home and road unis.
#41 by Nolan on 12.04.07 9:40 am |
Could be possible, he was wearing a different helmet than last week. Last week he had on this helmet, notice where his high chinstrap hookup is. Last night he had on this one that he has also worn for every other game (see the different snap placement).
#42 by Adam on 12.04.07 9:48 am |
All these 70’s Throwbacks comming back into circle again…I love the Jays throwbacks, too bad they didn’t go with the ‘77 uni’s and had TORONTO on the front instead of BLUE JAYS.
God I hope the Pirates don’t think about doing it with their million combinations for the ‘78-’-79 jerseys….a club house attendants worst nightmare!!
#43 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 9:52 am |
Nevermind, it is a crew neck with a cut up or disintegrating collar, Viewimages has some pictures of him wearing them. It is a little different than the fleece in the NFL shop, but looks similar.
#44 by JJD on 12.04.07 9:53 am |
Is that number font on the Blue Jays jersey the same as the Chargers new font? It appears so.
#45 by alan on 12.04.07 9:54 am |
looks like Wisconsin is continuing it’s pursuit of logo infractions.
#46 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 9:58 am |
Yesterday’s big story in sporting socks.
#47 by Rick on 12.04.07 9:59 am |
According the rules section of this site, mouth guards are not required, but says nothing about color choices of mouth guards.
#48 by Justin B on 12.04.07 10:00 am |
Is there history to this?
#49 by Frenchie on 12.04.07 10:02 am |
MLB will next year impose a “Francona Rule.”
Red Sox manager Terry Francona officially has a rule named after him.
“There’s going to be, for lack of a better term, a ‘Francona Rule,’” said Bob Watson, Major League Baseball’s Vice President of Rules and On-Field Operations. “You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times.”
No more pullover for Francona.
When asked if teams had been notified of the development Watson said, “They will be informed. There will be no doubt.”
#50 by Adam on 12.04.07 10:03 am |
I wouldn’t call the over the lips “Mouthgards”….more like a “PACIFIER” a baby would suck on to….considering nothing but babies use them!
#51 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 10:05 am |
NBA kicks off heritage week on Friday. Nine teams will be wearing retro unis:
Boston Celtics (1956-57 Road)
Chicago Bulls (1995-96 Second Road)
Detroit Pistons (1957-58 Home)
Golden State Warriors (1974-75 Road)
Houston Rockets (1994-95 Home)
Los Angeles Lakers (1987-88 Home)
Miami Heat (1988-89 Home)
New York Knicks (1972-73 Home)
Philadelphia 76ers (1982-83 Home)
The article is here.
#52 by scott on 12.04.07 10:05 am |
The Jays powder blues are fine as a throwback, but they shouldn’t be worn at home if there’s no history or precedent for wearing them at home.
#53 by Matt K on 12.04.07 10:08 am |
I may be wrong, but I believe all the Minnesota natives on the Gopher football roster have that sticker, with a star marking their hometown. Causing, based on their play this year, great shame to said hometowns.
Re: the Jays: not in love with the powder blue, entirely, but I’m gettin’ a replica of that hat posthaste.
#54 by Duckstyle on 12.04.07 10:09 am |
I hope I’m not the only one getting real irritated with this. I understand that it’s their logo, and anyone using it ought to pay up. But seriously, it’s not like these schools are making extra merch money because they use the same logo. I understand when a bootlegger is making false merch and making money, and they get charged. But a middle/high school, come on. Doesn’t their legal department have bigger fish to fry? I remember about 2 years before I attended my high school they changed their logo from a Iowa Hawkeyes ripoff to an original logo because they were asked, not sued, by the university to do so. In teh end the new logo is kinda badass, so everyones happy.
#55 by Robert on 12.04.07 10:11 am |
All right, a Francona rule and no more smocks! I love it. If he has circulation problems, that’s fine. Just wear a jacket, like Ted Williams did to hide his gut when he managed the Rangers.
#56 by Mike Engle on 12.04.07 10:14 am |
{sarcasm} I’m disappointed. With the smock, John Gibbons was consistently the best-dressed Toronto Blue Jay. {/sarcasm}
#57 by James on 12.04.07 10:15 am |
I hate the powder blue. Someone please stop this trend before it gets out of hand.
I always hated those Toronto uniforms, especially the big logo on the front. They look like Little League uniforms. I was thrilled when they finally moved the logo to the sleeve. I’ve never really cared for any Blue jays uniform, though they have improved with time.
If baseball teams want to bring back something retro, how about showing socks and stirrups.
#58 by Jack Krabbe on 12.04.07 10:16 am |
He does this all the time. It is a tribute to Miami. There was a season where he always wore a wristband with the UM logo as well. I’ll look for a pic.
