Monday Morning Uni Watch

mmuw hed

By Phil Hecken

“Are you ready for some football?” Of course you are. The first week of the preseason is in the books, except for tonight’s MNF featuring the unusually early pairing of the Jets vs. Giants. We got our first looks at the 2010 unis, and, as we expected, not much has changed. We’ll get to the new Colts throwbacks in a minute, but lets take a look around the league at the other games:

New Orleans Saints @ New England Patriots: Defending Super Bowl Champs New Orleans in white tops and gold pants (which look great) against New England in blue over silver. New Orleans still can’t get their golds to match. If only they’d dump the vegas gold for old gold, that uni would be close to perfect.

Carolina Panthers @ Baltimore Ravens: Ravens in purple over white vs. Panthers in all white, which (IMHO) is their best look. It appears some of the Panthers are outfitted in the new uniform cuts, which particularly truncates the shoulder “loops” and really makes them look awful.

Oakland Raiders @ Dallas Cowboys: A good looking matchup, as always, with two classic looks. The ‘boys will sport their “50” patch all season, and looks like their pants still have that greenish hue. And the Raiders are still the black and silver, in all its glory. Seriously, is that not one of the top-10 ALL TIME great NFL uniforms?

Buffalo Bills @ Washington Redskins: Washington busts out the white at home with burgundy pants while Buffalo looks as bad as ever. New ‘skins coach Mike Shanahan keeps the classic pants (although there are still a rumored gold alternate) with the proper WHITE socks.

Jacksonville Jaguars @ Philadelphia Eagles: Philly goes with the all white look versus J-ville. What a mess the Jags’ jerseys are, with some guys wearing the classic or full cut (notice the black and white “stripes”) while others sport the modern cut where the stripes are completely bisected at the armpit. Considering the Jags just introduced this uni last year, you’d think someone would have realized that “style” might encounter problems. It’s not a good look with either jersey cut, but it looks particularly bad when both styles are worn at the same time.

Kansas City Chiefs @ Atlanta Falcons: Chiefs keep the white pants/white jerseys/white socks look for 2010 (which, although I like, they really should wear red undersocks for more contrast), and still have the AFL patch on the chest. The new jersey cut basically obliterates the red-gold-red sleeve stripe at the hem. The Falcons went with their “standard” red over white look (which is their best), despite all the bumper stickers.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers @ Miami Dolphins: Ah…who doesn’t love a game played in the mud? Dolphins looked great in their aqua over white (and the mud of the…um…what’s it called now? Sun Life Stadium???). While I don’t like the pewter of the Bucs, they probably should have gone “helmets match pants” down in Miami for a good contrast. Jim Vilk approves of these conditions.

Detroit Lions @ Pittsburgh Steelers: More elements in play as the Lions in white and Stillers in black, each with classic contrasting pants, put on a very visually appealing game. Throw in some rain and it was nigh on perfect. Add varsity block numbers to each jersey and it would be.

Houston Texans @ Arizona Cardinals: Despite wearing their least obnoxious uniforms, these two teams are still visually not quite right. The Cardinals bumper stickers are numerous and covered before, but the Texans need to get white socks to wear with their blue pants. And has anyone noticed that most receivers are now going full-on bicycle pant and no pads at all?

Minnesota Vikings @ St. Louis Rams: Ugh. The Vikes uni just looks all wrong — like, unfinished or something — the panels on the side of the pants (which look bad enough) should really form one solid line, not start white, go purple, then end in a gold stripe. And the Rams are apparently favoring the white pants over their gold ones. Good look here at the Vikes “50” seasons patch.

Cleveland Browns @ Green Bay Packers: Probably the best looking game of the preseason. The Browns have (hopefully) scrapped the ridiculous brown pants and gone back to their iconic all white uni with white socks. Not too many teams look great with that much white — the Browns do. And of course, the Pack look spectacular as always. If you had to pick the top 10 best (or most iconic) uniforms in the NFL over the past 50 years, easily the Browns in all white and the Packers homes would be on that list.

Tennessee Titans @ Seattle Seahawks: The Titans sported their best outfit (white over powder) while the Seahawks, in what could be a new uniform direction under Pete Carroll, did not go monochrome, but instead wore suicide blue over navy blue (although it’s hard to tell in those photos). I actually watched a part of that game and the contrast was better than in the photos. While it’s not as good as dark over white pants, it’s still better than the monochrome of the past. Now, if they could just wear white socks so as to avoid the leotard look, they’d be getting somewhere.

Chicago Bears @ San Diego Chargers: Da Bears went with their sometimes-worn deep blue pants under white tops, while the Chargers were in their very nice dark royal over white. Bears players who wore the new cut jerseys almost lost their stripes, while I’m not sure what was going on with Jay Cutler’s jersey. He’s got sleeves, but that cut is absolutely bizarre.

Denver Broncos @ Cincinnati Bengals: In what may have just been a “warm weather move,” the Bengals wore white at home yesterday against the Broncos, who were dressed in navy over white. Hard to believe that that uniform was introduced by (who else?) Nike in 1997. Sure has stood the test of time, eh? (TPFIC). On the other hand, the Bengals, who have (arguably) the worst uniform in the NFL, actually look pretty good in white. No bumper sticker side panels, socks contrast with pants…and just the right amount of tiger stripes.

And finally…

San Francisco 49ers @ Indianapolis Colts: The Niners, who have returned to the almost perfect uniform, faced off against the Colts in their 1955 throwbacks. The Colts uni didn’t differ that much from their current uni (which has remained virtually unchanged since 1957), save for four differences: Blue helmets with white horseshoes, three sleeve stripes (instead of shoulder loops), single pants stripe, and three blue stripes on white socks. How’d the do? Pretty spot on; the pants stripe of 2010 appeared slightly thicker than in 1955. But aside from that, the Colts nailed it

The new jersey cuts, unfortunately, were another story. While they were perfect on QB’s and kickers, on linebackers and running backs (and anyone with the new jersey), there were just three half moon stripes. On receivers and those with not quite full sleeves, the stripes were similarly truncated. At least, however, every player had three stripes (whether full or truncated) on their jersey. Contrast this to the 49ers, who are supposed to have 3 stripes, but who range anywhere from almost three full to just barely two to maybe one visible stripe. You’d think, since this uniform was new to the 49ers last season, that they’d have been better able to design the jersey to account for the disappearing sleeve.

Alas, there is no longer any point in bemoaning the loss of the sleeve — after all Ricko already provided the solution a year ago — and the compression sleeves are already here. Just take those stripes off what’s left of the sleeve and move ’em down to the compression sleeve (and throw some white stripes on those Niner red socks). Done and done.

More pics of the Niners vs. Colts can be viewed here.


I’m looking forward, as always, to the upcoming football season. While not ONE SINGLE TEAM has introduced a new regular uniform, there will be plenty of new and old alternates and throwbacks, so the Madden generation won’t be too bored. I sure hope the Colts break out the ’55’s again, preferably in a nationally televised game, since they look great with the blue helmets and three stripes. And if the teams stick with the uniforms they wore in the opening week of the preseason, for the most part, those were some pretty good looks.


67 Kilmer DIYDIY Saints 1967 Jersey

Got a note from Tom M., who created a pretty awesome 1967 Saints Jersey. And I do mean sweet. Here’s Tom to explain:

Thought you might be interested in my 67 DIY Saints jersey. Since jerseys from the Saints’ first season are virtually unobtainable, I decided to make my own.

I first acquired a blank Durene jersey on ebay. Bigger than I wanted but they are getting hard to come by. Then I ordered some stock 4″ TV numbers from Eastern Lettering in black and old gold. Also ordered sheets of tackle twill material in the same colors. The old skinny font is no longer available so I had to make my own. From old photos of Bill Kilmer, I made a 10″ drawing of front numbers. It took a while to measure off the old pics and try to make it look right in that old skinny type. I used the drawing to make patterns for the front numbers, and also to make 12″ numbers for the back. The numbers were cut out of the tackle twill material, and then ironed on in the too-far-apart style of the Saints/Southland Athletic of the period. I fashioned the sleeve stripes from black nylon material with 1″ old gold stripes ironed on. I then shipped the whole thing off to my seamstress to secure the numbers and stripes with zig-zag stitching. The jersey is very stout. Could play a game in it if necessary.


