This real money site caters to all players, with reviews on mobile games you can play, including slots, blackjack, and roulette.

Monochrome In Baseball, Part V

rockies monochrome black 2

By Phil Hecken

After a short hiatus, the look at the “future” of monochrome (or lack thereof) in baseball continues. Today, we’ll examine half of the Senior Circuit. The premise of this ‘series,’ has been to look at the historical use of monochrome in baseball, a look at monochrome in other lands, and finally, a look a monochrome possibilities for teams in the American League.

Since that time, we’ve actually had two teams, the Baltimore Orioles (throwing back to 1971-72) and the Minnesota Twins (throwing back to the turn-of-the-20th-century, circa 1909 St. Paul Gophers) break out monochrome. For the most part, the fans seemed very receptive of these looks. These teams join the A’s and Pirates, who had earlier this year participated in their own “70’s Turn Back The Clock” game. Even if one doesn’t count the Phillies and Braves, who both did the powder blue monochrome throwback, so far four teams have gone true monochrome this season. So, it seems fans want to see the look, even if for only one game. Or do they?

Seeing as baseball seems to have morphed into a bunch of pajama-pants wearing, softball-topped (for many teams) clones, are there any teams for whom the monochrome look might be more appropriate? After looking at the American League, there only a handful of teams who would probably be able to pull off a monochrome look, and I for one would support that — on the condition that it’s used very sparingly, and with proper hosiery. Unfortunately, neither is likely to happen.

But what about the senior circuit? Would any teams (and there are a few with monochrome in their past) be good candidates for monochrome now or into the future? Let’s see.


Arizona Diamondbacks: The Diamondbacks have two alternate tops, a brick and a black, and neither of them would likely look good in monochrome. Black would require a complete no-pajama policy, and stirrups or socks. The brick might be a better option, without or with striped stirrups (thanks to Chris Powers for that mock).

The Verdict: Can’t you just see the D-Backs mixing and matching if given the opportunity? Brick and black aren’t bad colors — but there are better teams to “claim” either of them, so I’d say the snakes aren’t a candidate for monochrome.


Atlanta Braves: Another team with two softball tops they trot out a lot (well, not so much the red, but the navy is worn fairly often). Aside from the fact that I don’t think the Braves should wear monochrome red, I think if paired with classic hosiery, it wouldn’t be a bad look. As far as monochrome navy, that’s probably best left alone. Besides, no one wants to see navy pajamas.

The Verdict: If anyone is going to “claim” monochrome red, it’s probably not the Braves, although that has possiblities. All navy blue is definitely not going to look good. If the Bravos return to any monochrome, powder blue may be a better option.


Chicago Cubs: If you refer back to the original monochrome piece, you’ll see the Cubs do have solid color tops & bottoms in their past. And they do have a royal blue alternate. How might that look? A lot would be dependent on the socks. Bringing back the three red stripes (thanks to Chris Powers for the last two mocks) isn’t a terrible look. But, the Cubs are another team with powder blue in their past, perhaps a return to that is more appropos.

The Verdict: While the all-royal is appealing, and the Cubs do have a history of monochrome, it’s probably a bit too much to pull off. And the pajamists would ruin any good that could come from it.


Cincinnati Reds: OK — possibly we’re getting somewhere. If you recall the recent Nights In White Satin article, you’ll recall the Reds did introduce red pants for use at night, although they never went monochrome. If any team were to appropriate an all red look, the Reds might be the team to do it. That’s a lot of red though. Chris Powers’ thought to mitigate some of that, striping, a white belt and white sleeves might be a nice counterpart. Of course, that also runs the risk of this. With really only white and red (and the mandatory BFBS undoubtedly creeping in, especially as a dropshadow), it may prove too daunting to pull off, particularly with the dreaded pajama bottom option.

The Verdict: Probably best to just leave the Reds with white pants. However — instead of white or gray, what if the Reds went with a “powder red”? Nah.


Colorado Rockies: The Rockies two primary colors are black and purple. That couldn’t possibly look good right? I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I don’t think you need to possess Paul’s hatred of purple to realize this isn’t a good look.

The Verdict: No.


