Four on the Floor — er, Mound

Screen shot 2010-09-15 at 10.04.25 PM.png

Who’s that on the mound — a position player? Nope, it’s Kyle Drabek, who made his MLB debut last night and in the process became the first single-digitized MLB pitcher since, I believe, Josh Towers (which I guess means the Blue Jays are really specializing in this quirk). I wasn’t near a computer most of last night, so I’m not sure why Drabek went with the unusual number — anyone..?

Meanwhile: I have a new ESPN feature today. It isn’t uni-related, but I think you’ll like it all the same. It’s about this unique chapter in college football history:

I think you’ll find it really interesting. Having worked on it for the past month-plus, I can tell you I found it fascinating. Here’s the link.


Screen shot 2010-09-15 at 10.14.15 PM.png

Start teaching ’em young: Hmmm, what have we here? A page from an old tequila sunrise-era catalog, perhaps?

Nope — as you can see, it says, “New Item for 2011,” because this is a brand-new catalog. And although the model looks sort of adult-ish (at least to me), that’s actually a youth uniform. Here’s the full scoop from reader Jeff Ryder, who works as the athletic supervisor for a parks system in Illinois:

I recently had a meeting with the sales rep who handles all my Majestic and Outdoor Cap orders. They’re working together to launch a set of matching replica jersey and cap designs to youth baseball teams for 2011. Here’s the full listing of the designs.”

Throwbacks for kids, I like it! Well, I like most of it — I’m a little amazed, and more than a little appalled, that they’re including the super-racist-looking version of Chief Wahoo (that’s gonna be a big hit with the Native American kids and their parents). But the general notion of giving the tikes a history lesson while teaching them how to play the game is a really good one. Kudos to whoever came up with it.

Giveaway Reminder: I’m currently giving away two copies of a cool book and two cool T-shirts. Details here.

Uni Watch News Ticker: What do dangerous NYC criminals and the Yankees have in common? A whole lot, it turns out. … Nice piece here about Nebraska’s football uniforms. The fourth graf, about the sleeve stripes, is particularly interesting. ”¦ New national championship 20th-anniversary logo for Colorado. So far it’s only appearing on merch — not clear yet if it’ll be used as a patch and/or decal (with thanks to Matthew Robins). ”¦ Michael Orr sent along this FIFA 11 demo shot and had this to say about it: “What’s interesting is that both sides are wearing white socks. In the Premier League, in a case like this, the home side would get first choice and the away side would have to change their outfits accordingly. So if this screen shot is supposed to be from Stamford Bridge (Chelsea’s ground), then Arsenal would be wearing their red alternate socks. If it was supposed to be at the Emirates Stadium (home of Arsenal), Chelsea would be switch to blue alternate socks. Geeky point, but one I’m surprised the FIFA folks missed. At least in this demo.” ”¦ Flyers will reportedly be unveiling their new road jerseys this Friday, 3pm. ”¦ Caldwell Bailey recently spotted this very cool Winnipeg Blue Bombers pennant at an antiques store in Southport, North Carolina. ”¦ If you choose to believe an eBay listing — one from a seller with a very good feedback rating, for what that’s worth — MLB’s new dugout jackets will look like this (with thanks to Terence Kearns). ”¦ Check it out: The Memphis Redbirds wearing gray at home. That’s because their playoff opponent, Tacoma, is having some work done on their stadium, so the whole playoff series is being played in Memphis, including Tacoma’s designated home games (with thanks to Don Gale). ”¦ Kenneshaw State will field their first football team in 2014, and here’s what their helmet will look like (with thanks to Michael Hardman). ”¦ Here’s the latest NHL All-Star Game logo — not for this season’s game, but for next season (with thanks to John Muir). ”¦ New logo for ESPN college football (with thanks to Ray Barrington). ”¦ Soooo much to like in this old photo of Chris Cagle, who played for Army (serious tip o’ the cap to Mark Weinstein). ”¦ Here’s something interesting: a university admitting that maybe picking on a high school for logo infringement wasn’t the greatest idea after all (big thanks to Jeff Downe). ”¦ Great color footage of a color-on-color game: Maryland vs. Navy in 1950 (as forwarded by Matt Shevin). ”¦ UGA will have a helmet decal this weekend to promote cancer awareness (with thanks to Brian M. Deutsch). ”¦ In case you hadn’t heard: Next year’s MLB schedule will begin on a Thursday. ”¦ Dylan Buell took this photo while shooting the recent Ball State/Liberty game. “Looks like it’s a device that marks which yard line the clip is aligned to,” he says. “Never seen one before. Looks kind of retro.” ”¦ If you go to this link and click on “The Times” in the left sidebar, you’ll get some really sensational EPL illustrations (great find by Paul Richard Cook). ”¦ Latest Auburn rumor for this weekend: blue helmets. ”¦ You know, it’s one thing for a college football team to have two guys with the same uni number. But how did it happen to the Camden River Sharks? (As noted by Jim Taggart.) ”¦ New all-star jerseys for the ECHL. Additional info here (thanks, Kek).

133 comments to Four on the Floor — er, Mound

  • denvergregg | September 16, 2010 at 7:51 am |

    The downward slope of the text on the Colorado patch is pretty darned fitting given the downward slope of the program in recent years, but a surprising visual nonetheless.

    • Ledsker | September 16, 2010 at 11:47 am |

      Will there also be a 20th Anniversary patch for the 5th Down game?