Tom, Lafayette, LA

Thanks Tom. Looks great!


ticker 2Uni Watch News Ticker: Starting off today is Marc, who noted these patches, from our friend Jerry Reuss–he just uploaded them the other day. Great stuff! … More oddities with the A’s helmet decals, notes Brandon Davis. Kevin Kouzmanoff recently cracked his helmet and got a new helmet with the correct A’s decal. Not sure when it changed but as of August 8, Coco Crisp’s helmet decal is the old version when in fact he started the season with a correct decal. The last photo of him with a clear view was July 20, when he clearly had the new decal. … Great photo of the Giants vs. Redskins from 1975 (thanks to John Weghorst) — the white facemasks, the one-year “ny” decal, the blue pants — what’s not to love? … Still more out of state license plates comes from Rob Turning, who lets us know that Maryland also offers several out-of-state collegiate plates — Ohio State; Villanova; Virginia State; Virginia Tech; Miami University; The Other Miami; Clemson; and Delaware. Rob states that you can search them all in the Organizational Plates section of the Maryland MVA website. … John Holland (with this link) and Bill Sour with this link note Colorado State’s new unis. … Uni Watch Prexy Paul Lukas tops all those pics with this which “shows a better view of how the tiny ram horns look like pubic hair.” Uh. Sweet? … Jared Saltalamacchia made his Red Sox debut late in last week’s blow out in Toronto, notes Andy Chalifour. “Thank goodness it was on the road so we got to see the name spelled out on the Sox uniform. It should also be noted Salty is the second Red Sox this season (Kevin Cash) to be wearing the front facing catchers helmet.” … And just to show how UWers “think alike,” Jason Levine independently sent this thought: “Not sure if this was already brought up. I have been a fan of Kevin Cash’s front-facing helmet mainly for the sheer novelty of it. Cash is on the DL, but I didn’t realize his replacement, Jarod Saltalamacchia, is a front-facer, too. Salty has been a front-facer since his days in Texas. Gotta think no team has had two front-facers on the roster in the same season.” … Bill Scrowther was going throught some packed up boxes, and found some stuff of interest: Atlanta Falcons plush toy. “If I had to guess, circa 1982 or so.” And, a San Diego Padres magazine from 1992. Says bill, “Check out those stirrups–sweet.” … Bob Selby was looking at a 1977 Sports Illustrated article. “Look at those nasty Nike socks. Nice unis, though.” … John Muir invites us to open a ‘virtual pack’ of cards for minutes of mindless fun.. … Alex Puncochar was watching his homestate Minnesota little league team in the Midwest Regional semis of the Little League World Series, and noticed that the opposing team, Missouri, has a few players who are wearing stirrups. They are Grade A stirrups, sannies and everything. They have about 5-6 stripes. Could this mean a new generation of baseball players are going back to stirrups? We can only hope. … Gary Jop noticed a “wrong uni in an ad” with a Bob’s Home Furniture goof on the TV numbers in this ad on If he was number “01” then 0 wouldn’t show on the front of his right shoulder. …Terence Kearns “Loved the post on the Nats’ curly dubya! We all know it’s similarities to that “National” drug store chain. So much so, that I DIY’d this cap recently.” … Alyssa Miller was checking out Cricinfo’s pictures of the day and “I came upon an item that absolutely must be entered into the collection of worst, most ridiculous headgear ever. Check out Scotland’s wicket keeper (I believe his name’s Simon Smith) in this picture. Normal wicket keepers wear helmets that look like the batters’ helmets, or don’t wear helmets at all.” Says Alyssa, “That…thing…on this particular wicket keeper’s face is…umm…well, the word embarrassing comes to mind but doesn’t come near describing how silly it looks. Actually, in trying to find the reasoning for Smith’s wearing of such a stupid mask, I came upon a wicket keeper’s mask from 2007 that is almost as awful. It’s as if cricket has turned into the mid-20th century NHL.” … Paul Lukas also notes the Sabres will be unveiling a new third jersey on September 18th. … Jay Gonsalves found a awesome new “sponsor” for EPL unis. … David Evertson offers this great AFL Program Art (from the great MM Bolding site). … Good one from Aaron Parrish who says, “Apparently, spelling isn’t big in ”˜Bama. Or ‘Mississippi’ is just a really hard word.” … Jeremy Fallis grabbed some twitpics of the new Penn State Nike Elite Jerseys, and the shorts. … “Sorry for the crappy cell phone pic,” apologizes Chris Short, “but spotted this real-life Ullman pin-up at my favourite brunch spot in Toronto today and fell in love.” Um, yeah. There’s no apology necessary. … More from John Muir: New Tampa Bay goalie Dan Ellis shares one side of his new mask. … Robert Turning says Division III Stevenson University (MD) unveiled their new athletics logo, “and it’s awful.” … Tim Mulgrew found an article where Carl Crawford was speaking of rups: “His uncle Jack played parts of three seasons in the Angels’ system before returning to Crawford’s hometown of Houston, where he continued to play in local leagues. Carl Crawford went to some of Jack’s games and wanted to start playing baseball — because of his uncle’s red uniform. ‘Basically I just got more interested in his uniform than anything,” Crawford said. “I wanted to wear the same uniform that my uncle had on. It was red and it was those little stirrups that I really fell in love with.'” … Jeff Hunter notes new Kentucky uni numbers. … Great spot by Matthew Blinco who spotted a New York Football Giants helmet in David Wright’s locker. … Jeff Vanden Langenberg saw this jersey at the WI state fair Thursday. “I know there’s a lot of alternate jerseys out there, authentic and otherwise, sometimes the numbers aren’t the right style or color, things like that. But this powder blue Brewers jersey has the right font and look, but that was the look of the home white jersey,” say Jeff. “The baby blue had a script Milwaukee on it. But this one, selling for 69.99, combined the two.” … Jared Camden has a few items for us: “First pick is from the Michael Vick 30 for 30. Old picture of 2 Hampton Crabbers RB’s, amazing helmets and amazing jerseys! Next is interim coach, for the Cincinnati Redleggas,’ Chris Speier’s [career 3-0 as a coach lol] odd hat bend, no idea how you get that kind of fold on a hat. Next picture is of the Redleggas’ backstop which was clearly altered during the now famous bench clearing brawl. “,,“. Next picture, and maybe i am just behind the times, is Hanley Ramirez’s “Boombah” undershirt, never seen it. Aaaaaand this last one is bought to you by Jay Bruce who wants you to know how most Redlegga’ fans will always view Old Man Jim Edmonds (as a dick.)” … Jim Taggert says, “The Wilmington Blue Rocks wore this camo cap (Friday) in their game against the Salem Red Sox. Each players cap was auctioned off after the game. Also, the Rocks alts are friggin sweet.” Indeed, but why would they wear the camo cap with the powder blue top? … Josh Coney notes that to honor the memory of legendary New York Yankees owner and longtime Tampa resident and benefactor George Steinbrenner, Hillsborough County’s public school football teams will place his initials on the back of every player’s helmet for the entire season. … Still working while on vacation, Paul informs us the ram horn motif on the new Colorado State football uniforms is also showing up on the school’s new women’s volleyball uniforms. … Rob Naylor was watching the EPL match between Wigan Athletic and Blackpool and noticed the Wigan goalkeeper wearing a baseball cap. “Obviously, this isn’t a normal part of the football uniform,” says Rob. “The cap doesn’t appear to have any “logo creep” but I thought it was noteworthy nonetheless.” … Rob Ullman presents the “Inaugural Season” patch for the Penguins new building. … Good spot by Matthew Wolfram who took these screen grabs of Dodgers pitcher Ted Lilly, and asks, “Is he wearing his undershirt backwards?” … Rick Friedel has a couple of Ravens notes — Derrick Mason wearing stirrups?! Outside the show at that. Also, it was mentioned back in January about a new practice patch, so just in case someone cares Derrick figured he would forward it to us. … Donnie Kwak curates The Top 20 Kits of the European Soccer Season across all leagues on the continent. … Blue Jays bobble headhead error alert from Neate Sager who noticed the Dave Stieb bobblehead the Jays are giving away (or selling) during their Sept. 2 game, the 20th anniversary of his 1990 no-hitter, is historically inaccurate. “The figurine has him in road gray with the blue-and-white cap, which is a good seller,” says Neate. “The Jays never wore a blue-and-white cap with that uniform. They introduced a solid-blue road cap in 1989, when they switched powder blue for gray.” … Kevin Clark reports that the Lakewood BlueClaws wore these jerseys Sunday night, which were auctioned after the game to raise funds for the American Cancer Society.


Phew…that’s it for today — there will be a whole mess of NBA uni unveilings today (Cavs, Mavs, Wolves, Clips & Jazz); some of these have already been leaked, but they will become “official” later today. Paul will have something on the mothership & I will likely have much more on these tomorrow. Yay…the NBA. Where Amazing Shit Stuff Happens. I Love This Game.


Pressure is something you feel when you don’t know what the hell you’re doing. — Peyton Manning

205 comments to Monday Morning Uni Watch

  • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 7:37 am |

    I don’t really like the Colts throwback uniforms anyway – I think they’re a big step backwards from what the team actually wears – Yay for historical accuracy, Boo for aesthetics. But I didn’t realize how much worse it looks on the side of the helmet with the relocated flag & warning sticker.

    I don’t know why we need flags or warning stickers on the helmets anyway. I understand the need for warning stickers on replica helmets and youth helmets, but not at the pro level. Any player in the NFL should know that there’s still an injury risk and that you’re an idiot if you lead with your head. They’ve only been playing the sport for their entire life. Duh. As for the flag, it has no business being on the uniform at all, in any sport.