#59 by Stuby on 12.04.07 10:20 am |
I would love to see the Giants use their 70s uniforms with the orange jerseys as a Friday throwback. Of course, the best part of that uni is the orange sanitaries. Unless you could get the players to wear the uniform and stirrups correctly, it would probably look like shit.
#60 by Chance on 12.04.07 10:26 am |
No, actually. Because they’re all the same.
Setting aside the fact infringement is stealing, if Wisconsin doesn’t go after the little fish, they lose their legal standing to challenge larger infringements.
Plus, read the article.
For the past six years, the lawsuit states, UW-Madison has been in touch with Washburn “numerous times and requested that Washburn cease using a confusingly similar imitation of Wisconsin ’s Motion W mark. ” Several times, the lawsuit states, Washburn assured Wisconsin that it had stopped using the Motion W logo, but instead has only expanded its use.
If true, how could the University not sue, with a pattern like that?
#61 by CV on 12.04.07 10:27 am |
I would like to see these throwbacks from the 70’s-early 80’s:
A’s - 1976 Yellow
Indians - 1977 Blue
Pads - 1978 whites
Pirates - 1979 white with thick pinstripes
Orioles - 1980 Orange
Giants - 1981 Black
#62 by ML on 12.04.07 10:28 am |
The Ravens “unitard” look last night reminded me of my 7 yr-old’s dance class…
agreed. i really like the all-black but with almost no distiguishing marks between the jersey & pants and the seriously legging-like bottoms…
#63 by DenverGregg on 12.04.07 10:29 am |
I guess I’m the minority here. I like powder blue, but don’t like pullovers, softball caps or the centered crest on a baseball jersey and I vehemently dislike the lettering. Tractor lettering looked pretty cool in about ‘74, but like most things from that era looked woefully dated by the time the Jays first took the field.
#64 by Jeag on 12.04.07 10:30 am |
i’m all for the powder blue, and throwbacks and such, but the pullovers are going to look horrible, especially with the baggy 2007 style and the recent tendency of the Jays to employ huge/fat guys. i know most of you are probably for historical accuracy, but I would have advocated a “modernization” of the uniform (like Milwaukee does) to include a button front and move the logo to one side. Matt Stairs and Frank Thomas are going to look really, really sloppy.
#65 by John Griebel on 12.04.07 10:30 am |
Man, those Jays throwbacks are killer. I’ll buy a Jays lid the second they are available…….
#66 by ryan c #40 on 12.04.07 10:30 am |
favre is sportsman of the year… but wearing a replica jersey???
#67 by ryan c #40 on 12.04.07 10:31 am |
oops on the favre thing. link:
http://sportsillustr...
#68 by Randy Miller on 12.04.07 10:31 am |
Re: the Francona rule and polyester.
When Ted Williams managed the Texas Rangers in their Arlington debut season (1972), he ALWAYS wore the jacket. It didn’t matter the gametime temperature was 99 in the shade, Ted was not going to be seen in form-fitting polyester.
#69 by Matthew H. on 12.04.07 10:34 am |
Bob Watson is a major league loser who seriously needs to get some balance in his life. Can’t you just picture this guy sitting up at night thinking up ways to make sure Terry Francona wears a jersey. Idiot.
#70 by Mike Engle on 12.04.07 10:35 am |
Doubt it. A replica jersey probably wouldn’t have the Lambeau patch, and the front white #4 would probably have mesh holes through it. This is obviously a sewn-on number. My guess is that it is tailored authentic.
#71 by Minna H. on 12.04.07 10:35 am |
quote comment=”181424″]
I confirmed it here, they don’t have black pants. They haven’t changed anything about their uni in years so it may not be something you see for a while, if ever.
Thanks, Nolan, even if it’s not the answer I wanted. Oh, well. I can always hope they will come up with a ‘one-timer’. I would especially love for the Raiders to go all-black because silver is vastly superior to gold.
#72 by J-P on 12.04.07 10:38 am |
The Giants are the other way around, which makes sense to me. They have NOB on the road and NNOB at home.
#73 by Matt on 12.04.07 10:41 am |
Maybe they pointed the camera his way because he was crying? Is he not allowed to be sad about his deceased friend?
#74 by LI Phil on 12.04.07 10:43 am |
perhaps im in the minority here, but i totally dig the alt. uni thing in all it’s glory, so long as it is a RARE event…like the flashback friday trend…what’s wrong with seeing the powder blues all of 13 times a season out of 162 games??? additionally, i would love it if MLB and the other leagues have MANY different jackets, vests, sweaters, pullovers, etc. for teams to wear while not on the field of play…however…select one for the day of the game and outfit everyone in it…none of this mix and match shit
what i am extremely anal about is uniform uniformity…i know this may sound assinine, but would it really be that big of a deal to have everyone wear stirrups, or just sanitaries, or even the low cuts (but not the manny/barry bootcuts…i might throw up into my mouth if everyone had that look) at the same time??? most will argue this would take away a player’s ‘individuality’ (well, are you a TEAM player or just one of 25???)…they could even have different days of the week to wear the different look…god forbid
i know this will never happen, of course, but that’s just my $.02
#75 by Duckstyle on 12.04.07 10:44 am |
Fair enough. I just skimmed it, I stopped reading the full articles like 20 lawsuits ago.