  • Mike Edgerly | September 16, 2010 at 8:04 am |

    The bigger problem with that FIFA screen shot is it makes #23 Arshavin look much taller, see the “EPL illustration” with the chant “He’s five foot four, He’s five foot four, We’ve got Arshavin, **** Adebayor”!

    Also IMHO that screen shot takes place at Stamford Bridge, which means Arsenal should be wearing red socks.

    Still Andrey Arshavin gets into Uni Watch twice in one day, gotta love that!

    • Inkracer | September 16, 2010 at 8:21 am |

      That is one of my big problems with EA Sports. Their slogan is still “If it’s in the game, It’s in the Game” Yet Madden is the only game with completely customizable unis. For the FIFA games, this means you play with the shorts and/or the socks of both teams being the same color. For the NHL game, this means generic Goalie masks.

      • The Jeff | September 16, 2010 at 8:30 am |

        …and even Madden is still missing enough options and has enough errors to make the “fully customizable” aspect still end up quite disappointing for some teams. We can put the Chargers in a navy helmet & pants with powder blue jersey & socks, just for the hell of it… but we don’t have the mid-90’s Lions uniforms available.

        • Andy | September 16, 2010 at 8:44 am |

          Which is exactly why being a researcher is a tough job worth a sizable salary. EA’s researchers obviously aren’t getting paid enough, or they would be getting it right and getting it complete.

        • Inkracer | September 16, 2010 at 8:59 am |

          Not sure about the other sports (Hockey, Soccer, Basketball, etc.) But the EA studio that does Madden actually has the uniforms on hand, so they (should) get everything right. They also get a copy of the blueprints for any new stadiums being built.

    • Rubens Borges | September 16, 2010 at 10:15 am |

      hey, long time lurker, first time commenter.
      That’s one thing they had in Pro Evolution Soccer. You could mix and match parts of the kit. For some reason, they don’t habe it anymore. Kinda gets to me…

    • mao | September 16, 2010 at 11:46 am |

      I can’t see anything that makes it look any more like Stamford Bridge than the Emirates. I agree with you about Arshavin though.

      FIFA10 has a big problem with the kit selection process. You only see the shirt when choosing, so you don’t know what the combination of shorts and socks will be before the game starts. Some are obvious, like both Chelsea and Arsenal, but when you play in the Champions League against a club from say, Slovakia, it’s much more difficult to know whether there will be a contrast or not. Even if kits are not fully customizable, EA could at least allow you to see the full kit when choosing.

  • jdreyfuss | September 16, 2010 at 8:14 am |

    How’s this for a way to protect their copyright and still look like the good guys?
    Full use of the name, symbol and pageantry related to the Seminoles for $1 a year? It’s the traditional solution in that case. Why does it have to be so complicated?

  • Jeff Ryder | September 16, 2010 at 8:29 am |

    According to the Majestic catalog, the 2011 MLB throwback replicas will be available in both youth and adult sizes. Wonder if we’ll see these on sale at stadiums too?

  • Tris Wykes | September 16, 2010 at 8:48 am |

    I like how the Florida coach says he “had no choice” but to allow Miami to score in that clip. What a clown.

  • BirdsOnTheBrain | September 16, 2010 at 8:55 am |


    You know, it’s one thing for a college football team to have two guys with the same uni number. But how did it happen to the Camden River Sharks? (As noted by Jim Taggart.)

    This is also a fact with the Philadelphia Eagles:

    29 Allen, Nate FS
    29 Mallett, Martell RB

    • Inkracer | September 16, 2010 at 9:01 am |

      Well, since Mallett is on the Practice Squad, he won’t be seeing any Game Day action, if he does get the call up, I’m sure the number will change.

    • scott | September 16, 2010 at 9:52 am |

      Do we know who the first base coach is? Usually minor league baseball teams use pitchers and reserve players to coach there, but perhaps it was a celebrity coach?

      Or was every player wearing #21 that night in honor of Roberto Clemente?

      • scott | September 16, 2010 at 10:00 am |

        There also doesn’t appear to have been a “Wilson” on the active Camden roster since April. Weird.

        • JB Early | September 16, 2010 at 10:07 am |

          Ah ha! there’s your answer – it’s a ghost…

  • Timothy OMalley | September 16, 2010 at 8:57 am |
  • Dan B | September 16, 2010 at 8:59 am |

    Yeah, I don’t know how many orders that catalog will get for that Chief Wahoo, unless it’s some adult softball team going out of its way to be politically incorrect.

    • Steve Naismith | September 16, 2010 at 9:15 am |

      Do you think it is less politically correct than the current Indians hat?

      • Dan B | September 16, 2010 at 9:38 am |

        From a political point of view, no, they’re pretty much to the same effect. The early version is a bit cruder in its caricature.

        I suppose that’s the distinction some people draw between Chief Wahoo and the depictions of Native Americans used by the Blackhawks and the Redskins. They’re not so much caricatures or parodies.

        I don’t myself subscribe to any particular notion of political correctness, but I think I have a pretty good eye for what’s going to push people’s buttons.

        • JB Early | September 16, 2010 at 10:14 am |

          The umbrella appelation “politically correct” is too broad to use to define something such as Chief Wahoo. The logo is simply in extremely poor taste. Incorrect would be having an opinion about it’s usage being acceptable. I will point out again – names such as Blackhawks & Braves are European/Anglo applied to Native Americans. It’s not the same as calling an “Indian” one “Chief Wahoo” and using a “Black Sambo” like caricature. Europeans were automatically i nthe debit column when they called the Indians weren’t they. Seeing as how this was never India. Once more, nothing political about it. Just incorrect from the get go. . ..