Florida Marlins: For a team about to move into a new stadium and adopt a “new” identity (the “Miami” Marlins), they are probably a candidate for a uniform overhaul. And with black and teal as their current colors, would either look good in monochrome? We’ve seen enough black monochrome mocks to realize that’s out. But, how bad would an all teal uniform look? Only Jim Vilk would wear that.

The Verdict: Let’s see if the Marlins seek a new uniform for their move into a new stadium in 2012 before we think about wanting to see them in monochrome.


Houston Astros: If brick didn’t work for the D-Backs, would it work for the Astros? It wouldn’t be much better, but owner Drayton McLane loves that color. And the Astros do have some, um, crazy looks in their past. Still, as much as their owner loves the brick, even he wouldn’t want his team in that much red, would he? A better option, especially since they already use it, might be to adopt a cream look. Of course, with five teams already sporting a cream uniform or alternate, it wouldn’t be very original.

The Verdict: Not my choice for a team to go monochrome, but it’s certainly a team I could see them being a candidate for it.


Los Angeles Dodgers: Surely, a team with one of the most classic looks in the game, and whch doesn’t even have an alternate jersey, wouldn’t be a candidate for monochrome. But, the Dodgers do have monochrome in their past (of course, they also have plaid in their past), most notably during that satin night baseball era. So, we can at least hypothesize as to how it might look. And we can just as quickly dismiss that thought.

The Verdict: For a team with as beautiful and classic a uniform as that worn by the Dodgers, the thought of them introducing a solid color uniform is just…unthinkable.


That ends the look at the first half of the National League, and almost without exception, there is not a single team I would recommend even attempting the monochrome look. But, that doesn’t mean there isn’t a National League team that shouldn’t. There are several good candidates coming up in the final offering of monochrome in baseball. You can probably already figure out at least two of them.

What say you, readers? Of the first half (alphabetically) of the NL, should any of the teams even consider the monochrome look? Possibly a return to powder blue for one or two? Or should we just hope they learn to wear proper hosiery and leave it at that.


Dead Slug inline

The Slug…is Dead
New 40th Anniversary unis Unveiled

Yesterday afternoon, the Buffalo Sabres unveiled their new third sweater/uniform as well as a new road jersey that is almost, but not quite, a white copy of their home sweater. The home uniform is “technically” new as well, having been bumped up from their former third kit of last season. The unis were unveiled as a part of the celebration of the Sabres’ 40th Anniversary.

The big news, of course, is the old logo, derisively nicknamed the “Buffaslug” (for its uncanny resemblance to the vile garden denizen) is no more. The Sabres have reverted to a full-time fauxback uniform, with a nifty new third jersey.

The new royal blue uniform “celebrates the history of Buffalo hockey with a vintage white script across the chest inspired by the old Buffalo Bisons club,” notes the Icethetics blog. “Beneath the script and set to the right side is the Sabres’ 40th anniversary mark ”” the retro logo with 19 and 70 inside the blue circle.”

The Buffalo script is reminiscent of the old Buffalo Bisons “bottlecap” logo (more information on the Bisons can be found here). The back of the jersey features a yellow nameplate with blue block lettering and an odd cross-stitched pattern, which is supposed to be evocative of vintage hockey sweaters.

Obviously, after the “Buffaslug,” these uniforms are a MAJOR upgrade, and it’s hard to find fault with anything about them. I’m not overly fond of the tiny front uni numbers nor the white piping on the home jersey, but other than that — these are damn near perfect. As far as the new third, I LOVE the four yellow/gold stripes and the royal blue color, but the retro inspired wordmark doesn’t need the overline and the 40th anniversary patch looks slightly out of place and purposely off-center (just not a fan of a wordmark and a logo on the front — it might look better if moved the shoulder). But those are really minor quibbles — the Sabes have totally scored a hat trick with these gorgeous new threads.

According to, the Sabres will wear their new third jersey for the first time against the New York Rangers in their home opener on Oct. 9.


ducktrackerTrackin’ the Ducks

UW #1 Seahawks Fan Michael Princip has been tracking the Oregon Ducks and all of their 2,456 possible uniform combinations this season. He’ll be updating it after each game.