#76 by Chance on 12.04.07 10:45 am |
Oh, I think very possibly. But I think what he was getting at was that he thought Lewis was playing for the cameras, knowing full well that it would draw their attention.
He doesn’t think it was genuine at all, if I may speak for him.
#77 by ryan c #40 on 12.04.07 10:47 am |
post #42:
“I hope the Pirates don’t think about doing it with their million combinations for the ‘78-’-79 jerseys….a club house attendants worst nightmare!!”
ha-ha! adam, i don’t think they could afford another jersey in the rotation!!! i DO love all (4 or 5 (4 i think)) of the pirate jerseys right now. even the red one, there’s just something about it! anybody know the official name of that font/text the pirates use?
#78 by ryan c #40 on 12.04.07 10:47 am |
post #49:
“You can only wear your uniform top or jacket. You can’t wear your night-shirt, or whatever it is. You can wear it before games, or after games, but not during games. You have to have your uniform top at all times”
i beg you, can mlb coaches please, please, please STOP wearing uniforms!!! the look insanely stupid! a nice polo and khakis and the hat will do great. you… hell, you can EVEN wear the cleats!!!
#79 by JMO on 12.04.07 10:48 am |
In case Paul was looking for a an actual news link about Francona
http://www.bostonher...
#80 by Chance on 12.04.07 10:49 am |
Too bad - the really great part was at the very bottom, where it says:
Most of the infringements have been by high schools, Nagy said. The university typically sends them a letter, informs them that the Motion W is a registered trademark and offers assistance in creating new logos that don ‘t infringe on the trademark.
So it would seem that the University is doing everything right.
Now, if you’re tired of the lawsuits, your ire should be directed where it belongs - towards those organizations who don’t seem to think that stealing is wrong.
#81 by Stuby on 12.04.07 10:49 am |
I’m sorry for being so cynical. This whole Sean Taylor memorial is over the top. League-wide moment of silence? Cool. His team wearing a memorial patch? Cool. League-wide helmet sticker the size of a grapefruit? Excessive.
#82 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 10:51 am |
They’d end up looking like this.
(Actually, they’d be like the NFL, mannequins for the latest in ugly apparel).
#83 by LI Phil on 12.04.07 10:52 am |
i believe MLB is the only sport where it is a rule that if you step onto the field of play, you must be wearing a uniform…therefore, fat third base coaches will be required to sport the uni…although, trainers are obviously NOT required to wear unis, so i may be wrong
does anyone really want to bring back the days of connie mack (last manager to wear a suit in the dugout)?
#84 by Robert on 12.04.07 10:53 am |
Um, I believe that the report indicated that Francona could wear a jacket in lieu of a jersey. Just no smock.
#85 by Robert on 12.04.07 10:55 am |
I love that Watson threw in a jab, referring to Francona’s smock as a “nightshirt, or whatever it is.”
#86 by ryan c #40 on 12.04.07 10:55 am |
post #70:
“Doubt it. A replica jersey probably wouldn’t have the Lambeau patch, and the front white #4 would probably have mesh holes through it. This is obviously a sewn-on number. My guess is that it is tailored authentic”
yeah mike, but don’t the sleeves look painted or ironed on??? thats not what they wear on the field. either way, no biggie! just weird…
http://sportsillustr...
#87 by Robert on 12.04.07 10:56 am |
Oops, I stand corrected. The article said that the uniform top must be worn at all times. I guess that the reference to the jacket just meant that it can be worn over the jersey.
#88 by Chance on 12.04.07 10:59 am |
I tend to agree.
I also think it diminishes the deaths of other active NFL players, who were not similarly remembered. I guess Darrent Williams and Marquise Hill had the bad timing to die outside of the NFL regular season….
#89 by Chance on 12.04.07 11:03 am |
Yes, it is. The Packers still use screened sleeve stripes, for some odd reason.
#90 by Jason on 12.04.07 11:07 am |
The Bucks NEED to get on board with this!
#91 by Mark in Shiga on 12.04.07 11:09 am |
I like the new Jays’ road uniforms too — the font looks a lot better than the Star Trek one they used to use — but what’s the deal with the massive gap between the collar and the NOB? There seems to be a lot of this lately and it really looks off-balance. (And the names themselves are big, clunky, ugly, and in the wrong font. Just dump them and make the numbers bigger.)
