Because I’m a spoilsport with a 10-month-old — and because I also don’t understand the allure of fireworks — I spent way too much time watching How It’s Made on the Science Channel yesterday. Yeah … I know. I saw the goalie mask one and the goalie pads one, and the baseball bat one, and the paintball one. Thrilling times.
There was no catchers gear episode, but watching Jason Varitek’s Independence Day gear getting made would have at least proved interesting. Or perhaps more interesting than listening to fireworks for about eight hours.
I’m gonna go see if my idiot neighbor left any of his fingers in the street. Keep celebrating safely, all. — Bryan
Wait! I forgot about this. Who said the White Sox weren’t classy?
#1 by Art on 07.05.08 7:13 am |
Varitek looks classy – god bless the U.S.A. !!!!!!!!!
#2 by Buckeye Mike on 07.05.08 7:26 am |
Wow, I really hate Tek, but I think this looks cool. Anyone have the pics of the Reds yet? Have a great weekend!!!
#3 by Ben on 07.05.08 7:30 am |
Something makes me think this isn’t quite what Betsy Ross envisioned.
#4 by Steve on 07.05.08 7:32 am |
K-Fed plays for the White Sox these days?
#5 by Philly William on 07.05.08 7:58 am |
Shane Victorino beat the Mets with a walk-off single last night – behold the power of the double flapped helmet!
http://mlb.mlb.com/m...
#6 by Johnny O on 07.05.08 8:01 am |
Yeah, Tek did look pretty sweet yesterday:
http://d.yimg.com/a/...
The 3rd base coach for the White Sox is taking this “coaches-to-wear-helmets” thing pretty seriously:
http://d.yimg.com/us...
I was at the Brewers game yesterday, and I have to say the Crew didn’t look bad in the WBV hats:
http://d.yimg.com/us...
Speaking of the Brewers, they had the stars and stripes MLB logo behind home with red, white and blue stars on both sides of it. ( I have a pic. but it’s at home right now). They also had their Milwaukee “M” behind the pitchers mound with the stars and stripes in the logo (like on the WBV hats)
One more tid bit… on brewers.com Ned Yost slightly address the “un-tucking” tradition the Brewers have had for over a month now:
“MILWAUKEE — The shirttails were out again, and the Brewers walked off the field happy after bringing the fireworks out a little early Friday afternoon.
The Brewers’ bats came alive and Ben Sheets worked through a solid outing as Milwaukee cruised to an easy 9-1 victory over Pittsburgh to open the Fourth of July weekend at Miller Park.
“They always find something to do together,” Brewers manager Ned Yost said. “That is a good thing about this team, they always find a fun way to celebrate together. They’re a close group.”
- Ned Yost
#7 by DrBear on 07.05.08 8:09 am |
It’s been done:
Bill Freehan on a Sports Illustrated Cover, 1969.
#8 by Mike on 07.05.08 8:11 am |
That does look good. That’s what the catcher on Team USA ought to wear for the Olympics.
#9 by Mike on 07.05.08 9:12 am |
Buckeye Mike said:
http://news.yahoo.co...
#10 by Stuby on 07.05.08 9:35 am |
1) Nothing says ‘Independence Day’ better than an outdated desert camo pattern and an all black hat.
2) Bronson Arroyo was wearing a double-flap cool-flo yesterday. Does he always wear that?
3) For the ladies final at Wimbledon, NBC has just ‘Serena’ and ‘Venus’ in the score box @ the upper left of the screen instead of the more traditional S. Williams and V. Williams.
#11 by The Ol Goaler on 07.05.08 9:58 am |
The “Independence Day” hats just didn’t work in the Cardinals-Cubs game… watching on TV, you couldn’t see the stars-and-stripes on either the “StL” or the “C” cap logos.
It coulda been worse… the blue caps on the normally red-capped Cardinals hearkened back to their unis from 1957 through 1963.
Bad idea, MLB… and I doubt folks will be lining up to buy those awful hats!