The Ducks quacked a new look (surprise, surprise) yesterday. Here’s the top dog duck to explain:


I have to admit, I wasn’t really expecting these carbon helmets to look this good. Or, maybe it was simply the fantastic ensemble that accompanied the helmet, and the spectacular yellow numbers playing off the yellow ‘O’ decal on the helmets. Every year the Ducks wear a combination that I completely go nuts over, and this year it might just be these week three carbon helmets, green jersey, and matte gray pants. Interestingly enough, it was week three last season where they wore a similar combination I flipped over, however, with the awesome white helmets. Oh and, in only three weeks, the Ducks have scored 189 points. Not too shabby, guess it helps to play teams like New Mexico and Portland State at Autzen.

Here then, is your 2010 Duck Tracker


all sport uni tweaksStill have a backlog of uni tweaks, so let get right into it. If you have a tweak, change or concept for any sport, send them my way. OK? OK! Here’s what’s on tap for today.

Only two tweakers, but a whole mess of tweaks. Here ’tis:


Starting off the show is Dan Baglio, who has some college tweaks for Maryland & Princeton:

Hi Phil,

Here are some tweaks that I’ve done to Maryland and Princeton’s football uniforms. They’re my two alma maters and thought I’d give their unis a little tweak.

With the Maryland concept, I really wanted to highlight the yellow in the uniforms. It’s a little-known fact that Maryland’s original colors were gold (yellow gold) and black, but added in the red later to commemorate the blood shed in the Civil War. Obviously, red has taken over as the primary color and the yellow has been relegated to an accent color. With the basketball team having yellow alts, I really hope the football team starts to showcase it a little more as well.

Home, Home Alt., Road, Road Alt.

As for Princeton, I really just did what I think is a modern, but not too
modern update on the classic. I’d be fine if they never changed unis, but this was a fun exercise.

Home, Home Alt., Road, Road Alt.

Love the blog, it’s part of my morning news routine every day.



And for the final set today, and it’s a big one, is Bowen Hobbs, who has a whole mess of NFL concepts…and they’re pretty sweet:

Hi Phil,
I’m back with an array of NFL uniform (and some logo) concepts. I’ve posted most of these in my blog, 44th & Goal, but a few haven’t made it. I’ll cover some of the bigger changes:

Bills: Not a huge change, but the uniform actually makes sense from a mix & match standpoint.

Chiefs: Yes, it’s modern, but the arrow on the pants is a pretty nice touch.

Colts: Unified the striping, with a twist.

Jets: Modified the 80s logo and developed an abstract helmet.

Panthers: I felt the current uniforms are dated. My first choice was ditching the silver. I added the claw marks as inserts in the light blue panels and paired it with a black helmet.

Patriots: I went back to the red, white, and blue. The uniforms blend modern and traditional by placing subliminal stars within the striping.

Raiders: I started by tweaking the logo. I added more details, such as scars and shading. With it, I also created an alternate logo and a new wordmark. The uniforms use the modified block font and some piping. I also made the shoes and facemasks black for a more intimidating look.

Ravens: I wanted the uniforms to be modern and fitting with the logo. The piping and inserts create a wing feel on the sleeves.

Saints: I updated the logo and and decided to go with a wrought iron theme on the uniforms. Also, the gold match.

Steelers: I used diamond plating for the stripe pattern, putting more “steel” into the uniforms.

Texans: What’s more Texan than Western-Style button-down shirts? These jerseys, that’s what.

Vikings: I updated the logo, making the Viking sharper and less pink. I also fixed the side panel issue and added an off-white alternate.

Washington: Total re-brand. New name, new logos, new everything. The uniforms are very modern.


Bowen Hobbs

Great job today, fellows. Back next time with more of your concepts, tweaks and wholesale rebrands.


vilk 5 & 1 b 5 & 1

After a surprisingly good week last week, Jim Vilk is back his top 5 best, and one worst, uniforms for the college football season. Obviously, these are all subjective, so what I think looks good (or bad) Jim probably feels just the opposite.

