It’s no secret that I’m not a fan of how the Mets market themselves. But I had high hopes — okay, maybe naïve hopes — for yesterday. It was the old girl’s last coming-out dance, and the team had promised to make the Shea family a big part of the festivities. A few days ago, they announced that they’d be unveiling a logo — their term, not mine — in honor of William Shea during the pregame ceremonies.
Sigh. You can get a glimpse of the “logo,” if you want to call it that, above. That’s the only photo of it I could find, but you get the idea: It’s an NOB. Now, there’s nothing wrong with putting Shea’s name next to the retired numbers, and I’m very happy to hear that his name placard will be displayed at the new stadium next year. But why tell fans you’re gonna unveil a logo if it’s not a logo?
Also: At first I was annoyed to see that the “Shea” lettering had a black drop shadow. Shea died in 1991, long before the team adopted the accursed black trim, so why render his name that way? Then I noticed that the retired numbers now have black drop shadows as well — something they didn’t have last year. So now the occasion of honoring William Shea has become an excuse to debase the whole roster of retirees. Just another thing that other teams do right but the Mets do wrong.
Other things they did wrong yesterday: They wore their black accessories instead of blue; they borrowed Madame Tussad’s wax figure of David Wright, put it on the subway, and let it keep wearing a numberless jersey instead of a proper one; they didn’t let this guy throw out the first pitch; they didn’t exhume Lindsey Nelson’s corpse to do the play-by-play; and a key member of their bullpen missed most of the game because his route from the last road trip to Opening Day somehow went through Puerto Rico.
Oh, and they played like shit and lost. Sigh.
On a brighter note: Today’s my mom’s birthday, so I’ll be spending most of the day with the ’rents. Everyone behave while I’m gone. Mom, if you’re reading this (or, more likely, if Pop is reading it to you), have a great birthday morning — I’ll be there in a couple of hours.
Uni Watch News Ticker: “My wife just qualified for the paralympic swim team, which will be heading to Beijing this summer for the Paralympic Games,” writes Pat Kerley. “I guess nothing says you just made a swimming team like giving you a hockey jersey. These championships were in Minneapolis, so what makes this a little funnier is that they then wore their hockey jerseys to pregame introductions at a Twins game. I have more photos here.” … Nike has unveiled some Olympics gear. … Awesome ABA ref’s jersey for sale here (with thanks to Jason Dulin). … Yesterday I mentioned something about the Akeem-era Houston Cougars wearing different uni numbers at home than while on the road. That led to this note from Ken Singer: “It used to be a high school rule in New York that the home team wore even numbers and the visitors wore odd numbers. When my dad first started taking me to games in the late ’60s, I remember noticing that the visitors always had odd numbers. My number in JV basketball from 1975–77 was 14 at home and 15 away. These were leftover jerseys from the varsity team. But when I played varsity in 1978, my number was 14 for both home and road, so the rule changed in there somewhere.” … The Red Sox championship rings look like this. “You can’t see it in the photo, but one side displays the name and number of each player with the B logo flanked by trophies won during the current regime,” explains Brian Corbett. “For instance, Tek has two trophies and Beckett has just one.” … Still more confusion regarding the Rangers’ home and road caps, as Joe Poll provided this photo of two ushers during the team’s home opener. As you can see, one’s wearing a white T, and the other one has the red T.” … Several readers (and one of my ESPN editors) have complained about Orioles reliever George Sherill and his flat-brim cap. I don’t like the look either, but it’s hardly unique — just ask Chad Cordero. … Second entry on this Q&A page has some good info on the Royals’ powder blues (with thanks to Matt McLaughlin). … Remember this? Looks like we’ll be seeing more of it next week, which I count as good news. The 42 celebration is one of the few unqualified successes of Selig’s tenure. … More city-specific logo mashups, this time for Denver (by Denver Gregg) and Atlanta (by Mike Duchock). … Truly outstanding vintage track uni available here (nice find by Michael Kimmins). … Tyler Kepner points out that Leo Nuñez has “El CD” printed on his glove (plus he apparently wore two undershirts yesterday). Anyone know what that’s about? … Tyler also reports that the Yanks have new road dugout jackets with a “New York” insignia. I like. … Ben Nickerson notes that Jose Calderon of the Raptors threw out the first pitch for last Saturday’s Jays/Bosox game and wore a Blue Jays jersey with a ribbon of some sort. Anyone..? … Jersey-o-rama at Fenway yesterday, as various Celtics, Patriots, and Bruins were on hand for the ring and trophy ceremonies. And Billy Bucks threw out the first pitch — good for him. … Advance word from an anonymous source regarding the new Team Canada hockey jerseys that will be released later this month for the World Championships: “Basically, it’s a ‘vintage’-style jersey that looks like something you’d buy a four-year-old. The white jerseys have red shoulders, which would look nice if it was done traditionally, but it comes off looking cheap. Same Canada crest as usual on the front, but cheapo little crests NOT on the shoulders but the elbow-area. Bad striping (you’ll see). Oh, and like all Nike stuff, it’s got the swoosh on the upper right chest. Overall it’s plain, in a bad way. The red jerseys are a little better, but it’s like comparing a pound of crap to a spoonful. In the end, they both stink.” … Turns out the University of Wisconsin folks aren’t the only ones who like to sue people over uniform trademark infringement. … MLB footwear notes from Mark Mihalik: Yuniesky Betancourt wore silver cleats in yesterday’s game in Tampa, and Manny Ramirez wore these cleats for the pregame ceremonies but changed into these for the game (here’s another view).