#12 by Nick on 07.05.08 10:13 am |
Nick said:
I bought one.
#13 by Ricko on 07.05.08 10:24 am |
As if the Indians don’t get enough shit for their nickname, that navy-faced logo looks like they’re the “Cleveland Minstrals”.
Sheesh, what a dumb adaptation.
#14 by Ricko on 07.05.08 10:40 am |
That Varitek gear on ebay yet (or whereever the pink and camo versions were sold)?
#15 by Kevin M. on 07.05.08 10:47 am |
Ricko said:
Weren’t those being auctioned off on the All-Star site itself?
#16 by Tony Miller on 07.05.08 10:51 am |
Stuby said:
I believe CBS did so for a U.S. Open final once.
#17 by Ricko on 07.05.08 10:59 am |
Kevin M. said:
Don’t remember, just wondering how quickly it appeared.
#18 by Brad A. on 07.05.08 11:24 am |
http://www.fannation...
Titans switch default home jersey to light blue, ditching the navy.
#19 by Rick on 07.05.08 11:57 am |
Stuby said:
2) Yes
#20 by Mike Engle on 07.05.08 12:14 pm |
Brad A. said:
If by “ditching the navy,” you mean “relegating the navy jersey to ‘alternate’ status,” then yes.
(Sorry, I’m a stickler for that kind of stuff.)
#21 by Matt O on 07.05.08 12:23 pm |
I thought the Reds were wearing camo yesterday! Man have I never been more relieved to see the hideaous read alts they were at home. I was hoping smarter heads prevailed, but then I go to their website and see this as a promo for tonight…..
http://cincinnati.re...
However the did a great job honoring our vets and troops last night during the game. GOD BLESS THE USA!!!!
#22 by =bg= on 07.05.08 12:23 pm |
White Sox camo, complete with black on black cap;
http://img.photobuck...
http://img.photobuck...
#23 by Jefferson D on 07.05.08 12:25 pm |
Nick said:
I worked a festival all day yesterday in the Chicago ‘burbs, and I saw at least 2 guys wearing the Cubs version. Oddly enough, they were both worn backwards.
#24 by Adam on 07.05.08 12:40 pm |
Those White Sox hats yesterdy were just really odd. The blog of the White Sox VP of communication called them “two-tone brown hats”, but if that was brown it was a very dark brown, and the two tones were almost identical. I don’t have a picture, but I’m pretty sure they also didn’t have an MLB logo on back (or if they did, it was the same color as the hat).
#25 by Joey Guns on 07.05.08 12:54 pm |
I know this isn’t sports related, but I’d love to know Paul’s thoughts on this:
http://www.southberg...
#26 by =bg= on 07.05.08 12:57 pm |
Totally out of place logo creep.
Watching Wimbledon, NBC does an in-studio with Boris Becker, who is always well-dressed. He’s wearing a nice suit, no tie, jacket open….and a POKER STARS.NET patch emblazoned on the jacket pocket.
I think ‘huh??’ They say thank-you, he says thank-you and seems to stare direct into the camera as he says it……
..then they go into a commercial of his for Poker stars.net.
How cheesy.
#27 by Azul Army on 07.05.08 1:05 pm |
The Stars & Stripes caps almost work for the Los Angeles Dodgers.
For the Jints of San Francisco, the cap does not work at all.
But it is GREAT to see the Gnats wearing (almost) Dodger blue!
And Varitek’s gear looks fantastic. I’m sure if John Ross or George Washington were catching in a Philly softball league back in the day, they would be sporting this gear.
Happy day after Independence Day,
Azul Army, U.S. American
#28 by Ricko on 07.05.08 1:07 pm |
=bg= said:
Wow, they look so much like soldiers in the Continental Army, don’t they.
Silly me, I thought Independence Day was to celebate the beginning of this noble experiment of ours…democracy.
Turns out that somehow it’s about Iraq.
Seriously now, I have nothing but total respect and admiration for our troops, but wouldn’t that sort of attire be better suited to, and more fitting for, Armed Forces Day or Memorial Day?