    I also wish the Rams would quit screwing around and wear the gold pants like they’re supposed to. They’re the only team in the league using the combination of gold & navy, don’t minimize the gold.

    • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 8:54 am |

      Apparently a lot of them are idiots, since so many still lead with their heads. Instead of a warning sticker, each helmet should have a radio just like the quarterbacks, only the defenders should have a recording of “don’t lead with your head” played in a constant loop.

      Amen on the Gold pants.

      • Andy | August 16, 2010 at 9:14 am |

        It seems like the Rams’ official preference, according to the style guide, is to primarily wear the white and blue pants.

        • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 10:33 am |

          is it me? or shouldn’t anybody/everybody who says, “i noticed somebody fudge up, ops, my bad,” do some sort of penance? like 3 immaculate receptions to the holy cow in the receptional minimum. to question if the co(a)ts wore 3 stripes is like questioning the corn mother for orange sake.

    • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 9:19 am |

      Speaking of historical accuracy, am I the only one who noticed that the ’55 uniforms had two sock stripes and the new ones had three? I didn’t see it mentioned anywhere in the article.

      • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 9:26 am |

        they actually did have three stripes on the socks — that color photo from SI, unfortunately, has most of the players wearing their white oversocks so high they cover the third blue stripe — if you look closely at the rear leg of the ballcarrier, you’ll see the third blue stripe

        • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 9:27 am |

          My mistake. I guess even back then they couldn’t regulate the high whites/low whites crowd.

        • Chance Michaels | August 16, 2010 at 3:24 pm |

          It was very common at the time for whole teams to pull their whites up high.

      • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 11:18 am |

        by the way, i was pulled by a 4×4 after the last stirrvp offering, so i live what i speak.

    • RS Rogers | August 16, 2010 at 1:56 pm |

      U.S. Flag Code (U.S. Code 36, §176, part J):

      “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.”

      But aside from the flag desecration, which at this point every NFL team is guilty of all the time, I loved the overall look of the blue helmets on the Colts. Kind of surprised me; the Colts are the one team I like in white helmets. From the photos of yesterday’s game, I have to think that the logo would really pop on the sides in white on blue.

  • Ray Barrington | August 16, 2010 at 7:55 am |

    Well, the Brewers did wear a blue pullover with a block-lettered Brewers from 1972-78. It had a slightly darker blue than the 1979-80s model. And the arm stripes on this one are rather thin for either blue jersey.

    • Chance Michaels | August 16, 2010 at 3:18 pm |

      Yep, that’s exactly what that Brewers jersey is. A pre-78 throwback road.

      They’ve been selling them for a few years now.

  • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 8:39 am |

    is it too early to praise the bowl system as is? i know everybody and their mother wants a play~useless, right? is that not that the scuttle of butts? everybody needs a proper champ or the world might implode. paul bunyon’s axe!!! frig, is it football already?! GO! AWAY! NFL! GO AWAY FOOTBALL, I STILL HAVE SUMMER TO ENJY.
    sorry pops, i ain’t done with the summer, please don’t tackle me as if i were a twerp, er, not a terp.

    • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 8:47 am |

      You just be quiet.

      More football is a good thing. Ok, ESPN’s over-analysis of it might get a bit old… but that’s beside the point.

      I can’t wait for the New USFL to start up so we have spring football again.

      • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 8:59 am |

        And we’ve had more than a month of CFL already, which is better than the NFL.

        The throwbacks certainly are. Check out the Calgary Stampeders, who wore these beauties, Saturday:
        They went from being the worst-looking team in the league to one of the best.

        A slight boo for historical inaccuracy (facemask wasn’t red back then), but a big YAY for aesthetics.

        • Oakville Endive | August 16, 2010 at 12:26 pm |

          I agree with the assessment of the Stampeders throw back – definitely a huge improvement to what they currently wear. I thought Montreal’s Pepsi retro – looked great – in my top 10 list of any football uni – any league – sharp, bold and simple – what more can you ask. Have Saskatchewan gone permanently back to their Indy Colts look – except in green? = that would be good news. All these great CFL retros are really hi-lighting just how bad the current batch of uniforms are.

      • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 9:07 am |

        I wholeheartedly endorse rpm’s stance. Besides, I don’t follow the NFL till Thanksgiving anyway.

      • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 10:43 am |

        new USFL?! buh. espn has nothing to do with it, although it would if i had cable. but to me it means, if i may refer to our last…more darkness, the close of summer, the end of days. not to mention, um, the nfl s*cks.

  • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 8:51 am |

    by the by, never moving back to the land of mary. really, Tosu?!!! gawd i hates the plates, can we be done with it?

  • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 8:53 am |

    Regarding Saturday’s post: Didn’t the Orioles also wear the all-orange uniforms in 1972 for a few games? I believe Paul had a column on that once. Phil, you probably loved these uniforms given your preference for all-color.

    • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 9:08 am |

      yes…i posted in the comments saturday about them wearing them at least once and possibly twice in 1972 (okkonen got it correct)

      was i glad to see them? absolutely…once; that uni actually predated the poly-doubleknit era by a year (for most teams) and it’s one of the few monochromes i didn’t like, then or now…the way today’s players wear the uni, with the oversized shirts (and thankfully everyone wore socks, but alas, no rups), i can just see that getting totally butchered if worn as pajamas

      • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 9:17 am |

        You are 100 percent right about the wearing of the uniform.

        I don’t like monochrome in baseball or football. Loved the O’s orange jerseys with white pants, though.

      • duker | August 16, 2010 at 4:03 pm |

        Felix Pie wore stirrups for the game. I can’t find a pick of it though…

      • duker | August 16, 2010 at 4:12 pm |

        Here’s a video of Pie and his stirrups doubling in a run:

        Or you could watch the one where he loses the ball in the dome and falls down:

  • Terry Proctor | August 16, 2010 at 8:58 am |

    I hope my Brownies weren’t just playing with us by wearing the proper uniform the other night but when the bell rings they revert to the Brown pants (which look like crap-no pun intended) and the even uglier solid Brown socks.

    I’ve been a Browns fan since the days of Jim Brown (greatest running back ever-end of discussion), Bobby Mitchell and Lou “The Toe” Groza. The uniform, as worn last week, is one of football’s all-time iconic combos. There’s no question that these are the Cleveland Browns. No swooshes, piping, ass-backwards inserts that look like they were designed by a third-grader with the big box of 48 Crayolas. No, the Browns looked like the Browns for once. That uniform is perfect as it is. And they should wear it at home. No one has a shitfit when the Cowpies wear White at home.The Browns wore White at home when Jerry Jones was still in grade school.

    • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 9:17 am |

      Here here. Do like the brown jerseys with white pants, though.

    • marc | August 16, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

      Ugh… brown pants gotta go. Thought I would like the neo-orange pants as much as I did the original, but the originals were a different, more matte fabric and much more aesthetically pleasing. White over white is where it’s at. I don’t mind brown over white, but only when playing in places wear the home teams wears white.

      • Terry Proctor | August 16, 2010 at 2:29 pm |

        The original Browns pants of the late ’40s through the mid ’60s had Skinner’s Nylon Combat Cloth fronts with a stretch back. Those fronts gave the pants a satin look. And I will accept the Brown jersey only if worn on the road against the Cowpies or the Fish or whomever, but ONLY if it’s worn with the properly-striped Brown socks.

        As to the Orange pants-read my lips-THE BROWNS WEAR WHITE PANTS ONLY. PERIOD.

    • Chuck | August 16, 2010 at 5:32 pm |

      No official word here in Cleveland, as to the status of the brown pants. I sure hope they put them in mothballs.

  • Leatherhead | August 16, 2010 at 9:05 am |

    While I like the Packers classic home look, (not cuts) I haven’t heard why the 49ers were picked for the 29′ throwback game. They have better home choices and more history with the Bears & Giants, The Bears have the 1940’s looking going this year and they are the Packers oldest opponent. The Giants have played GB since 1928 and have met the Packers in the playoffs more than any other team.

    I own the M&N Acme/Packers long sleeve, That is a nice replica.


  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 9:06 am |

    “Jim Vilk approves of these conditions.”

    You betcha! Enjoy the mud before they put field turf in Miami as well.

    • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 9:09 am |

      What? You have to be kidding me. That should never happen. That’s the NFL for you. Baseball is natural grass and the NFL is, well, artificial turf.

      • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 9:12 am |

        I haven’t heard anything about switching to turf, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the league “encourages” it in the near future.

        • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 9:26 am |

          The Citrus Bowl put it in recently. I’m not kidding when I say I probably won’t watch that game anymore. It’s all part of the video-game-ization of sports — that is, everything has to be perfect, ersatz grass and all that. Why not just play the damn games in TV studios with robots?

        • paul | August 16, 2010 at 9:51 am |

          When Penn State played LSU at the Citrus Bowl, the field looked horrible. It is understandable why they decided it was neccessary to install artifical turf, but hopefully the NFL won’t “encourage” all team to install it as well. That would be a huge mistake. Part of the fun of sports is seeing the elements, and eliminating that would be just wrong.

        • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 9:58 am |

          I’m not a fan of turf, but the reason the NFL is trying to get all the teams to switch is to create consistent ground rules and playing conditions. I think they either did or are trying to put in place rules saying any time a team renovates its stadium or builds a new one it has to use an approved form of particulate-fill turf.

          Geeman is pretty accurate in saying baseball is natural grass and football is turf. Baseball encourages every stadium to have its own quirks and personality, while football encourages that consistency of play. Thankfully, there are a few places you’ll never see artificial turf go in, like Soldier Field, Lambeau Stadium, or Browns Stadium.

        • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 10:00 am |

          I agree it looked bad, but that’s part of the appeal of the game. Bermuda grass would have held up pretty well, and less use of that stadium in the weeks leading up to a big game would also help. Again, it just points to a larger problem with sports. If the real thing doesn’t look like a video game, people don’t like it. If this means everything has to be on instant reply and the field needs to LOOK like perfect green grass, and everything else is staged, why not just play it in a TV studio? There are so many TV timeouts anyway, it feels like it should be.

        • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 10:17 am |

          The Citrus Bowl looked wonderful. I normally don’t watch that game, but the combination of Penn State, LSU and mud made it the best game of last season. It just won’t be the same this year.

          Screw consistency of play. Being a champion means being able to play in almost any conditions. Don’t load your team with track stars – have some mudders on the roster as well.

        • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 10:30 am |

          I’m with you, Jim. I’d watch last year’s Citrus Bowl over a game played on turf any day.

      • duker | August 16, 2010 at 4:18 pm |

        Pitt vs. Miami on MNF 2 years ago was the worst game I’ve ever watched because of the mud.

        I guess it was fun to watch, but not for the football.

        • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 4:32 pm |

          2nd best game ever! First would be any snow game.

        • BurghFan | August 16, 2010 at 6:55 pm |

          Add Phil on Saturday’s game: “Throw in some rain and it was nigh on perfect.”

          Try sitting in the stands, and spending time in the concourse during a lightning delay (which happened at both games mentioned), then tell me how great it is after you’ve dried out.

          The crowd was sparse and quiet enough after the delay Saturday that it felt like a Pirate game.

        • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 8:24 pm |

          well, no, jerry — i wasn’t speaking for anyone who had to watch it live

          i would imagine that was not a lot of fun

          but it’s always great fun for us watching it on the telly sitting on our comfy couches with a bag o’chips and a bevvy

        • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 8:35 pm |

          As a native Clevelander, I’m disappointed to see a Steelers fan complaining that game conditions made the fans uncomfortable. I thought we in the north divisions were supposed to be the ones fighting for football played in real football weather.

        • BurghFan | August 16, 2010 at 9:27 pm |

          There’s a difference between sitting through 10-degree temperatures for an AFC Championship (although, even then, it often starts too late because network schedules are much more important than live patrons) and waiting through a 1:13 lightning delay after getting soaked during an exhibition game that you have to pay regular season prices for. If it matters, I was there when the game ended.

        • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 9:43 pm |

          Good man. And people think we can’t get along. Don’t they realize it’s more of a no-one-gets-to-abuse-us-but-each-other relationship?

          Outside the stadiums I mean, of course. Inside Browns Stadium or Heinz Field anything that happens to you when wearing the enemy’s colors is your own fault.

    • Aaron | August 16, 2010 at 12:53 pm |

      I know my alma mater is in the process of putting in FieldTurf, and I’m just sick about it. Doesn’t really matter the sport to me, if you’re in a spot where you can play it on grass, you ought to be playing it on grass. The only place where Turf ought to be used is indoors, and despite my Colt leanings, I’m not the biggest fan of domes or retractable roofs.

    • marc | August 16, 2010 at 12:59 pm |

      Football should be played on real grass regardless of climate or conditions. Hard to imagine someone like Chris Berman speaking of the legendary “(FieldTurf and underlying surface with a heating element throughout to prevent becoming the) Frozen Tundra of Lambeau Field.”

    • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 4:57 pm |

      Almost forgot, everyone knows that mud was all from the infield dirt at Joe Robbie/Pro Player/Landshark/Whatever Stadium, right? It’s not all torn up, it’s just one of the last stadiums where they play both football and baseball for a couple months out of the year.

      • marc | August 16, 2010 at 5:07 pm |

        Who cares? Mud is mud!

  • floormaster squeeze | August 16, 2010 at 9:08 am |

    The number 1 team in the Kwak “Top 20 Kits” poll did not wear any of the 3 pictured kits in this weekends shock loss to 3.BL team Chemnitzer. Both teams apparently went with “throwbacks” which for former East German Chemnitzer (known then as “Karl Marx City”) was decidely more complicated. East German soccer was not known for its loyalty to cities, teams or franchises and regularly reshaped its teams names, places, and line-ups to please politically connected soccer bosses (the current day Chemnitzer FC had 6 names in East Germany but had settled on FC Karl Marx Stadt for the 25 years). In the early 90’s the city and team became Chemnitzer (FC Chemniztzer).

    FC Chemnitzer wore the FC Karl Marx Stadt crest on their uni’s this weekend and came up with a big upset over the 1.BL St. Pauli.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 9:10 am |

    ” I’m not sure what was going on with Jay Cutler’s jersey. He’s got sleeves, but that cut is absolutely bizarre. ”

    After looking at that photo a couple of times, I’m wondering if they’re using Ricko’s striped undershirt idea.

    • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 9:17 am |

      no…he had sleeves … sometimes you saw them…and sometimes they tucked themselves under, like a turtle…

      • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 11:24 am |

        the question with the jay~cut is what’s with the new helmet?! he WAS clasic. speaking of helemts and the ncaa, what helmet will prior wear? a football helmet or that new crap that i hate? make comments, i still hate the mann1n8.

    • Andy | August 16, 2010 at 9:19 am |

      To me, it looks like the sleeve fabric is bunching up underneath a pair of shoulder pads that seem to extend very low.

      • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 9:21 am |

        Why is a QB wearing pads that extend that far past his shoulders anyway? Doesn’t that mess with his throwing mechanics?

  • Original Jim | August 16, 2010 at 9:18 am |

    Soccer (football) goalies are allowed to wear baseball caps to shield their eyes from the sun, since using their hands for that purpose would be detrimental for blocking shots.

    • Dan King | August 16, 2010 at 10:34 am |

      And almost every game I’ve seen Chris Kirkland play in, he’s worn one. Another stipulation is that it should be softer brimmed for other players protection, but its up the ref to okay it.

      • The Ghost of Ross Gload | August 16, 2010 at 2:20 pm |

        I see a keeper in a cap at many KC Wizards games. For most of the summer, the team defending the “east” goal in the first half is looking into the setting sun.

  • Scott | August 16, 2010 at 9:31 am |

    Ted Lilly is probably just wearing one of the Majestic “authentic” tees. They all have the MLB logo at the top.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 9:38 am |

    The Bengals and Browns have been known to wear white at home recently, usually in the early part of the season. When the Broncos visited Cincy last season the Bengals wore white.

    I think the Browns used to wear white for 4 games and brown for the other 4. Don’t pay enough attention to them to see if they still do that.

  • Supernally Ugly | August 16, 2010 at 9:41 am |

    Re: Wicketkeeping hats

    I’ve seen a lot of crickets wearing floppy beach hats before. It’s all about comfort, and wicketkeepers catching googlies and spin bowlers don’t need facial protection as much as the seamers.

    • Supernally Ugly | August 16, 2010 at 9:42 am |

      Cricketers, that is.

      • LeePNZ | August 16, 2010 at 8:26 pm |

        Keepers generally wear face masks for protection when standing up to the wicket for spinners or slower bowlers. There is more chance of the ball taking a deflection and less time to react when standing closer to the batsman.

  • Bernard | August 16, 2010 at 9:43 am |

    Their similarity to short ‘n’ curlies aside, I think I’m kinda diggin’ the new Colorado State unis.

  • paul | August 16, 2010 at 9:43 am |

    The Colts are “honoring” the franchise’s early days, but do they hang any banners in their stadium honoring championships won while in Baltimore? I may be wrong, but I don’t think they do. Just found this kinda interesting. It’s an obvious attempt to sell more merchandise.

    • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 11:29 am |

      if you have 30 jerseys does it matter what they put out to consume? either way you are 30 jersey guy so what does it matter. seriously, i have always wondered about the it’s marketing tip, don’t buy the crap, that easy.

    • Aaron | August 16, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

      Would Baltimore want Indy to honor those championships? Something tells me they would rather those banners stay in Maryland.

  • Stevie McQuistan | August 16, 2010 at 10:07 am |

    The new NFL uniform cut makes the game unwatchable – seriously.

    If a prominent player is wearing one (MJD, Addai) I have to turn the game off.

    • interlockingtc | August 16, 2010 at 12:52 pm |

      Thank you for saying that, Mr. McQuistan. That’s the simple truth.