        • scott | September 16, 2010 at 11:44 am |

          American Indians is still the correct term, not Native Americans, according to the Associated Press.

      • DJ | September 16, 2010 at 2:56 pm |

        Because, as George Carlin pointed out in one of his famous bits, “Indian” derived from Columbus’s description of the natives as “una gente in Dios”, “a people of God” in his fractured Spanish. The term for what we know as India in Columbus’s time was “Hindustan.”

        Also, “Blackhawk” is an English translation of a proper name, “Makataimeshekiakiak.”

  • traxel | September 16, 2010 at 9:01 am |

    I appreciate your passionate view toward the Chief Wahoo logo, I just respectfully disagree.

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

      it’s ok to be wrong ben

      glad you admit it

      • traxel | September 16, 2010 at 9:26 am |

        Not the first time. Won’t be the last.

        I do see my kids in some of that retro gear in the very near future.

        Am I also wrong to HATE the fact that every MLB jacket (and BP jersey, BP hat, etc.) have to be from the same template? Where’s the fun in that?

        • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 9:45 am |

          Totally agree. But then I thought the same thing about every team using the same web site template… Individual team character is something that got hammered out of MLB a long, long time ago….

        • Aaron | September 16, 2010 at 9:49 am |

          Couldn’t agree more with that last sentiment. Isn’t part of the fun in uniforms the differences? If everything is so cookie-cutter, it just becomes boring and uninteresting. Just look at the stadiums of the 60’s and 70’s for that.

        • Chance Michaels | September 16, 2010 at 10:12 am |

          As far as websites go, the NFL has the right idea. They’re all hosted and administered by the League, but teams can create their own designs and content.

        • Jeremy | September 16, 2010 at 10:55 am |

          Hopefully, US teams don’t go the way of European soccer and have all teams use the same number font.
          That’s the irony of Euro soccer v. Amerian sports.
          American leagues: all uniforms made by same supplier, but different fonts
          European Soccer: each team has its own uniform supplier but they all need to use the same font
          then there’s MLS: all teams wear addidas and use the same font

  • Bryan | September 16, 2010 at 9:11 am |

    I find it amusing that FSU is, or was, going after a high school for using it’s logo. FSU copied the Skins logo 7 years after Washington introduced it. I know it’s not the same since the HS is using the same colors and name but still sad.

  • K. McInnis | September 16, 2010 at 9:24 am |

    Word from Auburn coaches is that they will wear their regular old uniforms Saturday, white pants and shells, as per usual and despite the fans “blue-out”. Chizik has reportedly debunked that helmet photo in the papers. Who really knows, though? I’ll be at the game Saturday, so if they run out in the all blue get-up, you will be able to see me completely shit myself… in HD. 3D-HD no less.

    • War Eagle Jeffrey | September 16, 2010 at 11:14 am |

      k., i’ll be shocked to see them emerge in anything but the standard white hats and pants…but that navy helmet looked nice.

      btw, what’s the deal with the 3-d for the game? is it on standard espn channel? do i need glasses?

      war cam eagle.

    • K. McInnis | September 16, 2010 at 6:29 pm |

      You need the tv and the glasses. I say its all in the air and the denials do not sit well with me. Auburn has a fan base that flipped thier lid when the helmet logo was increased by a fraction of an inch and that was halted. So just imagine what the alumni would do if Chizik said “we are tinkering with some colors for Saturday”….

  • bicklefischerkane | September 16, 2010 at 9:43 am |

    The item clipped to the chains, photographed at the Ball State-Liberty game, is indeed a device that marks a spot on the chain that aligns with whatever yardline the user indicates. It’s cleverly called a “clip” and is useful to mark the precise location of the chains, in case (a) field action approaches the sideline and requires the chain gang to drop the chains and retreat, (b) the quarter ends and the chains need to be flipped around, or (c) a first-down measurement is required.

    In re (c), TV cameras never show anything but the ball and the stick closer to the ball, but a third official (the head linesman, who always operates on the chains sideline) holds the chain to the yardline indicated by the clip; from there, not from the opposite stick, is the first-down side of the chain stretched during the measurement. Note also that unless the chain begins exactly on a x0 or x5 yardline, the chain straddles two yardline, and the custom is to place the clip on the yardline farther from the first-down side.

    And yes, the clip pictured is pretty old. Here is what a commonly used clip looks like:

  • Hank-SJ | September 16, 2010 at 9:43 am |

    According to this piece from, Jays offered him #4 and he said ‘he didn’t care’ what number he was assigned.

  • concealed78 | September 16, 2010 at 9:45 am |

    Ugh, why do they keep making MLB jackets so ass-ugly?? Why not do a simple clean design with just stripes on the collars, cuffs & waistband this like?:

  • TommyD | September 16, 2010 at 9:51 am |

    Byrd Stadium in College Park is (was) a very cool structure as the top row of the horseshoe was at street level.

    I was there in 1986… I’m 99% sure it’s been remodeled since then.

  • frankenslade | September 16, 2010 at 9:59 am |

    You don’t hear football announcers using the term “unmolested” these days, do you?