As much as the navy Stars n’Stipes hats don’t do it for me, they’re at least appropriate to the holiday.
Somebody needs to give the White Sox marketing department a history lesson. But, what the hell, the did a 1969 thowback game and wore their ‘70 unis so the don’t even have their OWN history right.
Idiots.
#29 by Tony Miller on 07.05.08 1:10 pm |
=bg= said:
Isn’t that redundant?
#30 by Jamie on 07.05.08 1:10 pm |
Oh my god I love How It’s Made. It makes me feel like the hugest dork that has ever lived, but how I love it so. Good choice, Bryan.
#31 by Samuel Lam on 07.05.08 1:12 pm |
I thought that the new cool base uniform grey differentials were out of place for the Jays, then I just realized that it was just AJ Burnett having sweat problems
#32 by Adam on 07.05.08 1:14 pm |
Ricko said:
When was this? And besides from the MLB patch, what was the difference between the two?
#33 by Bryan Redemske on 07.05.08 1:15 pm |
Jamie said:
You’re not a huge dork if you’re learning something by watching TV. Well, maybe you are, but you’re still learning something.
Oh, and the White Sox caps are definitely brown. There are other images out there, and I unfortunately looked at all of them. They’re brown.
#34 by =bg= on 07.05.08 1:18 pm |
http://online.wsj.co...
Nike & Adidas battle for Olympic dominance
#35 by Mike Edgerly on 07.05.08 1:21 pm |
Check out this Jersey Mosaic displayed on today’s Tour de France route,
http://d.yimg.com/us...
#36 by Mike Engle on 07.05.08 1:21 pm |
Samuel Lam said:
No, it’s off. The standard Cool-Base gray is indeed different from the standard double-knit gray. Terribly frustrating.
I would make a comment here about those damn “Blue” Jays uniforms, but I don’t think I need to. I’ve made it clear many times before that they have my least favorite current uniform set in baseball.
#37 by Ricko on 07.05.08 1:24 pm |
Adam said:
1969: Royal blue and white with powder blue road unis.
1970: Navy blue and white with gray road unis.
Honest. As a long time, uniform geek, I saw them play the Twins here both years. And have supplied Paul enough photos to verify it.
See, we learn something new here every day. Well, I know I certainly do.
#38 by Mike Edgerly on 07.05.08 1:28 pm |
try this again… URL may be too long
http://d.yimg.com/us...
#39 by Brad A. on 07.05.08 1:30 pm |
Mike Engle said:
Yes, I meant that it is no longer their primary home jersey.
#40 by Ricko on 07.05.08 1:34 pm |
Ricko said:
Dressed to the Nines has it wrong, btw.
low number ‘69 card, shot in ‘68….
http://cgi.ebay.com/...
1970 card, shot in ‘69…(that isn’t royal or powder blue…photos from this year are terribly hard to find)
http://cgi.ebay.com/...
The 1969 SI Baseball Issue shows the navy hat on the cover (have sent scan to Paul).
#41 by WarDameEagle on 07.05.08 1:36 pm |
Got to feel for Jeff Francoeur. First, he’s demoted to Double-A Mississippi. Then he’s forced to wear this monstrosity:
http://www.ajc.com/s...
#42 by Ricko on 07.05.08 1:41 pm |
WarDameEagle said:
Wow, Braves are tough. Don’t only send ‘em down, they sentence ‘em to a flagged.
#43 by Stuby on 07.05.08 1:47 pm |
To quote Rocky Balboa, Francoeur ‘looks like a flag’.
#44 by Joey Guns on 07.05.08 1:57 pm |
Not sure if this was posted on July 3rd or not…..
USA Basketball Team Photo: Artistic Or Logo “Conspiracy”?
http://www.cnbc.com/...