    • duker | August 16, 2010 at 4:24 pm |

      Do you turn it off because you’re offended? Does it hurt your brain? Can you watch it on a smaller TV where you don’t notice as much? Do you turn off a sitcom if one of the characters is wearing purple?

      “My god, they’ve got purple on my TV! Turn it off at once!”

      Sorry, turning off a game because of the uniform cut just means you don’t actually want to watch the game.

      • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 4:34 pm |

        I’ll agree with you there, Duker. I hate the System of Dress unis, but I still love college basketball.

      • interlockingtc | August 16, 2010 at 8:49 pm |

        I don’t know Stevie McQuistan and I can’t speak for him, of course, but I think his comment, Duker, is a hyperbolic way of saying, “Football uniforms looked good when there were sleeves and …now they look ridiculous.” At least that’s what I think.

        I still watch games, as I’m sure Mr. McQuistan, does, but how can we not notice how awful looking these uniforms have become? It’s a little depressing when aesthetics matter to you. Right?

        • duker | August 17, 2010 at 11:22 am |

          I agree that I’d prefer it if the uniforms are ascetically pleasing. But the game matters a heck of a lot more to me. I love the Colts uniforms and wish the Ravens uniforms were better. But I hate watching Colts games and love watching Ravens games. (Although I also hate the uni-mods that are submitted that remove the purple from the Ravens unis.)

          It’s that his quote was very literal, not coming off as figurative at all:

          “The new NFL uniform cut makes the game unwatchable — seriously.”

          My first response to that is “Seriously?” Then I realize he’s already answered that preemptively. So I assume he’s being very literal with his comment. To me that means, you just don’t really want to watch the game, and you’re finding a reason to do so.

  • Jeremy | August 16, 2010 at 10:11 am |

    Storming the Floor (college basketball blog) gives some love to Paul and UniWatch in their best uniforms post.

  • Brad | August 16, 2010 at 10:13 am |

    The Chiefs “AFL patch” is the Lamar Hunt memorial patch which is supposedly to be worn permanently.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 10:27 am |

    Checked out that European soccer kits Top 20 list.

    Lose the swoosh and the sponsor logo and I’d wear this!

    Those aren’t stripes, they’re song lyrics:

    Mean Green? Seriously?
    One of my favorite teams, but not one of my favorite jerseys. Reminds me too much of 90s fashions. Although the 1888 design is clever, once I realized that’s what it was. Still wouldn’t wear it.

    • Mike Edgerly | August 16, 2010 at 10:33 am |

      Ah… FC St. Pauli is #1.. gotta love that! The “reversible” jersey is starting to grow on me, a slight departure from their traditional kit, then again, they gleefully depart from tradition! (“Non established since 1910”!)

      • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 11:48 am |

        st pauli is THE kit for sure! if i had X dollars and had Y shoulders, that Z jersey would be mine. who am i kidding, Y is the cash i don’t have. ironic post after the other? sure, but whatever, deal. maybe i will knit one.

        yo, mothervilker, your pine tar has cured, send me your addy to get your bat, the “original mothervilker”

  • Brad | August 16, 2010 at 10:40 am |

    Great photos of the Dodgers patches in the Jerry Reuss upload to Flickr. As a longtime MLB commemorative jersey patch collector, I’m humbled to know that I have all the originals of those Dodger patches (the 1981 L.A. bicentennial is the hardest to find) in my collection along with the MLB anniversary patches and NL centennial patch. The Dodgers wore their own version of the Jackie Robinson patch, with “DODGERS” across the top and it was slightly larger than the patch the other teams wore that season. The Expos wore a French language version, and the Marlins wore one in team colors instead of red, white and blue.

  • Nick Ruggeri | August 16, 2010 at 10:45 am |

    I couldn’t agree more about the Browns in white. A classic.

  • Casey Hart | August 16, 2010 at 10:46 am |

    The worst uniforms in the NFL were certainly on display in the Bengals-Broncos game, but it definitely wasn’t Cincy wearing them. The Broncos uniform is the single worst thing ever to happen to NFL aesthetics.

    • duker | August 16, 2010 at 4:25 pm |

      I agree the Broncos are the worst. The problem is the Broncos won two Super Bowls after switching to those unis. So they got instant “classic” cred.

    • marc | August 16, 2010 at 5:08 pm |

      Worse than the Bills? Really?

  • Casey Hart | August 16, 2010 at 10:51 am |

    Also, I’m a Bengals fan and don’t love some of their combinations (black/black look is the worst thing outside of Denver and Nashville), but as Phil points out the white/white combo is pretty effing solid.

  • Ben | August 16, 2010 at 10:54 am |

    Video of different uniforms in Madden, from Bears to Jets. Rest of league coming soon (or so the maker of the clip says)!

    • Jeremy | August 16, 2010 at 11:31 am |

      Lions to Vikings up too…

    • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 11:37 am |

      Here’s part 2.

      Basically it’s all the same unifoms that the game had last year, with the addition of the Packers & Bears throwbacks, and Cardinals black alts, and a proper version of the Eagles throwbacks that were in the game but screwed up before. This year’s Colts throwbacks are not in the game, just a “50’s” uniform that’s basically the same thing only with extended shoulder stripes…and only the white version of that.

      There’s also a couple oddities that aren’t shown in the video that you can only select individually. There’s a black Bucs jersey, silver Raiders, and a yellow Packers jersey, and some weird white pants for the 49ers. Possibly a couple others I’m forgetting. Kinda pisses me off to see the yellow Packers but not have a freakin 90’s Chargers or 80’s Eagles uniform. It’s just like… WTF EA? I kinda like the jersey because I’m weird like that, but for god’s sake do the real ones first you fools!

    • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 6:43 pm |

      Didn’t check the link, but the Browns’ brown pants are in Madden this year. They weren’t last year for some reason. I think they finally dropped the orange jersey from the available options as well.

      • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 9:48 pm |

        The orange is still there, at least on PS3.

  • Jimwa | August 16, 2010 at 11:16 am |

    Any chance a Jets fan shows up at the stadium tonight with a “I’m Still Calling It Giants Stadium” t-shirt?

    Also … as for “you’ll never see artificial turf at Soldier Field” … don’t forget it’s been done before, and there’s talk of doing it again. Tough to grow good grass in Chicago in December.

    • Dave Mac | August 16, 2010 at 11:24 am |

      Yeah Soldier Field actually had artificial turf in the 70s and 80s, and from what I read recently, I believe they considered putting it in for this season, but decided against it. And a group in Cleveland has talked about eventually putting a dome over that stadium to attract more events, which would mean turf.

      Unfortunately, I don’t know if any stadium is safe. Which is absolutely scary to me.

      • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 12:35 pm |

        Lambeau will most likely be the last bastion – the mudders’ Masada, if you will. Someday “Remember Lambeau!” will be shouted by members of the Grass Revolution.

      • Andy | August 16, 2010 at 1:56 pm |

        “And a group in Cleveland has talked about eventually putting a dome over that stadium to attract more events, which would mean turf.”

        Not necessarily. If it’s a retractable dome/roof, grass could certainly be an option, like in Houston.

        • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 3:33 pm |

          Yeah, just like in the Citrus Bowl in tropical Florida! Jeesh, these turf people drive me nuts. It’s bad enough Wake Forest put it on the football field; now they’re putting it at the baseball stadium, the former Ernie Shore Field (named after Babe Ruth’s roomie on the Red Sox who later went on to serve as county sheriff).

        • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 5:11 pm |

          That talk was fifteen years ago as a last ditch after Modell threatened to move the team. The idea of adding a roof to Browns Stadium has made a referendum ballot at least once and possible twice and lost by more than 65-35. No matter how miserable the wind is on the south grandstand, there will never be a roof on that stadium.

  • pdiddy | August 16, 2010 at 11:17 am |

    Nice job on the DIY Saints jersey. Right on the money with the number font and spacing.

    • traxel | August 16, 2010 at 11:39 am |

      I was just getting ready to chime in on that. LOVE IT. The too wide number spacing is great. The gold color I wish they’d go back to is too. The fact that it’s #17 and Billy Kilmer makes it just spectacular. Tremendous job Tom M.! Make me one.

      • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 12:01 pm |

        hey trax, you know what svcks? the cards. go royals go royals go royals. al cowens, cookie, the flea, i can’t wait to drive to the louie to see the cards loose to the second best team ever(my what 10th 2nd fav.). seriously i have the (a)o’s, an the royals?! corn mother hates me, but when the royals whup the cards, i will rub you nose in it like a puppy. get your puppy on trax!

    • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 11:54 am |

      Yeah, meant to mention that was some nice work.
      Congrats on a worthwhile project well done.


      • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 12:26 pm |

        Indeed. I’d wear that!

        Now can you make me a Tom Dempsey jersey?

    • concealed78 | August 16, 2010 at 1:36 pm |

      Love the job on the Saints DIY jersey. Really like the sleeve pattern as well.

    • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 1:49 pm |

      royals, worlds champs by 1015, just sayin.
      dear corn, it was bad enough with 01 for depression without droppin a 2000~munson, buh. none the less go monarchs!!! st louis stinks like dirty diaper. those stink, right? if not sub something very stinky.