    As a youth soccer coach I can sympathise with uniform managers issuing duplicate numbers. I’m confused by numbers as it is, and then parents don’t have their kids try on their uniforms in advance of the new season in time for me to get them larger sizes with more than a day to spare before kickoff. In my rush to get them any uniform that fits, the club hands me a jersey with an already issued number. Or a kid finds the jersey he lost in the middle of last season and decides to wear that one instead of the new one I had to scramble to acquire. I’m something like this is what happened with the River Sharks players:) I carry rolls of black duct tape in my bag to correct these annual mix ups. The boys will wear their alternate jerseys this week, ensuring more opportunities to turn the number 3 into the number 8!

  • Luther Mahoney | September 16, 2010 at 10:01 am |

    Re.:Yankee caps &criminals

    There is a blog post on the Vanity Fair website about this topic.

  • Kyle | September 16, 2010 at 10:09 am |

    This is not uni-related but I can’t figure our how the kicker’s show is facing the wrong direction in this photo. Maybe I am seeing things but would like some feedback.

    • CraigD | September 16, 2010 at 10:12 am |

      Looks like the foot of a player diving off camera to block the kick. But it DOES look creepy.

    • marc | September 16, 2010 at 10:15 am |

      has the shoe come off and is in mid-air? weird, wild stuff.

      • AndyP | September 16, 2010 at 10:40 am |

        No. It’s a right foot/shoe. A blocker flew past.

    • Kyle | September 16, 2010 at 10:43 am |

      Thanks all. I agree it is probably a Defensive player diving past. Just looked really weird and creepy since you can’t see any of the kicker’s foot.

      • Ricardo Leonor | September 16, 2010 at 12:37 pm |

        What also make is look funny is that the defender that dove is wearing black socks…and it blends into the black pants of the guy on the sidelines….

  • JohnnySeoul | September 16, 2010 at 10:13 am |

    I’m so tired of hearing people cry about Chief Wahoo. It’s no different than the 20 Div I NCAA schools that have Caucasian characters as their logo (Cal State Northridge, Cleveland State, Colgate, Duquesne, East Carolina, Eastern Kentucky, Hampton, Iona, La Salle, U Mass, Ole Miss, New Mexico State, U of New Orleans, NJIT, Providence, Robert Morris, Seton Hall, Troy, UNLV, and UTEP). I’m sure there’s plenty more. So are we saying it’s ok as long as it’s a white person? C’mon, we need to stop being so over sensitive. I was born and raised in Cleveland and Chief Wahoo has never disrespect the Native American race. He is nothing more than a sports character…a cartoon-ish drawing than technically isn’t any real race.

    • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 10:15 am |

      >It’s no different than the 20 Div I NCAA schools that
      >have Caucasian characters as their logo

      Right, because someone waged a near-genocidal campaign to steal a continent from Causcasians, just like they did to Native Americans. Exact same thing!

      • JohnnySeoul | September 16, 2010 at 10:20 am |

        What does that have to do with logos though?

        • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 10:27 am |

          When you steal a continent from someone in a near-genocidal campaign, it might be nice not to caricature them in ways that exaggerate their ethnic characteristics for your cartoon-ish amusement.

          What was it we’re supposed to have? Oh,right: class.

        • marc | September 16, 2010 at 10:48 am |

          Just playing Devil’s Advocate… what about the “Fighting Irish” logo or the Celtic’s leprechaun? The Irish were treated as subhuman in this country and subjugated by the British in their own country for centuries. Why is it these logos are so revered? Both seem to be (paraphrasing here) caricatured in ways that exaggerate their ethnic characteristics for our cartoon-ish amusement. What makes them ok and why aren’t people up in arms about them? Is it because they’re a symbol of Irish-American pride at having come so far in American society or is it more that the Irish are white?

        • Jeff S. | September 16, 2010 at 12:03 pm |

          Well one difference might be that leprechauns aren’t real, whereas Native Americans, you know, are…

    • Chris from Carver | September 16, 2010 at 10:31 am |

      I think the difference between those D1 schools and the Indians is that their mascots are for the most part respectful. Notre Dame has somehow escaped controversy, even though “Fighting Irish” can be construed as offensive. Currently Chief Wahoo and formerly Chief Noc-A-Homa and the Philadelphia Warriors mascot, are essentially racist caricatures of Native Americans. An argument that is frequently brought up is what if there was a team named the “Blackies” and their mascot was a grinning African-American face. Is that not offensive. With regards to the Blackhawks and Redskins, their mascots are at least dignified, not just a toothy grin with a feather in their hair.

      • JohnnySeoul | September 16, 2010 at 10:44 am |

        In 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll’s findings about Native American sports team names and logos, showing that that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name of Washington Redskins football team and the logo of the Cleveland Indians baseball team acceptable.

        I suppose it is only sensitive to those that allow themselves to be extra sensitive.

        • EMD | September 16, 2010 at 10:56 am |

          I’m a lifelong Indians fan who would love to see Chief Wahoo retired.


          The team (for the most part) of my generation has been a laughingstock*, and frankly the logo doesn’t help. I’d even be up for a name change, too, but that might be taking things too far for the diehard fans who are older than I.

          I’d be up for something new … as long as there are stirrups involved.

          * – inept management for many, many years now followed by a league-wide revenue system that makes it increasingly difficult for small-market teams to compete on a consistent basis.

      • marc | September 16, 2010 at 10:59 am |

        “An argument that is frequently brought up is what if there was a team named the ‘Blackies’ and their mascot was a grinning African-American face.”