#45 by Mike Engle on 07.05.08 1:58 pm |
Stuby said:
Better to look like an American flag than to look like a taco. (Steve Garvey, paraphrased)
#46 by Michael Emody on 07.05.08 2:03 pm |
History lesson: the White Sox wore the same uniform set in 69 and 70. The blue was lighter than what was used from 64-68, but I wouldn’t call it “powder” blue. The caps featured the same “SOX” logo as the home jersey, not the boxey “SOX” cap logo used until then. If you look carefully, the “S” on the cap does not include extra line that connects with the “O”. True for the 69-70 caps, and the 71-74 red ones. Cap embroidery evolution.
The 69-70 blue is closer to a Dodger/Cub blue, no pinstipes on the home uni, and the road uniforms were GREY. There’s something about the photography and mass production of Topps cards that gives a blue-ish tint to some of the photos of the Sox from that period. There are no powder blue road uni’s from 69-70. And BTW, the name and numbers on the back were blue, not white like the front lettering, and in the exact format/fonts used throughout the 60’s.
Dressed to the Nines is right, and there ARE alot of photos from those years. Oh, and on a more confusing note – photos taken at spring training in 69 might show the new (69-70) hats on players wearing 68 uni’s. You can definately find 64 caps on players wearing 63 road jerseys in s.t. at the site below.
Go to http://www.whitesoxp... and have fun.
#47 by KT on 07.05.08 2:07 pm |
Nick said:
One person can’t be a line. :)
#48 by Adam on 07.05.08 2:21 pm |
Ricko said:
Interesting. It was well before I was born, and I was just trusting Dressed to the Nines (which does show a slight color change, but I assumed it was just a bad scan). So, the other part of my question was, when did they wear the wrong throwback, and (my main reason for asking, since I don’t like unjustified critisism of the Sox) was it at home or on the road (since, on the road, it wouldn’t be their fault, right?)
#49 by Ricko on 07.05.08 2:36 pm |
Adam said:
Could point. It was the road uniform. Maybe MLB doesn’t consult the visiting teams to verify. You’d think they would, but maybe not.
Come to think of it, they probably wouldn’t cuz visitors apt to say, “Hey, it’s your deal.”
Doesn’t alter my opinion of camo on 4th, though (Padres did, too). My view is that Veterans Day, Memorial Day and Armed Forces Day are to honor those who protect—and have protected—our freedoms. Independence Day is to honor those who gave them to us in the first place. They deserve a day to themselves. They pulled off the most extraordinary rebellion in history, defeating the most powerful army in the world in the process, and created an equally extraordinary form of government.
#50 by ForestGlade on 07.05.08 3:00 pm |
I’m looking for a little help. I picked up a vintage Houston Astros jersey, but I’m trying to find out exactly when they wore this. Here’s a link
http://www.facebook....
Any help would be appreciated
#51 by erik on 07.05.08 3:09 pm |
I also bought one of the Stars & Stripes caps. I went to the PHI-NYM game yesterday and they didn’t look half bad on either team. I happen to like how they look, and think it’s a decent gimmick.
#52 by BurghFan on 07.05.08 3:17 pm |
I picked up a vintage Houston Astros jersey, but I’m trying to find out exactly when they wore this.
It’s based on their mid-to-late ’90s unis, but I don’t believe they actually wore that on-field.
#53 by BurghFan on 07.05.08 3:22 pm |
So, the other part of my question was, when did they wear the wrong throwback, and (my main reason for asking, since I don’t like unjustified critisism of the Sox) was it at home or on the road (since, on the road, it wouldn’t be their fault, right?)
Could point. It was the road uniform. Maybe MLB doesn’t consult the visiting teams to verify. You’d think they would, but maybe not.
It would be good to find out exactly who has what responsibility for TBTC games. I doubt that the visiting team shows up and finds a set of throwbacks that are supposed to fit, so they must be involved to some extent.