    • SoCalDrew | August 16, 2010 at 3:42 pm |

      Saints need to reclaim that look NOW!

    • Fran Fried | August 17, 2010 at 10:31 pm |

      Jim from Lafayette NAILED the ’67 Saints jersey. Who Dat, baby, indeed!!! In lieu of winning MegaMillions and going to an auction site, I wish I could hire him to make me one in white and one in black, both with the narrower numbers.

      The ’67-68 Saints jerseys, especially the whites, are my undisputed choice for the coolest football unis of all time. (And I’m partial to the ’68 helmets, with the white-on-black center stripe.)

      If you want to see a trove of early Saints jersey shots, there was a wretched 1969 film called “Number One,” starring a wretched, over-the-hill Charlton Heston playing a wretched, over-the-hill Saints QB (not coincidentally wearing Kilmer’s 17). NFL Films was heavily involved (as were the Saints themselves); there’s very liberal use of game footage from the Saints’ first two seasons (continuity alert: the change of helmet stripes from scene to scene), and it’s great to watch — except, of course, for Heston throwing like Moses and the Saints losing more than winning …

  • Jet | August 16, 2010 at 11:33 am |

    I’m not sure what is being said about this backstop picture of a Reds brawl
    You say “its clearly altered” because the wall has “” and “” — are you saying the photo was altered?

    More than likely the lettering on the wall is vinyl adhesive and a piece of it got torn or scraped off by a foul ball.


    • Jimwa | August 16, 2010 at 11:35 am |

      I took it as the wall was altered by the brawl, meaning the mass of bodies scraped the vinyl letters off.

    • concealed78 | August 16, 2010 at 1:40 pm |

      I wonder if it could just be weather erosion. I noticed some worn red vinyl wall at AT&T Park during a Cubs / Giants game.

  • Gusto44 | August 16, 2010 at 11:57 am |

    Regarding the Rams uniforms, does anyone know when gold was ever used prior to 2000? Anytime I’ve seen the original logo and uniform, it appeared to be yellow, and the 1994 throwback jersey(1950s) was yellow as well. It’s my understanding yellow has been in use for the vast majority of the existence of the Rams franchise.

    Personally, I liked the Rams better in yellow as opposed to gold, but the trend has been sports teams switching from yellow to gold over the last decade or so.

    • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 12:05 pm |

      Yeah, it was just part of the trend. Or maybe the start of it, really. They won the Superbowl in ’99, then came out in 2000 with the darker blue and metallic gold. They even officially called the shade “championship gold”. It wasn’t one of their colors at any previous time.

      Of course, part of the confusion is that what most normal people call “yellow” is typically called Athletic Gold. So, the Steelers are black & gold, not black & yellow. It’s just one of those things.

      • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 12:35 pm |

        The Jeff’s right. Very few teams actually wear Yellow. Michigan and Oregon, to name two.

        In pro sports, the only team in the “Big Four” that I recall ever flat-out listing “Yellow” as a Team Color, and wearing it, was the WHA’s Cincinnati Stingers.


        • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 12:43 pm |

          Holy Mazola, Ricko…Michigan calls it Maize.

          I miss yellow. Are teams are afraid to wear it because people will think of the old yellow=scared connotation? Hey, that’s ironic.

          Hope the Steelers never switch to a golder gold. The Athletic Gold/Yellow is what makes those black jerseys pop.

        • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 12:48 pm |

          the jeff’s right — sort of…teams do wear “yellow”

          steelers (gold)

          packers (gold AND yellow)

          vikings (gold AND yellow)


          when referring to gold, we almost always mean vegas or old (metallic) gold

          athletic gold, while called gold, definitely is more what we commonly refer to as “yellow”

        • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 12:50 pm |

          “An ear by any other name…”

          ’tis true, they euphemize it. Sorta.

          Although, I believe up until about 1980 (or so) the Wolverines did wear Athletic Gold. Remember cuz the Gopher game I attended where for the first time there was a clear difference between the athletic gold Minnesota pants and Michigan’s yellow pants and helmet graphic, Anthony Carter was playing.


        • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 12:56 pm |

          Pantone 123 C…that might be my new screen name someday…

        • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 1:00 pm |

          The Cleveland Force wore yellow, but I don’t know what they called it.

          Wait, yes I do…I have an old MISL media guide. Pantone Yellow and Pantone Reflex Blue are listed.

        • marc | August 16, 2010 at 1:11 pm |

          The Force’s yellow always seemed kinda pale to me. I wouldn’t have imagined it was as vibrant as Pantone Yellow. Ya learn something new every day!

        • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 1:15 pm |

          “…athletic gold, while called gold, definitely is more what we commonly refer to as ‘yellow’ ”

          Then how do we differentiate the color Oregon and Michigan wear?
          Piss Yellow? Canary Yellow? Oregon Yellow? True Yellow? Bright Yellow? Stonewashed Yellow?

          It’s a tough one, I know. Especially when EXACTLY the same Athletic Gold gets called “mustard” whenever it’s paired with brown (original Broncos, Padres).

          But it isn’t yellow. Yellow is bananas, Tweety Bird, the color that comes in the basic Crayola set.

          Take Process Yellow (check your PMS books, everyone) and add a touch of red. That becomes Athletic Gold…or PMS 123.

          Do the Steelers or Packers, for example, call it yellow? No. It’s Gold.

          Too bad it never got its own name.
          “Goldellow”, maybe?


        • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 1:21 pm |

          Depends on the lighting, Marc.

          Speaking of lighting, check out how the flash drowns the red out of that ball:

          Another pic from that game shows the red ball (under #18’s armpit):

        • marc | August 16, 2010 at 1:35 pm |

          Maybe it seemed more pale either because of my fading memory or the fact that I usually saw it on cheap knock-off jerseys at May Company or Higbees.

        • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 1:47 pm |

          Uh… Phil, I don’t think you grabbed the proper color sheets. Those seem to be some sort of concept/prototype thing, not the official versions.

        • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 2:07 pm |

          uh…the jeff…you’re right — not official for the vikes

          but the point wasn’t so much to refute anything you said per se — it was to show that some teams call athletic gold “yellow” (or maybe not pantone123–but the color that looks like athletic gold is sometimes called yellow by teams)

          but you’re correct — what most of us would call yellow (perfect example, the stillers), is officially “athletic gold”

        • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 2:10 pm |

          And just because the gold the Saints wear and the gold the Steelers wear is different doesn’t mean they both don’t wear gold. North Carolina and Duke both wear blue, but don’t dare say they wear the same color. Same for the the Dodgers and the Yankees. Or Ohio State (scarlet) and Alabama (crimson).

        • Andy | August 16, 2010 at 2:13 pm |

          “Take Process Yellow (check your PMS books, everyone) and add a touch of red. That becomes Athletic Gold…or PMS 123.”

          Actually, the base ink for PANTONE® 123 is PANTONE® Yellow, not PANTONE® Process Yellow. PMS Yellow is a tiny bit different than PMS Process Yellow.

        • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 3:10 pm |

          I was using the moniker of the older system, and scrambling it with the newer one to boot. The point was that the base color is the base yellow, whichever system you use. Should have used the “PANTONE” reference. And, yes, Process Yellow is a bit more, I dunno, “transparent”, maybe, for lack of a better description.

          I apologize profusely.
          With huge piles of contrition.

          (You’d think I’d learn, you just can’t leave those nits lying around…and, also, always remember to ask, “What color is that horse…on both sides?”


        • Chance Michaels | August 16, 2010 at 3:12 pm |

          Ah, Phil – you’re linking to fan-created uniform proposals. Not anything from the teams themselves.

          The Vikings, Packers and Steelers all call their color “gold.”

          Personally, I don’t see what the confusion is. Athletic gold is to yellow what teal is to aqua – similar yet distinct shades of the same basic color.

        • Andy | August 16, 2010 at 5:06 pm |

          Well, yes, it’s not technically called ‘PMS’ any more (I’ve always called my colors PANTONE® whatever, even when it was referred to as PMS), but I was really just pointing out the difference between PANTONE®’s base yellow color and their process yellow, which is normally only used to print jobs using the 4 color process, and is a very slightly different color.

        • Oakville Endive | August 16, 2010 at 11:23 pm |

          How about one is school bus yellow – the other is lemon yellow.

          The Vancouver Canucks in their Pavel Bure days – actually had a unique shade – it definitely wasn’t athletic gold , it was closer to pale yellow – more noticable on their black jersey.

          I think lemon yellow – could definitely work – especially on a basketball uni

      • Geeman | August 16, 2010 at 2:07 pm |

        Yellow is for highlighters.

  • rpm | August 16, 2010 at 12:11 pm |

    how do i keep track of this commentification anymore? buh, i gots ta go paint the indiana jonesiers they play football in indiana? um, kyj, don’t worry, their WILL be a subtle buckear/eye/nose/throat somewhere, let’s call it a game. g’luck.