197 Comments so far
Leave a comment
#1 by Matt Lesser on 04.09.08 8:53 am | Quote
I think the Red Sox accomplished something that hasn’t been done before, and if it has, very seldom. It appears they had the Larry O’Brien, Lombardi, World Series trophies, along with the Stanley Cup, all in one place.
#2 by Joe H on 04.09.08 8:54 am | Quote
Check out this auction…had no idea he had a custom pouch added.
#3 by LI Phil on 04.09.08 8:57 am | Quote
such a good boy
#4 by Yankee Hank on 04.09.08 8:59 am | Quote
I Am a NY-er at heart, though i cannot stand the Mets…but I have to ask…if Shea is going away like Yankee this season, why isnt there any hoopla over it? I Mean there were what, a couple of times Shea was important, right? The Beatles…the Game 6 moment, the Ventura HR in 1999, the Yankees winning the 2000 WS in Game 5? I think that is it…;-)
But that Shea NOB LOGO sux! That is NOT the way to commemorate a man who is a god to these Mets Folk
#5 by Alex Kibler on 04.09.08 8:59 am | Quote
I swear the logo in the middle of the black ribbon is the new Jays logo. I’ll look to see why it’s up there.
#6 by Adrian on 04.09.08 9:07 am | Quote
Looks like a green ribbon. Wouldn’t be shocked if it was some kind of Earth Day promotion coming up.
#7 by Walaitis on 04.09.08 9:18 am | Quote
Zooming in (without photo editing equipment, mind you), it definitely looks like the Jay Head logo in the middle of a dark green ribbon - making sure people know the Blue Jays are for saving the earth, I guess? I don’t suppose they could do that by, oh, I don’t know … not closing the dome and pumping in artificial air/heat for sporting events that were meant to take place outside?
#8 by James on 04.09.08 9:22 am | Quote
Not only did they add a dropshadow to the Mets’ retired numbers, it looks like they changed the number style as well, especially on that 37 (compare it with the old number).
#9 by Ash on 04.09.08 9:23 am | Quote
No word on the tourney contest?
#10 by Kevin on 04.09.08 9:25 am | Quote
Manny’s white glove that was disallowed by MLB…
#11 by Joey Guns on 04.09.08 9:27 am | Quote
Several readers (and one of my ESPN editors) have complained about Orioles reliever George Sherill and his flat-brim cap. I don’t like the look either, but it’s hardly unique — just ask Chad Cordero.
Don’t forget Anthony Reyes…….
http://assets.espn.g...
http://www.minorleag...
#12 by Paul Lukas on 04.09.08 9:27 am | Quote
Vince hasn’t gotten back to me yet with the results. Tomorrow, I’m sure.
#13 by diz on 04.09.08 9:30 am | Quote
Some casual sponsorship related news there. Dunno why the BBC insist on calling it part of Lanarkshire, and also what kind of point Jack Law is trying to make there. It’s not as if Gretna players are going to go to Subway before a match either (or would do if they could afford to.)
Wonder if the clubs will push the “social responsibility” angle or have a new sponsor lined up for next year.