Lets see how he did this week:


5. BYU/Florida State: Cougars don’t wear all-white often, do they?

4. Arkansas/Georgia: Hey, at least the Razorbacks didn’t put the name on the backside.

3. Alabama/Duke: After throwing you a curve with Arkansas, here’s a little old-school matchup.

2. Florida/Tennessee: A full day’s supply of Vitamin C with all that orange.

1. Iowa State/Kansas State: Color, stripes and grass — a real trifecta.

And the worst matchup: Portland State/Oregon.

Normally, I would have picked Boise State/Wyoming, but I liked the Cowboys’ alternate unis.


Wow…Um, that Boise State/Wyoming game might have been the worst matchup of the year. For real. BOTH teams feature NDL (“name down leg”) and the Cowboys have an airport abbreviation as their wordmark. Forget the fact that you have a white helmet/yellow highlighter jersey/brown pants/brown socks team versus blue/white/orange/white with file folder tabs and ass stripes. C’mon Jim. The Ducks don’t deserve this one.


this and that

This & That…

Been a while since we had a “This and That”…but there’s a lot of stuff that doesn’t belong anywhere else.

Marty Hick and croquet go together like bacon and ice cream. So when the new croquet season opens, as it did last week, that means freshly painted balls, which get two coats and then a clear gloss, gorgeous mallets, to match the balls…and, of course…vintage golf shirts to match your ball & mallet, natch.

Talkin’ Beisbol: The Milwaukee Brewers and the San Francisco Giants matched up in a Latino Heritage night last evening. Of note was the non-patronistic handling of the Spanish names for each team. Carlos Santana went NOB for the occasion. The cream versus gray matchup was much nicer than their Friday night attire, and much more palatable than the “Los Mets” Hispanic Heritage treatment this past Friday night.

Lee Wilds tips us wise to the Tennessee Titans, who will be wearing their white jerseys for their game today, and are also supposed to be wearing white pants — if this happens, it will be the only third ever pairing of the white tops & bottoms.

Really BFBS: If you’re going to go Black For Black’s Sake, you may just as well go all out. That’s what Mississippi State thought might look good yesterday. It didn’t. Black and maroon never look good together. Coach Mullen, what did you think? Exactly.

More BFBS in one of the late games out in California. Yep — the Stanford Cardinal also pulled out the BFBS last night. That’s right full-on BFBS. Their unis were only slightly better than were Mississippi State’s if only because they at least featured normal pants stripes and legible numbers. But still.

RTFTRS: (Red Turf for…) If you thought Boise State’s blue unis on blue turf look stoopid…check this shit out. Oh. My. God. That’s the Eastern Washington Eagles and Montana Grizzlies playing on the new synthetic turf at Roos Field in Cheney, WA. This might be the worst looking field in NCAA history. Seriously. How in the world do they think this stuff up?

L’il Help? Paul will be traveling back from the Cream City late today, so we’re asking everyone to go easy on the ticker submissions. Also, if you notice any NFL uni news or weirdness, please post it (and pics/screen grabs too) in the comments below (basically, anything that would normally appear in Monday Morning Uni Watch). If you don’t want to post in the comments, please SEND ME YOUR NFL UNI PICS & OBSERVATIONS directly? I’ll be helping Paul to gather the info for tomorrow’s post. OK? OK!


*PHEW*. Another biggie in the books. Everyone enjoy your Sunday and a full slate of NFL games. Don’t forget to post those uni observations in the comments or send them to me. And don’t be too hard on Jim — after all, he’d wear that Wyoming uni.


That’s Anita Bryant on his left in the light yellow outfit and Rock Hudson on his right. Talk about the “Odd Couple!” — Terry Proctor

117 comments to Monochrome In Baseball, Part V

  • Bill S. | September 19, 2010 at 8:00 am |

    – Lee Wilds tips us wise to the Tennessee Titans, who will be wearing their white jerseys for their home opener today, and are also supposed to be wearing white pants – if this happens, it will be the first ever pairing of the white tops & bottoms.

    As “the graphics guy” working with Tim Brulia, I had a suspicion that this was not the truth so I went back and checked our work. Sure enough in 2002 white-on-white was worn! Home vs Philly (Week 1) and Home vs Cleveland (Week 3). While I can do graphics, my ‘linking skills’ aren’t quite as good. If you go to the Getty Images site simply put in “2002 Titans Eagles” and “2002 Titans Browns” for the evidence.
    Also – LAST WEEK was their home opener against the Raiders!