#54 by Mike Engle on 07.05.08 3:23 pm |
ForestGlade said:
My first instinct is that that is a fashion jersey, as opposed to a legitimate “home alternate.” The Astros wore that design idea from 1994 to 1999 (time-line here), and, as you can see, pinstripes were not part of the equation until the christening of Enron Field. I have a hard time believing the Astros would wear a metallic gold top with pinstripes when they probably would not have had pinstriped pants at that time, let alone metallic gold pants. But hey, for $4, wear it in good health.
#55 by Ricko on 07.05.08 3:34 pm |
Hey, Cardinal fans!
Want to see the best color motion footage ever shot of the early 50’s Cardinals uniforms?
Watch first few minutes of STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND at 7 pm EDT on Turner Classic Movies.
Worth TIVO’ing…esp. for any Cardinal fan.
#56 by Brian on 07.05.08 3:35 pm |
I bought a Yankees Stars and Stripes hat, and they were selling like hotcakes at Lids the last two days.
And for the record, I haven’t really heard anyone not liking these hats outside of this site.
#57 by Brian on 07.05.08 3:36 pm |
I loved Tek’s gear BTW.
#58 by Mike Engle on 07.05.08 3:38 pm |
Brian said:
Not to sound elitist, but we Get It(tm).
#59 by Greg B on 07.05.08 3:42 pm |
If anybody cares, MLB is not using the commemorative baseballs (like this one in this pic: http://farm4.static....) like they insinuated they would in games this weekend for the “Welcome Back Veterans” promotion.
#60 by Kek on 07.05.08 3:45 pm |
CFL stuff, found this on one of my helmet collecting groups:
Edmonton Eskimos anniversary logo: http://www.edmontons...
The 34 second mark of this video shows a decent shot of the logo: http://www.youtube.c...
Here’s a shot of the logo: http://i214.photobuc...
Watching that video, I thought it was pretty odd seeing a WR wearing #71 (although I remember a guy wearing #75 for Edmonton years ago but I can’t remember who it was).
Also, I watch all the highlight packages the league puts on youtube because since Fox changed the Atlantic, Central and Pacific channels to Fox College Sports I can’t get my fix of an occasional game on TV. I’ve always like the style of play more exciting north of the border so I’ve followed the league with interest and I also follow BC a lot because I went to high school with Geroy Simon.
That all being said, when did the refs stop wearing stirrups? I thought they were one of the last leagues with the zebras still sporting them.
#61 by Elena G on 07.05.08 4:24 pm |
I thought it was stupid they had the Cards and Cubs both wearing the same color cap yesterday. Of course,the Cardinals do already wear navy caps on the road, and navy with a red bill on Sundays at home. But the Cubs don’t wear that shade of blue. If MLB was forcing everyone to wear the stars and stripes logo, at least keep them on their normal color caps. Obviously, there are fans who will buy anything. I think the Tek chest protector is a bit much.
#62 by Michael Emody on 07.05.08 4:27 pm |
So… um… when did the White Sox wear the wrong color TBTC uni’s? They’ve been home the past week. Seems like something we’d have seen photo’s of. Honestly, I think powder blue would’ve look better on the 69-70 roads, but it just ain’t so…
#63 by erik on 07.05.08 5:00 pm |
I happen to think the S&S caps look pretty nice, at least for the Phils. I don’t think A’s fans should be jumping all over this, because blue/red/white don’t exactly go well with green/yellow. And just because people like the S&S caps doesn’t mean they are completely lost and don’t Get It(tm). It may just mean they like the cap.
#64 by Buckeye Mike on 07.05.08 5:25 pm |
Mike said:
No I was meaning the camo unis the Reds were going to wear. What ever happened to them?
#65 by Mark K on 07.05.08 5:37 pm |
Kek said:
The CFL officials have new uniforms this year.
#66 by Jeremy on 07.05.08 5:47 pm |
Mike Engle said:
If you ask me, this is by far one of the better “gimmicks” that a sports league has come up with in the recent future. Sure, it doesn’t look great on every team, but that’s life. I understand that it’s a deviation from the normal uniforms, and for teams like the A’s or the Reds they look pretty close to terrible, but there is no reason to shit on everything.