        Kinda like Uncle Ben and Aunt Jemima. Considering the chronology of the origin of pro sports, it’s surprising to me that this didn’t happen. How is it that Native Americans were singled out as desirable representatives of sports teams? Maybe it was a compliment(backhanded though it may be)? Strange.

    • The Jeff | September 16, 2010 at 10:44 am |

      I’m just going to leave this here…

      “According to polling results published in Sports Illustrated, “Although most Native American activists and tribal leaders consider Indian team names and mascots offensive, neither Native Americans in general nor a cross section of U.S. sports fans agree.” However, the article didn’t discuss any polling specifically on the Chief Wahoo caricature.[9] According to the article, “There is a near total disconnect between Indian activists and the Native American population on this issue.”[9] However, the results of the poll have been criticized by Native American activists due to Sports Illustrated’s refusal to provide polling information. Among the questions raised are how “Indians” were found and contacted, if they were concentrated in urban areas or on reservations, if a small number of tribes were overrepresented, and the exact wording and order of the questions.[10] However, in 2004, a poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania essentially confirmed the prior poll’s findings about Native American sports team names, showing that that 91% of the American Indians surveyed in the 48 states on the mainland USA found the name of Washington Redskins football team acceptable and setting out in detail the exact wording of the questions.”

      For the TL:DR crowd – actual Native Americans don’t care.

      • JohnnySeoul | September 16, 2010 at 10:50 am |

        > For the TL:DR crowd — actual Native Americans don’t care.


        • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 10:58 am |

          Your sweeping statement — “actual Native Americans don’t care” — is neither an accurate summary of what you posted nor an accurate summary of the original SI polling.

          SOME Native Americans cared, but not the majority. And if some of them cared — let’s say it was 25% (I’m not saying that number is accurate, but you didn’t post the original polling data and I don’t have time to look it up right now) — why would you do something that offends 25% of an ethnic group?

          More to the point, why would you do something cheap and low and when you could do something classy and high? It’s not always about what other people think or how they’d react; it’s about doing something you know is right, something you can be proud of.

          I also wonder what Native Americans would think if they were specifically polled about the mid-century version of Chief Wahoo….

          I’m not opposed to the team name Indians, and I’m not even completely opposed to Chief Wahoo per se. But the version of Chief Wahoo used back in the day, and now revived in this throwback design, is shameful.

        • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 11:08 am |

          Meanwhile, Phil just pointed out to me that we’ve been down this road (too) many times before. Some of you have no problem with caricatures of Native Americans; some of us do. OK then — let’s move on. Thanks.

        • marc | September 16, 2010 at 11:12 am |

          “I’m not opposed to the team name Indians.”

          A Native American friend of mine said she wasn’t offended by the name either, in fact, she said most of the NAs she knew and was related to referred to themselves as “Indians.” She wasn’t offended by Wahoo either, but that’s just one person and obviously not the universal sentiment. As Paul mentioned, the point isn’t that most of them aren’t offended, there are a good number who are, so why not honor their wishes and relegate Wahoo et al to the history books?

        • hugh.c.mcbride | September 16, 2010 at 12:46 pm |

          “Why would you do something cheap and low and when you could do something classy and high? It’s not always about what other people think or how they’d react; it’s about doing something you know is right, something you can be proud of.”

          Very nicely put, PL.

        • EMD | September 16, 2010 at 3:19 pm |

          Honestly, I don’t believe the team thinks what they’re currently doing is “cheap and low.” The team’s history is predominantly as the Indians, and the Wahoo character goes back to 1947. Efforts have been made in the past to minimize the Wahoo character (The script I hats, the 70s and 80s uniforms where he was again relegated to a sleeve patch, etc.), but without a raucous, continuous outcry, I think the team probably thinks they have bigger problems (i.e., attendance!) to deal with now.

          Originally, I doubt the idea was to dishonor or disparage Native Americans. The ‘Louis Sockalexis story’ is good mythology, but it’s not really true, so the name wasn’t to ‘honor’ Native Americans, either.

          I do however agree with your sentiment that they should change it for the sake of doing something right. As a fan, I would welcome a change and think nothing of it. In fact, it would be interesting to see more uniform tweaks for the Indians that a) presented a new identity and name or b) did away with Wahoo.

    • JimmyDan | September 16, 2010 at 11:48 am |

      So Hampton, a historically black university, has a caucasion logo?

  • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 10:16 am |

    not that mlb moves as many dugout jackets as their other merch, but isn’t it pretty obvious they can’t issue a “classic” one because then having to buy a “new” model would become unnecessary?

    • concealed78 | September 16, 2010 at 10:34 am |

      Makes me nervous when you say that, Phil. But MLB has a deep history, and they could easily make many classic jackets that could be issued once every few years. Lots of primary, secondary & caps logos to play with. I would just like to have the option of having such a thing exist (and isn’t $500). They gotta be neglecting the demand for classic. All fans weren’t born in the 1990s.

    • =bg= | September 16, 2010 at 11:06 am |

      I just wanna see the new design with MLB names on it- ‘MAJESTIC’ on the front doesn’t give me a sense of what the Giants look will be. (I started this thread a day or two ago.)

  • B-Rich | September 16, 2010 at 10:34 am |

    I still find it ridiculous that Colorado has the gall to put out a patch claiming that they were “National Champions” in 1990. Everyone knows Georgia Tech was the real national champs– they had only one tie ( against UNC), knocked off #1 ranked Virginia in week 10, pounded Nebraska in their bowl game, and topped the UPI poll. Meanwhile Colorado had one tie (to Tennessee), one “official” loss (to Illinois), and one “unofficial” loss – when Colorado “beat” Missouri on a last-minute lunge which was done on FIFTH DOWN. Colorado also BARELY beat notre Dame 10-9 in the Orange Bowl.