/me waits for the usual debate that invariably ignores team colours and base design elements as a form of identification
#14 by Danny on 04.09.08 9:31 am | Quote
This question was asked yesterday - It’s probably been asked, but why does Tennessee’s women’s basketball team wear blue and the men don’t have it? Are there any other teams that have gender specific?
I can only speak about Tennessee. The Lady Vols have used light blue as an accent color for as long as I can remember, back to the 70’s. It’s actually part of the Lady Vols logo. I believe all Lady Vols teams use blue in some form.
The basketball men used light blue or grey in the 70’s and eighties. Eventually all the men sports started using black as an accent, which as a traditionalist, I hate. The only men’s sports uni that has no black is the football home jersey, which is all orange and white.
#15 by Original Jim on 04.09.08 9:35 am | Quote
The previous number style used on the Mets’ retired numbers was just a generic block number. I think it looks pretty cheap.
I know you don’t like the black drop shadow, but the numer style used on the current numbers is identical to what is worn on the field, so at least there’s some consistency (if not historical accuracy).
#16 by Kevin on 04.09.08 9:35 am | Quote
#17 by Graf Zeppelin on 04.09.08 9:36 am | Quote
Things just keep getting worse and worse with the Mets. Just makes their 2006 playoff failure hurt more, because they’re never going to make it back, they’re never going to wear their actual home uniforms in home games with any degree of regularity, they’re never going to “ditch the black,” and they’re never going to be able to compete with the Yankees, either on the field or uni-wise.
There’s only so much a fan can take.
#18 by Jason Gomez on 04.09.08 9:36 am | Quote
Anyone else watching the womens game bothered by Stanford wearing Black? I know their colors are Red n White but the whole black jersey just didnt look right.
#19 by Tony in Erie on 04.09.08 9:36 am | Quote
I’m curious: I’m not a UniWatch newbie by any means, but I’m really curious: has anyone ever tried to make the long pants thing against the uniform rules?
In this photo in the article, the long pants look so bad, and its so UN-uniform. Check out the ONE man wearing stirrups.
Why are teams allowed to do this? My hometown SeaWolves all wear the stirrups…why can’t everyone? Seriously? Its called a “uniform” for a reason.
I am sure some of you will say, “well, thats the point of this site, that you ‘get it’.”
Why isn’t baseball seriously taking this into consideration? Are they and I missed the conversation?
They penalize basketball players for not wearing the right color shoes…they banned long shorts in basketball (I think)… Whats the hold up here?
#20 by Chad on 04.09.08 9:42 am | Quote
i mentioned a few days ago that the mets were going to get rickrolled from an online poll. now every 8th inning they’ll be hearing this. there’s also a full shot of the shea emblem on the visible on the wall
#21 by DJ on 04.09.08 9:45 am | Quote
They penalize basketball players for not wearing the right color shoes…they banned long shorts in basketball (I think)… Whats the hold up here?
To put teeth in any uniform rules, they would have to make it part of the collective bargaining agreement
#22 by Cosmo on 04.09.08 9:45 am | Quote
Anyone know where I can get one of those Yankee jackets? They’re much better than the ones with the script “Yankees” on them but I can’t find them anywhere.
#23 by Chad Johnson on 04.09.08 9:45 am | Quote
Those aren’t ushers at the Ranger game. That’s Claude Osteen, a former big league pitcher and coach, and another former player. They still sell all of those hats in the gift shop in the new performance material.
#24 by DrBear on 04.09.08 9:46 am | Quote
I don’t know if it (rven home/odd road numbers in high school basketball) was a specific rule but it was widespread in the 70s - our high school had even/odd jerseys for home-road. And one of the schools in our conference retired a number for an all-state player and the trophy case had two jerseys - 22 home, 23 road.
I graduated in 75 so I’m not sure when this was changed.
One other interesting uniform note from that time - they changed the rules on lines on jerseys, possibly because of Marquette’s “bumblebee’ unis. Our school had little racing stripes on the front
(above and below the school name, in a baseball type script, and the number at its lower right as you face the jersey) and back (above and below the number) for its road jerseys in 1974, when they put in a rule - no striping on the body of the jersey except for the four inches on the side panels. So we had to get new unis - but they didn’t arrive until January. So for the first few games of the season, our team had to wear white at home and on the road because they were the only legal jerseys we had. (The white ones had the team name above and below the number but that was legal - sort of like
POLAR
21
BEARS
Sadly, I saw my school play this past winter, in horribly plain jerseys that weren’t quite Frocks for Jocks, but could have been.)