#67 by Brian on 07.05.08 5:53 pm |
erik said:
^That^
#68 by Giancarlo on 07.05.08 6:03 pm |
Ricko,
If your first Tommy John link is a ‘68 photo how is he wearing the ‘69 MLB logo on his sleeve?
Also, if the Sox wore royal blue in ‘69 why does the Sports Illustrated cover feature a navy cap?
#69 by Giancarlo on 07.05.08 6:12 pm |
Aha, I can answer my first question: you were just off by a year identifying those two baseball cards.
#70 by James P. on 07.05.08 6:40 pm |
That Astros jersey is just a fashion jersey and not based on anything they have ever worn.
As for Tek’s pads: I got a Captain America vibe from them…just needed one star on his chest instead of 6…
#71 by James P. on 07.05.08 6:40 pm |
James P. said:
er…8…I misscounted the stars…
#72 by Mike Engle on 07.05.08 6:57 pm |
Jeremy said:
OK, we clearly aren’t seeing the implied {/sarcasm> tag.
On a serious note, I’ve had it with today’s age of merchandise design. No, I’m not a sucker to buy EVERYTHING with my team’s logo on it, no matter the color, pet cause, or day of the week, and I resent being treated like one.
You know why Charles O. Finley picked Kelly green, old gold, and wedding dress white for his Kansas City Athletics? Simply because it would look bitchin’ on those hi-tech color TV’s. Unfortunately, in my lifetime, I’ve seen a way too crowded black bandwagon, purple AND teal together, and the cloned Astros in the form of the D-Backs because “red is clearly a fashionable color right now.” And now I have to see teams dilute their brand identity and kill their look in the name of charity cookie-cutter hats that look like crap on TV because it’s hard to see either the logo or the flag motif from far away? Really? I’m supposed to like that? Sorry, I’m not buying.
#73 by Jonah on 07.05.08 7:07 pm |
Buckeye Mike said:
Unless I am mistaken, the link provided above clearly states the camo jerseys are for July 5… i.e. tonight.
#74 by Robert on 07.05.08 7:12 pm |
I am late getting to the comments today, but chalk me up as thinking the stars and sort-of-stripes catching gear looks pretty damn cool.
#75 by Ricko on 07.05.08 7:33 pm |
Giancarlo said:
Ooops, always get that messed up cuz Sox wore four dif. unis in four years, and sometimes I get lost in the middle of the discussion. Also have some kind of mental block that I have to keep reminding myself the red pins came in ‘71, not ‘70.
Anyway, here’s what it should say: First Tommy John card is a ‘70, shot in ‘69, second was shot in ‘70, and it was the ‘70 SI Baseball Issue cover that had the navy hat, along with all the other MLB hats, so obvious is navy with Dodgers, Mets and Cubs hats in same collage (duh, of course ‘70, cuz photo surrounded by hats is of Jerry Koosman, so followed Mets’ ‘69 Series win and cuz shows a “speculated” cap for the new Brewers…scrambled eggs with sanserif M).
Sorry about that. Can I blame it on early Alzheimer’s?
That, and the fact that everyone seems to have this wrong, and I’ve explained it SO many times. I just know that from the third or fourth row at old Met Stadium, maybe 15 feet from White Sox players, it’s easy to tell the difference between Royal and Navy, between Powder Blue and Gray. A good clue: White Sox and Twins hats different colors in ‘69, same color in ‘70.
With regard to White Sox throwback, have no idea when or where was from. Someone posted it here recently cuz was on ebay. A road uni in Navy and gray color scheme, WITH ‘69 shoulder patch and saying was a TBTC to ‘69 uni.
Here’s another ‘71 card shot in ‘70. Yeah, the direct sun is making McCraw’s sanis look kinda bright, but there’s no way that’s a royal hat or sleeves or a powder blue uni. Plus, no ‘69 patch, but the mourning band worn in ‘70, which shows on the second Tommy John card, too (I’m not saying these cards are what tell me all this, just that they’re the best visual confirmation I’ve been able to find so far).
http://cgi.ebay.com/...