    Finally, the two teams had a common opponent: Nebraska.

    Georgia Tech beat Nebraska in the Orange Bowl, 45-21
    Colorado beat Nebraska regular season, 27-12


    • phillip | September 16, 2010 at 11:01 am |

      No Playoff = No NatChamp in my book. Polls are garbage.

      • Robert | September 16, 2010 at 11:37 am |

        I refer to what college football has today as the “TV Title Game”. Because that’s what it is. It’s a contest of the 2 teams the powers that be want to see play, not the two best teams.

      • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 12:05 pm |

        Just an observation here.

        The mindsets in pro football and college football and markedly different, and a college playoff would change that forever. The minsets would become much, much more the same.

        The pros focus on winning their division or at least making certain to get into the playoffs. Going undefeated? That would be nice, but it rarely enters their minds until it starts being discussed about the time someone’s gone 11-0 or so.

        In college, however, the WHOLE IDEA is to go undefeated. That is absolutely the goal of most every coach, player, student, fan and alumnus out there.

        Personally, I enjoy the difference. I enjoy that most college teams are out there, basically, to try to if at all possible kick the snot out of everyone they play. I like the pressure that any week you could get tagged with the loss that’d schmutz up your entire season.

        Yeah, it’s different. And different, I thought most of us profess here, is good.

        I don’t college football to feel like the NFL. I want it to feel like college football. A whole different paradigm and mood.


        • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 12:31 pm |

          stop making sense, rick

          you’ll confuse everyone

        • Chris Holder | September 16, 2010 at 12:44 pm |

          As an Alabama fan who just celebrated a great UNDEFEATED season after enduring a decade plus of agony… amen, and amen. The NFL is something a lot of people enjoy, but I will always prefer the college game. I would love to see the NCAA actually revert to the bowl system used prior to the 90s, where the possibility of split national championships (and even more controversy?) was high. The controversy and debate over the national championships is a part of what I love so much about college football.

        • The Jeff | September 16, 2010 at 12:47 pm |

          The mindset doesn’t need to change.

          You don’t even need a true playoff system. The only time it comes up is when you have a situation where one team is declared champion, while another team is still undefeated. Just make them play each other. Problem solved.

        • Aaron | September 16, 2010 at 2:16 pm |

          And towards the idea of going undefeated leads to a lot of cupcake games. Although it is fun when the cupcakes win, a la App. St. and James Madison.

          Count me in for a playoff, but then, my alma mater is a DIII school, so I’ve gotten used to seeing a great college playoff system.

        • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 3:20 pm |

          And those “cupcakes” have the power to just about totally scuttle a top-flight team’s shot at the national title, or expose a pretender. That’s what the likes of Appalachian State and James Madison did. Every year, NCAA football inches closer to “on any even Saturday…”

          I think that, every once in awhile, that sort of thing makes for memorable drama and excitement.

          Besides, I don’t know that the NFL doesn’t have its share of cupcakes every now and again (the Lions in recent years, for example). Or, let’s examine the NFC West these days. If that were a beauty contest, the highest anyone would finish would be Honorable Mention. Things could change, of course, but right now…Woof.


        • Christopher | September 16, 2010 at 4:15 pm |

          Ricko: Great point. I don’t know if I fully agree, but I’ve never heard it put that way before.

          Here’s the only issue I have with your point. With the current college football set up, only a select handful of teams have any real chance to win it all.

          There’s something to be said for giving an 8th ranked team an underdog’s chance to shock the world and win the playoffs.

          Plus, the fact that there are so many teams out there, and there would be, say, only 8 spots in the playoffs… teams would still be playing each and every game just as hard.

      • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

        The only time it comes up is when you have a situation where one team is declared champion, while another team is still undefeated.

        which has happened

        either they institute a full playoff, like every other league and division already has…

        or they keep it the way it was for 100 years

        the way it is now doesn’t work

      • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 2:35 pm |

        I just thought of something.

        About “Mulligans”.

        If the best team in the NFL goes 12-4, they are giving every other team in the league 5 Mulligans, 5 games they can lose and still remain dead-solid in the hunt.

        In NCAA football there are, pretty much, no Mulligans. Perfect or go home. Now THAT’s pressure. And that, to me, is exciting. Not MORE exciting than the NFL, just DIFFERENT exciting.

        NCAA football’s national championship drive is an autumn-long “last man standing” thing. An 8- or 16-game playoff would be a participation trophy for those who couldn’t handle that kind of pressure, to be unbeatable every frickin’ week.

        And if Boise State wants to play with big boys, let ’em join the Pac 12 or the Big Ten…and try to be perfect at that level. It’s not like schools aren’t re-affiliating themselves these days or anything.


        • EMD | September 16, 2010 at 3:23 pm |

          That’s certainly compelling, Ricko.

          But do you think we would see better regular season matchups if the “Go perfect or go home” system wasn’t in place.?

          More Boise State/Virginia Techs and less Florida/Frostburg State matchups, since losing to a high-profile non-conference team would be less costly?

          Also! A playoff system would probably create more interesting matchups, too. Texas vs. Alabama in the second round? I’d love to see that.

        • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 3:36 pm |

          Guess the bottom line questions are things like…

          “Why does NCAA football have to be like NFL football?”
          “Is it necessary that it be for anyone to enjoy it?”
          “What’s wrong with the approach, atmosphere and attitude being different?”
          “Do we want to watch the same show on Saturday that we now see on Sunday?”

          or (and this is admittedly hypothetical and specific…but not impossible)…

          “How are we gonna handle a coach ‘resting’ his Heisman hopeful in the season finale against a traditional rival because his team’s got a home-field first-round playoff game locked up, and ‘No sense getting the guy hurt in a meaningless game’?”

          Just, y’know, sayin’…things change when the focus is only on making the playoffs.


        • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 3:56 pm |

          great point ricko…i seem to recall a post on this a few months back ;)

          i still maintain that however college football, division 1 (or whatever they’re calling it now) eventually plays out…almost everyone (no matter what side you’re on) agrees the system NOW ain’t working

          we won’t rehash the arguments for a full playoff (to bring them in line with every other sport and every other level/division of that sport) or revert back to the “old” bowl system, pre-BCS nonsense…everyone has an opinion and no one is really right or wrong, because, after all…we all have opinions

          the point is that the current system, where a “number one” is officially declared yet never played an undefeated team who could just as easily lay claim to that same #1…aint workin

          at least the old way, you might get three teams who could “say” they were number one, but the official honor wasn’t bestowed upon them the way it is now…and in lieu of a full fledged playoff you’ll NEVER have (unless one team is like 13-0 and everyone else has one or two losses) a true number one

          so the question becomes “do we need (or want) a real playoff system” or should we just go back to the traditional bowls for the conferences?

    • pflava | September 16, 2010 at 12:54 pm |

      For college football, the trade-off for having the best regular season is having the worst post season. And I don’t mind that. I enjoy the college season a LOT more than the NFL.

  • Jeremy | September 16, 2010 at 11:07 am |
  • Scott | September 16, 2010 at 12:08 pm |

    Dang. The one time my school, Kennesaw State University gets to be mentioned on this blog and it gets spelled wrong…
    At least it isn’t as bad as the flop Vince Dooley made yesterday announcing his recommendation for football at KSU.

  • Kevin Z. | September 16, 2010 at 12:15 pm |

    Do any readers live in Toronto or in an area that gets the Toronto Blue Jays’ games on TV? If so, I’m hoping you might be able to help me with a project I’m working on. My email is uvacavs28 at if you are willing and able to help. Thanks!

  • Ricardo Leonor | September 16, 2010 at 12:44 pm |

    For the first since what might as well be 400 B.C. the Cubs will be visiting Fenway to play the Red Sox in 2011. Any chance this can be a throw WAY WAY back weekend for both?

  • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 1:02 pm |

    Today’s ESPN column is up, and I don’t mind saying I think it’s really, really good:

    • dwight | September 16, 2010 at 1:43 pm |

      Nicely done Paul. I had never heard of this “event”. Was entertaining and informative, as an article/collumn/feature should be. Kudos.

    • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 2:41 pm |

      AND, a chance to see the Hurricanes in their forest green helmets and jerseys.

      Just good all the way around.

      Nice work, Paul.


    • M.Princip | September 16, 2010 at 3:00 pm |

      Enjoyed this, and never heard the story before.

      It would have been interesting if Miami’s coach gave his team orders not to score, if it looks like Florida were going to pull any shit like that. I mean, if the crowd was really chanting “let them score”, should have given them some clue? Or, maybe if Miami’s running back saw what the DL had just done, then on his on initiative went down right at the goal line.

      Kind of reminds me of a play I saw in the NFL last year when I believe it was Eagles back Brian Mitchell stopped right at the goal line, sacrificed the TD, instead ran the clock out in Dallas? Heads up play by the RB there.

      • Ricardo Leonor | September 16, 2010 at 3:41 pm |

        He should just have danced around the field running in circles until the clock expired!

        This story reminds of something that I have always asked my friends regarding the integrity of sports:

        Your team is losing 12-0 in the last inning of a meaningless ( pennat wise ) game. You are the last batter in the game. Pitcher is throwing a perfect game.

        What do you do?

        A. Keep the bat on your shoulder and see if he walks you or strikes you out.

        B. Swing away freely at anything, basically strking out on purpose.

        C. Have a normal at bat like always trying to get on base.

        D. With the infield playing back try to sneak in a drag bunt to break up the perfect game.

        • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 3:48 pm |

          Depends on where Jim Joyce is umpiring, no?

        • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 3:58 pm |

          the answer is ALWAYS C (which would include D if you think you could get on base)

        • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 4:17 pm |

          I dunno. D’s kinda bush.
          Stick with C and try to rope one so there’s nothing cheap about it.


        • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 4:26 pm |

          why is D kinda bush?

          if the infield is playing the hitter properly, they shouldn’t be surprised by a drag bunt…and if they’re going to give you a hit by playing back, why wouldn’t you try to get on base?

          it’s not like stealing when you’re up 8 runs…that’ll get your next batter plunked in the earhole or you, next time you are at bat…that’s a total “unwritten rule” you don’t break…i’ve never seen don’t try to get a hit (by whatever means) listed in those rules

          if bunting is bush, then it shouldn’t be allowed ever

        • Ricardo Leonor | September 16, 2010 at 6:16 pm |

          I guess the “correct” answer would be C. You always try to get on no matter what, but I kind of understand why in this scenario dragging a bunt would seem kind of bush…

          Personally I would not be too upset if I struck out, but would prefer hitting one to the centerfielder on the warning track…

          When we were in High School, I had a buddy that leaned in to an inside pitch to break up a perfect game….