  • Big Al | August 16, 2010 at 12:36 pm |

    Next is interim coach, for the Cincinnati Redleggas,’ Chris Speier’s [career 3-0 as a coach lol] odd hat bend, no idea how you get that kind of fold on a hat.

    Looks like Speier threw the hat on without taking the piece of cardboard out from inside the crown.

  • Big Al | August 16, 2010 at 12:43 pm |

    Pressure is something you feel when you don’t know what the hell you’re doing.
    — Peyton Manning

    Manning always attributes that fantastic quote to Chuck Noll.

  • LarryB | August 16, 2010 at 1:01 pm |

    I too was pleased when I saw the Browns with the white pants. I hope they keep wearing those. It is a classic look and they look great.

    Tom M super job on the Saints DIY.

    I did not know the Colts wore those tbs until I opened the column today.

    • marc | August 16, 2010 at 1:12 pm |

      Agreed on the Browns and the Saints DIY. Great job, Tom.

  • Michael | August 16, 2010 at 1:05 pm |

    Looks like the Red Sox have a guy in their farm system that beats out Saltalamacchia for name length. Seth Schwindenhammer.

    And we get to vote for him for best name in the Minors.

  • marc | August 16, 2010 at 1:06 pm |

    I have a part-time gig at a grocery store at night and happened to notice the other night a Bud Light display featuring a goal-post and a dark blue over-sized helmet with a BL logo on the sides. I was struck by how good the helmet looked. Ya know how helmets for that kinda thing often are misshapen and get the details totally wrong? This one — other than the fact the facemask bars are hollow — looks like it could have been a real helmet that got hit with a mad scientist’s enlarger ray. I’ll post a photo if I can get one.

    • marc | August 16, 2010 at 1:47 pm |
      • The Jeff | August 16, 2010 at 1:53 pm |

        That does look a bit better quality than the normal store display helmets.

        On a not-really-related-giant-helmet note, don’t ever buy a FatHead helmet decal unless you have at least 3 people to help you put the thing on the wall. A 4ft tall helmet image seems like a cool idea, but there’s no support at all in the facemask area and the stupid thing will fold up on itself, stick together and tear in 3 spots before you’re finished.

        • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 3:55 pm |

          the jeff said:

          On a not-really-related-giant-helmet note, don’t ever buy a FatHead helmet decal unless you have at least 3 people to help you put the thing on the wall. A 4ft tall helmet image seems like a cool idea, but there’s no support at all in the facemask area and the stupid thing will fold up on itself, stick together and tear in 3 spots before you’re finished.


  • Lose R | August 16, 2010 at 1:12 pm |

    Pedroia wearing his own Boston jersey (and helmet) on Sunday in Pawtucket:

    Sunday Globe had an article that since Red Sox players wear their own numbers when on injury rehab, he had borrowed Dusty Brown’s #15, and had to alter it for Saturday. I don’t have any images from Saturday, but he definitely was wearing his major league jersey on Sunday (note the Majestic logo)

  • Shane | August 16, 2010 at 1:15 pm |

    It looks like even the church is a fan of the classic Tiger’s logo. A local church of mine had many students go to a national fine arts event in Detroit, where they apparently gave out or sold these shirts.

    • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 1:31 pm |

      Gonna go out on a limb here and say that an Old English “D” was around a long time before the Detroit Tigers came along.

      Pretty sure that’s the case.


      • Gusto44 | August 16, 2010 at 2:20 pm |

        What about that weird Detroit Tigers uniform in the 1920s with the tiger head on the back of the jersey? Can’t think of another baseball uniform with that look.

        • jesse | August 16, 2010 at 5:24 pm |

          Want to say the Boston Braves had something similar, with an Indian profile on the back, not sure though.

  • Dave Mac | August 16, 2010 at 1:25 pm |

    What’s the deal on these NBA uniforms? Have any been released yet?

  • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 1:37 pm |

    Probably just the angle, but did that Saints helmet logo get even smaller this season?


    • marc | August 16, 2010 at 1:44 pm |
      • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 1:55 pm |

        Trouble is, in today’s NFL half of it would be covered by a facemask and chin straps.

        That’s why I wondered if perhaps the the new helmet logo isn’t a little bit smaller, to accommodate the way this year’s versions of the new helmets are sculpted.


    • NickV | August 16, 2010 at 7:50 pm |

      I looked at the whole game and my impression is that it is the same. Your photo angle does make it appear smaller. I will know more Saturday after going to the first home game.

  • flip | August 16, 2010 at 2:22 pm |

    Count me in the camp that LOVES the Chiefs’ white over white over white look. I also like it when Tampa Bay breaks out the white pants.

    • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 2:59 pm |

      Yup, a nice way to state that those basic unis have been theirs for a long, long time.

      I’ve mentioned before that in the first year of the AFL, six of the eight teams wore high white socks with their white jerseys. Only the Titans of New York and Los Angeles Chargers wore the same dark socks home and road.


  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 2:29 pm |

    Oakville Endive | August 16, 2010 at 12:26 pm |
    ” I agree with the assessment of the Stampeders throw back — definitely a huge improvement to what they currently wear. I thought Montreal’s Pepsi retro — looked great — in my top 10 list of any football uni — any league — sharp, bold and simple — what more can you ask. Have Saskatchewan gone permanently back to their Indy Colts look — except in green? = that would be good news. All these great CFL retros are really hi-lighting just how bad the current batch of uniforms are. ”

    The Als’ Pepsi unis might just be in my all-time top 5.

    Don’t think the Riders have gone retro the whole time. I wish they would, but the new unis aren’t too shabby.

    I think the only teams who need to go full-time retro are Montreal, Hamilton and Calgary. Especially Calgary. PLEASE, Calgary.

    I’d add Toronto to that list, but only if they wear these:
    Otherwise, what they wear now is OK.

  • PL | August 16, 2010 at 2:39 pm |

    the t-wolves uni tweak is up…better but still missed the boat

    • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 2:45 pm |


      I miss the green. That’s what separated them from the Magic. And enough with the tramp stamps on the shorts. I don’t like it on ladies shorts and I like it way less on mens shorts.

      Hope this is the worst of today’s bunch.

    • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 2:46 pm |

      Interesting, the one thing the “Old” unis had going from them was that splash of bright green. Seeing the home whites it person, it really did help what otherwise was a terribly nondescript uni.

      Of course, there also the fact that these days I’m not sure the Timberwolves even know there IS a boat.

      They know there’s a Ricky Rubio, yes. But a boat, no.


    • RS Rogers | August 16, 2010 at 3:01 pm |

      I agree about the green, but in most other respects I regard this as an upgrade. I mean, mot of the details tweaked have been tweaked to be better: the neck, the numbers, etc. None of that outweighs the loss of the green, and it doesn’t make the uniforms any less bad. But at least I get the sense that some good technical decisionmaking is going on, even if the whole is subsumed by very poor overall brand/marketing decisionmaking. Gives me hope that if the top-level identity decisions ever go the right way, the team will be able to execute competently.

    • ab | August 16, 2010 at 3:59 pm |

      Aside from ditching the green, I like the changes. A lot cleaner, since they got rid of a lot of the extra wackiness around the neckline. The new collar and rear neckline are a lot nicer. The numbers are light-years ahead of the old ones.

      Although I do like the blue/silver, yeah, they need the green back. Not just Magic-like, but Mavs-like too.

      And please stop with the ass logos already.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 2:54 pm |

    While trying to do a quick search for the other new NBA unis, I found out Team USA just played an exhibition game at Radio City Music Hall.

    Interesting venue, huh?

    • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 4:45 pm |

      Skip to the 3-minute mark of this video to get a good look at the setup:

      • The Ghost of Ross Gload | August 16, 2010 at 7:17 pm |

        Interesting. That would have been a lousy view from the good seats.

        Speaking of hoops in concert halls, before Allen Fieldhouse was built, Kansas played in another campus building, Hoch Auditorium. It seated about 3,500 for basketball. Here’s a picture of the basketball setup: The bleachers on the right are on the stage, the floor was built flat to fit the court. KU was still using Hoch for big lecture classes and the annual Vespers concert at Christmas until it burned in the early 90s. The shell is the same, but the interior has been rebuilt with a number of smaller classrooms and offices.

  • Chance Michaels | August 16, 2010 at 3:16 pm |

    some stuff of interest: Atlanta Falcons plush toy. “If I had to guess, circa 1982 or so.”


  • Chance Michaels | August 16, 2010 at 3:25 pm |

    Great photo of the Giants vs. Redskins from 1975 (thanks to John Weghorst) – the white facemasks, the one-year “ny” decal, the blue pants – what’s not to love?

    Easy – the white facemasks, the one-year “ny” decal, and the blue pants.

    • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 3:34 pm |

      dammit chance…were my sarcasm tags broken again?

      • Chance Michaels | August 16, 2010 at 3:59 pm |

        You just, but I’m amazed at the number of blue pants on Football Giant concepts….