#76 by Kek on 07.05.08 7:33 pm |
Bucs and Brewers in some snazzy looking negro league unis tonight.
#77 by Ricko on 07.05.08 7:40 pm |
Michael Emody said:
They did wear powder blue, with the ‘69 Royal version. The ‘70 Topps card of manager Don Gutteridge and an oversized ‘70 Topps card of Luis Aparicio, when seen in person, leave no doubt they were powder blue.
That and, as I said, I sat 15 feet from a whole team of players wearing that powder and royal combo. And in virtually the same spot a year later when they wore gray and navy instead.
#78 by Ricko on 07.05.08 7:41 pm |
Ah-HA!
http://cgi.ebay.com/...
#79 by mkwing on 07.05.08 7:42 pm |
=bg= said:
Trivia Time: adidas is named after founder Adolf Dassler. When adidas first hit the US in the late ’60s, their biggest rival was the shoe founded by his brother, Rudolf. What company was that? (Answer in my next post below.)
#80 by mkwing on 07.05.08 7:42 pm |
It was Puma.
#81 by Michael Emody on 07.05.08 7:56 pm |
Ricko said:
That’s what I’m talking about. It’s grey. If you look at enough photos of players in 69 jerseys, with the MLB patch, most are obviously grey. Here: http://www.thatsmybo....
#82 by MattO on 07.05.08 8:03 pm |
Jonah said:
And man do they look bad!!!!!!
#83 by Michael Emody on 07.05.08 8:09 pm |
Ricko said:
I just looked at the Gutteridge card again. Look at the stands behind him – see alot of blue? The same shade of blue? It’s the photo. The light might have too bright and they tried to compensate with a blue filter when developing the photo. My guess.
#84 by Ricko on 07.05.08 8:19 pm |
Michael Emody said:
I grow tired of arguing about what is a fact. Compare baseball card photos so the quality of color reproduction is the same. From 15 feet, you can tell a powder blue uni when you see one. Also, in ‘67 and for years prior to that, White Sox’ powder blue had been their road trademark. That’s why when they went to gray in ‘70 was such an aberration, and they immediately returned to powder blue in ‘71.
Also remember that, because it was a woven fabric, the older powder blue wasn’t nearly as intense as the double knit version that came later. It was a LOT more subtle and in many photographs did/does look gray. Besides, blue is the color of the spectrum that registers the least in color photography. Almost always washes out somewhat. In person, though, the difference was unmistakable.
’66’s don’t exactly look gray on the SI cover below, but you CAN see what I mean about the powder blue being far less saturated than later unis like Phillies, Expos, Twins and White Sox, for that matter. In fact, those double knit powder blues almost always are more intense even in person than they are in photos or on TV…because of blue registing far better on the eye than it does through a lens.
http://vault.sportsi...
This for comparison (shoot, I have this cover and this scan isn’t even as intense as the real cover, much less the actual uniform):
http://vault.sportsi...
#85 by Ricko on 07.05.08 8:29 pm |
Michael Emody said:
No, I’m saying photographer opened up an f-stop or to two to make sure he DID capture the blue of the uniform. He wanted the colors to look right…that’s why he also captured so much blue in the background.
#86 by Ricko on 07.05.08 8:32 pm |
Ricko said:
Michael Emody said:
Those are empty blue seats. Turned up. So, yeah, there’s gonna be a lotta blue no matter what.
#87 by Johnny O on 07.05.08 8:43 pm |
Kek said:
Both the Crew and the Pirates looking good tonight. They Crew even have the old Milwaukee Bears “M” in the dirt behind home plate, and went the distance with matching helmets as well.
#88 by Ricko on 07.05.08 8:51 pm |
Johnny O said:
They wearing this…?
http://www.negroleag...
and this (although this a road uni)…
http://www.negroleag...
or these, which they wore in ‘06 and differ greatly from the those at the Negro Leagues site (could just be big difference between home and road, of couse, cuz team only existed for one year)…
http://brewcrew.mlbl...