        • Ricardo Leonor | September 16, 2010 at 6:32 pm |

          Maybe “bush league” is not the right word…but bunting there may be in the “letter” but not the “spirit” of the rules…

        • Ricko | September 16, 2010 at 8:05 pm |

          Remember, in the scenario presented, my team is down 12-0.

          I’m not bunting. No way. I’m not going for a cheap hit just to screw up the guy’s effort. That’s personal, that’s not trying to win the ball game. If I get on, I’m the run that would leave us behind only 11-0.

          If it’s 1-0 or 2-0 or some such, you got a whole different situation.


        • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 11:02 pm |

          When we were in High School, I had a buddy that leaned in to an inside pitch to break up a perfect game….

          the next time he face that team/pitcher…i bet the first pitch was also inside

    • JimmyDan | September 16, 2010 at 3:36 pm |

      Brett Favre and Michael Strahan think that’s the greatest play in football history.

  • Paul R | September 16, 2010 at 1:15 pm |

    “Flyers will reportedly be unveiling their new road jerseys this Friday, 3pm.”

    Not that it’s a real suprise (basically they’re Winter Classic jerseys), but it looks like EA sports already reveals them on the NHL 11 site.

    • Paul R | September 16, 2010 at 1:16 pm |

      Sorry, that’s “they’re keeping the Winter Classic jerseys”

  • Ricardo Leonor | September 16, 2010 at 1:25 pm |

    Please excuse my ignorance of copyright or trademark laws…

    But this line jumped out at me:

    “telling the school it needed to phase out use of the NICKNAME and logos”

    I clearly understand the logos, images and other creative productions that can be owned… but can you “own” a nickname?

    Can you own words like Bears, Lions, Eagles, Tigers etc.. or for that matter even more specific words like SEMINOLES OR GATORS?

  • rpm | September 16, 2010 at 2:37 pm |

    didn’t get to comment yesterday, but i loved the reuss interview. when i replayed the 1970 baseball season strat-o-matic style, he was lights out, much better then his card.

    why is there a monkey quarterbacking the blue bombers?

    does anybody else see the irony when a school with a native “mascot” goes after someone to cease and desist for using the schools “mascot”? i know FSU is a rare case of having permission, but that really cracks me up in a what a world, what a world sort of way.

    • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 3:47 pm |

      Speaking of the Reuss interview: Barring any breaking uni-related story tonight, Part 2 of the interview will run tomorrow.

      • traxel | September 16, 2010 at 11:24 pm |

        Awesome. Part I was great. Always wondered if anyone else prominant in any of the big leagues checks in on the site. Besides rpm of course.

  • Dave Mac | September 16, 2010 at 5:36 pm |

    Paul, I loved the story on ESPN today. I’d say it’s among your best articles. Incredibly interesting, well-written, and you present the story in a very captivating manner.

    Yesterday’s entry with Reuss was one of the best blogs in a while too. You’re on a roll. I’m looking forward to part 2.

    • Paul Lukas | September 16, 2010 at 5:52 pm |

      Thanks, Dave. I learned a lot from this story myself, and that’s always the best thing that can happen while working on an article.

  • Chris from Carver | September 16, 2010 at 5:37 pm |

    Here’s the Red Sox’s new jacket w/o the sleeve patch.

  • LarryB | September 16, 2010 at 7:01 pm |

    Great story about the Gator Flop. I was aware of it, but nice to see more behind the story.

    And of course I love the Maryland Navy color on color film. Thanks Matt

  • Kris McInnis | September 16, 2010 at 9:19 pm |

    Auburn coach Gene Chizik just had his Thursday night radio show and the first question that was asked was, obviously, about the rumored all-blue uniforms (You know, nevermind about the team trying to win the game.) Chizik reiterated the whole “Auburn is Auburn and has been that way for a long time” scramble and then once again flat out denied they’d be in anything but the normal attire come Saturday night… but was then quick to throw in the “unless they surprise me” to end the discussion. So yeah, thanks for nothing, buddy.

    • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 9:44 pm |

      So yeah, thanks for nothing, buddy.

      isn’t it better this way?

  • Kris McInnis | September 16, 2010 at 10:01 pm |

    If by ‘better’ you mean at least I’ll have something to stew over during the 3 1/2 hour drive down Saturday morning as I fret, then yes. I’ll probably need a new steering wheel….

    • LI Phil | September 16, 2010 at 10:23 pm |

      sure…pop in some carly and chill

  • aflfan | September 16, 2010 at 10:22 pm |

    Michigan will wear a number 87 sticker on the back of their helmets Saturday to honor Ron Kramer who passed away last Saturday. Kramer’s number has been retired by Michigan.

  • ScottyM | September 16, 2010 at 11:04 pm |

    Tom O’Brien of NCSU looks like a complete dork with his R/W/B stripe ballcap… on a Thursday nite… 5 days after 9/11… (and they played on 9/11, too).

    What a patriot. Thanks, adidas.

  • Jon | September 17, 2010 at 7:07 am |

    It’s nice that Kennesaw State is putting Vince Dooley’s likeness on their hemlets!

    Oh no I dih-ihnt!!

  • Chris B. | September 17, 2010 at 11:25 am |

    the Detroit Tigers 2011 dugout jacket is on sale now!