      • NickV | August 16, 2010 at 7:38 pm |

        Whether you like the 1975 Giants’ “NY” or you hate it, I would love to know what happened to the 50-60 team-issued White capes that the Giants wore that year with the “NY” printed all over the capes in an Andy Warhol-style. I believe PL or Phil attached a photo of the Giants wearing those capes on the road at Green Bay about six months ago.

        Those capes were so horrible and 1970s that they are GREAT! I would wear one on Halleween every year!

        Somebody, Please – FIND THAT PICTURE!

        • Big Al | August 17, 2010 at 1:48 am |

          Is this what you were thinking of, Nick? From Paul’s post on 12/31/2008 ->

          Look at the wild rain jackets the Giants are wearing on the sidelines! That’s from 1971, Week 1.

    • Big Al | August 16, 2010 at 5:06 pm |

      I love the uppercase, italicized NY. After years of searching, I saw a shirt at the NFL Shop with that logo but didn’t get it for Christmas as requested and, naturally, it was sold out by the time I went to buy it for myself.

  • Dwayne | August 16, 2010 at 3:56 pm |

    Ted Lily’s shirt is not turned around backwards.

    We need to put this in the FAQ’s.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 4:39 pm |

    Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 3:10 pm |
    ” You’d think I’d learn, you just can’t leave those nits lying around…and, also, always remember to ask, “What color is that horse…on both sides? ”

    Well, we haven’t proved that it was blue yet…on either side…

    • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 6:58 pm |

      Haven’t proved it was brown, either.

      Oh, wait, it says so on the Internet. At at website likely creted by someone who wasn’t even alive in 1962. But, still, it’s there, so it must be true.


  • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 5:12 pm |

    Can I have some of whatever rpm is on? It looks like fun.

  • =bg= | August 16, 2010 at 5:31 pm |

    Growing up, I always looked forward to new unis and/or helmet logos.

    NOTHING this year?


    • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 5:35 pm |

      well brinke, there are four (count em) new throwbacks and the wonderful new black alt for the cards…

      plus…who knows what pants will be broken out…

      • =bg= | August 16, 2010 at 11:48 pm |

        well, i mean a whole new regular look, or a new helmet logo.

  • Pretty Boy Paulie | August 16, 2010 at 6:27 pm |

    “Da Bears went with their sometimes-worn deep blue pants under white tops”….Actually they wear that combo quite frequently. The all white look is sometimes worn….and even rarer the white jersey, white pants and blue socks look.

  • Joe-san | August 16, 2010 at 6:55 pm |

    What’s TPFIC?

    • Ricko | August 16, 2010 at 7:00 pm |

      Tongue Planted Firmly In Cheek.

  • ab | August 16, 2010 at 7:08 pm |

    New Clippers unis

    Okay, nothing groundbreaking. Although that LAC logo is way out of place.

    • ab | August 16, 2010 at 7:26 pm |

      Probably the biggest change is that the road jersey now says “Los Angeles.”

      Also, I noticed that when the Clippers tweaked their logo for this coming season, they gave the “C” a flatter, serifless top. Thus, they’ve changed the LAC logo accordingly.

      Old Primary
      New Primary

      Old LAC
      New LAC

      Probably old news for some, but I just found it interesting. The Clips have always seemed to have one of the most stagnant and questionably-executed branding schemes in the NBA, and this season there’s some very welcome evolution.

    • NickV | August 16, 2010 at 7:42 pm |

      Pretty Ho-Hum…….
      If EVER a team needed a TOTAL update and identity change, it is the L.A. Clippers.

      There are so many things that a team could do with Red, Blue and White, and yet every year the Clippers end up looking like a 1970’s Boys Club team.

      One good thing they had, and seem not to use anymore, was the sharp-looking Clipper Ship logo and accompanying graphisc from the 1970’s. That was a really sharp look, ahead of its time, and should be revisited.

      • Gusto44 | August 16, 2010 at 7:53 pm |

        Yes, that was around the time Bill Walton played for the Clips. They had a light blue uniform with the team name not in all caps, and small flags on the shorts. I think World Free was on that team, but they were still bad.

  • Kevin Z. | August 16, 2010 at 8:23 pm |

    I can’t stand white socks with white pants. It’s essentially the leotard effect, though a lot worse looking in my opinion. I know it’s not exactly the same since the stripes break it up a little. But when you have, say, black pants with black socks, at least there is the white half socks at the bottom. With white/striped socks, the white extends all the way to the shoes which looks even more leotard-like.

  • Rob Juba | August 16, 2010 at 8:30 pm |

    As a Giants fan I cannot stand to look at the jerseys they are wearing tonight. Absolutely horrible. Distorted numbers, horrible NOB’s, and they actually found a way to make the Northwestern stripes look bad.

    • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 8:44 pm |

      i’ve never liked it (and didn’t when it was originally worn) — i actually preferred the “bastardized” throwback they originally trotted out in the early 2000’s…i’ve also never liked them in gray pants (again, throwback-correctness be damned)…this has just too much red for my liking

      (right now, ricko’s head is esploding)

      but the HOME uni they wear is perfection (even with the gray pants) — and since it has no sleeve stripes, it’s immune to the awfulness of the new cuts — EXCEPT for the stretching of the numbers … hopefully this is something they can correct this year

      • Gusto44 | August 16, 2010 at 8:51 pm |

        Have the Giants permanently discarded the red jersey they wore a few seasons ago?

        • LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 8:55 pm |

          thankfully, yes

      • Rob Juba | August 16, 2010 at 9:09 pm |

        I thought the Giants had a classic look, both home and away, before these new tissue paper jerseys came along. The new cut ruins both jerseys IMHO. They just don’t have the look of football jerseys – they look like cheap overstretched t-shirts with numbers.

      • ab | August 16, 2010 at 9:40 pm |

        I agree on liking the older jerseys, especially since there was practically no blue on the new ones. I also liked that little red triangle the NFL Equipment shield was placed on. It’s on those older white jerseys, and it was on the blue jerseys until they switched to the tighties.

      • Oakville Endive | August 16, 2010 at 11:02 pm |

        It’s nice, but I find it contradictory that the Giants feel compelled to be true to the retro grey pants – but at the same time, put a current day gloss on their helmet. To be more consistently retro, my preference would be a dull mated finish.

        I truly hate these new cut jerseys – which seems to be making football jerseys increasing basketball-like.

    • StLMarty | August 16, 2010 at 11:22 pm |

      Why have no red on the blues, and no blues on the red? That is preposterous! Get rid of accuracy. Just get pretty.

      • StLMarty | August 16, 2010 at 11:25 pm |

        I meant to say… no blue on the whites.

        And I am so sick and tired of teams having three or four stripe patterns within one uni.

  • jdreyfuss | August 16, 2010 at 9:08 pm |

    I don’t know if anyone remembers the footnote about Rickey Jackson’s facemask from last week, but Keith Bulluck appears to be wearing something similar for the Giants. I can’t find any pictures of him wearing a hockey style cage in a Titans jersey, so this must be new.

  • Bernard | August 16, 2010 at 9:13 pm |

    Jenny Sweet’s opinion of the new Colorado State football jerseys:

    “They look like macaroni and cheese. I like macaroni and cheese, but not on a football uniform.”

  • traxel | August 16, 2010 at 9:38 pm |

    rpm – don’t forget to watch this flick again before your KC move

  • Flip | August 16, 2010 at 10:01 pm |

    I remember that Clippers’ look. Twas right after the franchise moved from Buffalo (leaving the Braves’ look, colors and records on Lake Erie) to San Diego.,r:8,s:0 Here’s a shot I found when Walton joined them. Doesn’t show either the ship logo or the nautical flags, but it was sharp look. This number font, before Kansas?Maybe Larry Brown remembered this look when he went to Kansas.,r:1,s:0

    One thing that always has bothered me about the Clippers’ look (beyond the blandness mentioned previously) was the way they never filled in the “C.” Ugly, ugly, ugly,r:8,s:0 just like the franchise.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 10:43 pm |

    LI Phil | August 16, 2010 at 8:44 pm |
    “this has just too much red for my liking”

    Well, you may have a point there:

  • ab | August 16, 2010 at 10:58 pm |

    aaaand the new Jazz uniforms.

    A better look at the new jersey via the Jazz store. There are some old Stockton jerseys on that page to compare them to. Basically, the same as those old jerseys, only that the number is green on the white jerseys, the JAZZ is white on the purple jerseys, and the new uniforms have a more modern cut and side panels.

    Kind of an odd, incongruous mix between old-school and modern.

    • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 11:07 pm |

      I’d most assuredly wear those.

    • ab | August 17, 2010 at 12:13 am |

      They’d be a lot nicer if the wordmark/NOB and number were the same color. It’s almost as if they’re trying too hard to use all the new colors in their arsenal. The green number on the white jersey is probably the weirdest thing.

      Also, it’s astonishing how that color is apparently supposed to be blue… but your head registers it as purple. Well, at least my head does that.

  • Jim Vilk | August 16, 2010 at 11:21 pm |
  • daddyfisk | August 17, 2010 at 12:16 am |

    anything from the Mavs?