Sorry about the long old-guy rambling.
#25 by Shaftman on 04.09.08 9:46 am | Quote
I’m not picking on you Tony but we can’t have it both ways. We rail on the NFL for being the “No Fun League” due their massive restrictions and then we turn around and rail on MLB for not having enough restrictions. Which one is better? I don’t really know, but I do know that if nothing else we should be consistent.
#26 by al on 04.09.08 9:52 am | Quote
Justin Chamberlains hat is so flat, it is almost inverted …
http://sports-ak.esp...
#27 by chance on 04.09.08 9:53 am | Quote
Try eBay. MLB’s online shop has been notoriously slow at times.
#28 by chance on 04.09.08 9:55 am | Quote
Speak for yourself - I am very consistent. I think the NFL is absolutely correct, and MLB should take a page from their book when it comes to uniform standards.
#29 by Morte on 04.09.08 9:55 am | Quote
I think my comment disappeared…
#30 by Joey Guns on 04.09.08 9:57 am | Quote
JOBA, not Justin
#31 by Shaftman on 04.09.08 10:01 am | Quote
I was being serious Tony; I wasn’t picking on you. I was being more general…you know, uniwatch as a whole.
That being said, I lean more towards the MLB way of it. I would rather have a little creativity and less uniformity in my sports. And I stress a “little”. No need to have infielders have one set of pants, outfielders another, and the battery another (ala USFL, I believe).
#32 by Joey Guns on 04.09.08 10:01 am | Quote
Not exactly. The Mets knew what had happened, so they changed the rules. They’re going to play the top 6 songs during the first 6 home games, and sort of have a re-vote. They did play the Rick Astley song yesterday though. Tonight at the game, Bon Jovi’s “Living On A Prayer” will be played.
http://www.techdirt....
#33 by chance on 04.09.08 10:12 am | Quote
I know, but any time you get any two people together, no matter who they are you will find inconsistencies between their positions on some subjects.
Unless you can find posters who have inconsistent positions on the NFL and MLB uniform regulations, I don’t know what you’re expecting to do….
#34 by Hank on 04.09.08 10:13 am | Quote
Whoo, boy. And they say us Phillies’ fans are all doom and gloom. (But it is nice to read about. :-))
#35 by Hank on 04.09.08 10:17 am | Quote
I don’t get the flat-brim look, either. And I’m not buying the ‘batter can’t see my eyes’ excuse either.
At least the other guys don’t look as big a goofus as Cordero does. Maybe it’s the flat brim and the big round head?
#36 by Juan Grande on 04.09.08 10:22 am | Quote
I’m all for honoring Jackie Robinson and the wearing of #42 throughout the MLB but by doing this on a regular basis, won’t it diminish his legacy? Eventually it will become “oh, it’s Jackie Robinson Day again.” I’d suggest that MLB do it just every five years, i.e. 60th, 65th, 70th anniversaries of breaking the color line. What does everyone else think?
#37 by K-Walk on 04.09.08 10:30 am | Quote
Is anyone else going through college football withdrawl?
Here’s to hoping that these never happen again…
…and that this would just go away.
Can you say glory days? (I’m going to miss seeing Favre on Sunday’s…)
Can you say national champion?
#38 by Walaitis on 04.09.08 10:31 am | Quote
I don’t think Jackie Robinson and the effect he had on the game can be talked about “too much”. If it were once a month or every week, sure, but how many kids stop getting excited over Christmas because it happens each and every year?
#39 by K-Walk on 04.09.08 10:35 am | Quote
I agree. Well, I could understand having Jackie Robinson Day every year - but having the players wear #42 every year is a little much.
#40 by Ash on 04.09.08 10:36 am | Quote
Not a problem. Davidson was one of my teams so I’m interested to see how I did.
#41 by Greg on 04.09.08 10:37 am | Quote
I found several basketball number clues when I looked around.
College basketball first allowed the numbers “1″ and “2″ in 99-2000. It notes that the reason for their previous banning was “confusion by referees”.
In 2003-2004, the Iowa High School Association felt inclined to note that the even-at-home/odd-on-road convention was NOT a rule. In 2005-2006 the Southwest Iowa Athletic Directors still felt it important to mention this at their annual meeting. I think Iowa may have been one of the last places this survived.
I found this mention on an th