#92 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 11:09 am |
Part of the purpose of a uniform is the branding of a team. I am not a Yankees fan, but when you see them step out of the dugout, there is something about it. You are seeing the New York Yankees.
That is why I don’t care for alternates at all, and am not even a fan of Sunday jerseys or anything like that. It dilutes the visual identity of the teams and some of the impact of seeing them in person. I don’t mind BP jerseys because they help create a separation between warming up and the actual start of a Major League Baseball game.
I see the argument that “hey, can’t this be fun??” but I remember being awed by baseball games as a kid and now it seems like I go, and there is a ferris wheel and fountains, and a million things going on with a ball game in the background.
#93 by Robb on 12.04.07 11:14 am |
Huh, looks like the equipment manager put the chin strap on upside down, Riddell puts their logo on the “upper” strap so that their name is upright…anybody know how long thats been going on?
#94 by Jerico on 12.04.07 11:14 am |
Ah, the good old days when Nike/Puma/adidas did the NFL laundry. I do succinctly remember the NE and Philadelphia “E” hats; those were Nike-fied, baseball-like creations, I believe. They also did a Steeler hat with the Steeler logo inside the block P, and an NYJ logo for the Jets. Nike may have been responsible for the Giants going retro; when they got the NY Giants jerseys in the late ’90s, they had been selling the old-school NY logo on caps before the Giants went retro in 2000.
In addition to changing the Broncos jerseys (for better or worse), Nike was also responsible for the Steelers changing their number font on the unis (to match the numbers on their helmets). Nike also changed the letterhead font of the Chicago Bears to match the rounded numeral font, which was REALLY cool. (For the life of me, I can’t find pics of it.) In fact, I’m kicking myself as a Bears fan for not getting apparel with the aforementioned font. When Reebok acquired the NFL rights, they switched back to the familiar block “BEARS” letterhead.
Adidas also did the San Francisco 49ers jerseys, if you recall–another one with three stripes. Given that, it’s remarkable that the Chicago Bears were a Nike team then.
#95 by dm00n [Doug] on 12.04.07 11:14 am |
Doesn’t he wear the official MLB thermal shirt? Funny that he is dissing their own product, rather than just telling Francona to reverse the order of his layers.
#96 by Paul Lukas on 12.04.07 11:20 am |
1) Connie Mack wasn’t the last manager to wear civvies. Burt Shotton of the Dodgers was.
2) Mack is a poor example, because he owned the team. He saw himself as a businessman/executive, and dressed accordingly.
#97 by Philly Bill on 12.04.07 11:21 am |
Only vaguely uni-related, but we’ve covered this team from a sartorial standpoint since day one, so here’s some news about our favorite #26.
http://www.philly.co...
I’ve never heard of such a thing… and I’m a “P.C. Thug”!
#98 by Kevin on 12.04.07 11:23 am |
When the hell did PorkChop become offensive? People need to get a damn life and not get offended by every damn thing.
#99 by My name is not Earl on 12.04.07 11:24 am |
Which Bucks throwbacks are we talking here . . . the original, Robertson/Kareem era ones or (more likely) the classic mid-80s ones?
Also, the thing with NNOB at home and NOB on the road probably is similar to teams having the team nickname on the home jerseys and the city name on the road ones. At home, everyone knows what city it is. Although you have to respect the Knicks, who have “New York” on both home and road jerseys (didn’t Finley have “Oakland” on both home and road jerseys the first year the A’s were in Oakland?)
#100 by LI Phil on 12.04.07 11:26 am |
like i said, i think im in the minority…i totally agree with you on the NYY…i can’t imagine them stepping out onto the field in something as garish as the pirate sly and the family stone duds…they never abandoned the button-downs or belts during the polyester smock era, and more power to them
my point, and i do have one, is that if a team wants to harken back to its roots on RARE occasions, i think that’s pretty cool…i’d like to see the marlins go teal once again and ditch the black or have the stros break out the psychadelics…just not every day
as far as the classics, you can’t beat the (yankee) pinstripes or penn state or the colts (sans the blue pants) and if they never change i have no problem with that
#101 by Pat on 12.04.07 11:26 am |
I don’t think anything Ray Lewis does on field in front of the cameras is genuine. I don’t want to get all off topic just explain.
I feel like ever since his murder/obstruction of justice trial he has been on this stage trying desperately to prove he is a changed man, a religious man. He may be very religious and he may be changed. Hell, he could be the most well-behaved NFL star now for all I know. But, the antics, the inspirational speeches, the crying, the interviews where he whispers the entire time trying to sound sincere, they all seem so forced.
No one is that inspired/emotional at all times.
I hate this too. But, just because it’s ridiculous.
On another note, I hope adidas doesn’t ruin the Celtics “throwback.” I’ve always wanted to see them bring back the old Celtics warmups and jersey with “Boston” on the front instead of “Celtics.”