#89 by Phil Pereira on 07.05.08 8:52 pm |
FC Porto 08-09 kits
away http://www.football-...
home http://www.football-...
#90 by Ricko on 07.05.08 8:52 pm |
Ricko said:
I mean the Brewers wore them in ‘06.
#91 by Johnny O on 07.05.08 9:28 pm |
Ricko said:
Yes, to the latter:
http://d.yimg.com/us...
http://d.yimg.com/us...
Pirates wearing these:
http://d.yimg.com/us...
#92 by jokiebird on 07.05.08 9:33 pm |
This is a silly one, but did anybody catch the anthem during Friday’s Yanks-Sawx game? They had the mic box upside down. The Yankee logo was pointed toward the bottom of the mic.
#93 by Kevin M. on 07.05.08 9:51 pm |
In the Braves game tonight Chipper was batting right handed but came up to the plate with a left handed helmet…Joe Simpson made reference to the fact that he had done it again. Wonder how often this happens?
#94 by Greg B on 07.05.08 10:13 pm |
Has anybody found a good pic of the Stars-n-Stripes caps the umpires are wearing? They look nice from what I’ve seen on TV.
#95 by Ricko on 07.05.08 10:26 pm |
Johnny O said:
Thanks. Hmmm… Big difference in the colors and look shown on the Negro Leagues site. As I mentioned earlier, the team was around for only one season. I suppose their home and road unis could have been that different from one another. But unless some photos exist (none show up on google image search)…who knows.
#96 by Ricko on 07.05.08 10:34 pm |
Brewers as Bears…
http://sports.yahoo....
#97 by Chris A on 07.05.08 11:09 pm |
Hope someone else caught this: Web Gems on Baseball Tonight, #2 was the Twins second baseman with a play…..Twins second baseman had a red hat on, Morneau had a navy hat on….what gives?
#98 by Ricko on 07.05.08 11:32 pm |
Chris A said:
Red caps were Marine Corps. Twins honored Armed Forces tonight so caps were assorted. ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE, USMC, USCG. Had small TC on one side.
#99 by Ricko on 07.05.08 11:36 pm |
Reds did camo tonight.
http://sports.yahoo....
#100 by Ricko on 07.05.08 11:38 pm |
Twins…
http://sports.yahoo....
#101 by Ricko on 07.05.08 11:40 pm |
More Twins…
http://www.twincitie...
#102 by Eric B in KC on 07.06.08 12:02 am |
Did I see FDNY on one of the Twins’ caps?
#103 by James Craven on 07.06.08 12:08 am |
That Edmonton Eskimos 60th Anniversary logo looks like it was designed by a ten-year-old.
As for the Reds, Twins and Pale Hose (I’ll pass on the Brewers and Bucs as that was planned before hand,) don’t you think Interim Commissioner for the Millennium “This Bud’s For You” Selig will dock them a hundered thousand bucks for breaking the edict on wearing the Stars and Stripes hats? Donated to WelcomeHomeVets.org as well?
#104 by Steven on 07.06.08 1:06 am |
Eric B in KC said:
Red caps was USMC, looks like Army hats were black, Air Force were Blue, Navy I’d guess were Navy. Coast Guard?
Love the Angels S&S hat.
On the Porto shirts….Like the Home, not the aways.
On OlympicGate-clearly Howard was posed.
#105 by Brian on 07.06.08 1:36 am |
James Craven said:
I doubt it.
Most of thoes promotions seemed planned way ahead of time, and were probably pre-approved.
#106 by Samuel Lam on 07.06.08 3:07 am |
Mike Engle said:
I thought so too. but if you look at the sleeve, there’s a spot on it that looks dry
but then again, it could be the cool base and my eyes are just playing tricks on me
#107 by rhymeister on 07.06.08 8:45 am |
Varitek just looks like a catcher and is always styling in his uniform.