    Bill S., Bradenton,FL

    • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 8:36 am |


      (now fixed)

    • Steve Naismith | September 19, 2010 at 1:07 pm |

      Nope… white jerseys, blue pants.

    • Tony | September 20, 2010 at 6:57 am |

      Also, I don’t have ready photographic proof… But I’m pretty sure the Titans wore white on white or one game in 2006… I remember this because the team did horribly the first part of that year and after the game when there were comments about the white on white not looking good, Jeff Fisher basically said they would never wear all white again.

  • jdreyfuss | September 19, 2010 at 8:25 am |

    Can Dan Baglio send those Princeton concepts to Mike Brown?

    On a second note, isn’t it even more inappropriate for a team named after a color to go monochrome in a different color? Stanford is even worse than Texas Tech, because they’re only named after cardinal. At least Tech also has Raiders in their team name.

    • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 12:27 pm |

      I was thinking “wrong,” but “inappropriate” works, too.

      Wanted to make Wake/Stanford the worst matchup, but while it was wrong…oh, SO wrong…it wasn’t ugly.

  • Joe Barrie | September 19, 2010 at 8:59 am |

    I am not a fan of monochrome uniforms, but I think the Dodgers would do well to go back to their old wordmark.

    It should be Dod gers, rather than Do dgers, as has been the case since ’49.

    • scott | September 19, 2010 at 9:59 am |

      Why? The uniform would look lopsided if you did that.

      • Joe Barrie | September 19, 2010 at 10:43 am |

        I’d say the reverse is true.

        Look at the training camp photo, or pictures of the ’41 NL champs.

  • StLMarty | September 19, 2010 at 9:18 am |

    Overall, Bowen Hobbs’ designs went against every fiber of my uni-thought. However, I found several likable nuances throughout his display.

    • Ricko | September 19, 2010 at 10:02 am |

      Bowen Hobbs certainly figured out how to vastly improve the Vikings pants: Put the “horn” there, too; stop trying to make the pattern “connect” with the jerseys. With those pants they actually could retain the contrasting jersey side panels, which I’m getting used to. But the pants they wear now are just a mess, look like the designer couldn’t come up with anything…or worse, overthought it.

      Kinda bums me out, though, that evidently these days any uni concept must contain six options. Too much “costume department”. Since whent are the bumblebee Pirates and Oregon football the models for every team everywhere?


      • The Jeff | September 19, 2010 at 10:16 am |

        Showing all of the possible combinations doesn’t necessarily mean the team would need to wear all of them.

        Personally I’d stop at 4, but then I also wouldn’t have white jerseys for most teams either, so… yeah.

    • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 11:55 am |

      On the whole, that was a great set.

      “Steelers: I used diamond plating for the stripe pattern, putting more “steel” into the uniforms.”
      Now THAT makes sense, unlike the team who last used diamond plating, the Oregon Ducks. Logo’s on the wrong side of the helmet, though. ;)

      I was almost going to pooh-pooh the Washington re-branding, but given the history of the “Hogs” there, it makes sense.

      Only ones I would leave out are the Chiefs, Panthers and Saints. Not that they’re bad, just that I like the current unis better.


  • The Jeff | September 19, 2010 at 9:58 am |

    A, I’d like to see a larger version of Mr. Hobbs’ Raiders logo.

    B, Red turf rocks!

    C, Yes to the Reds & Cubs going mono, not so much on the others, although your representation of mono-teal looks far worse than it should. A proper shade of teal wouldn’t be that far off from gray.

    • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 10:35 am |

      Red turf rocks, but not unis that blend in to them. I don’t like monochrome green on grass, Boise State’s all-blue at home or EWU’s all-reds. Now if they wore white or black pants, that’d be better.

      • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 12:15 pm |

        why am i not surprised that THE likes red turf

        or jim

        guys…please — do what you want with madden, but please at least understand the concept that in reality, grass is green — even the fake stuff

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 12:22 pm |

          Once you go to the fake stuff, you’re not bound by reality. Then again, reality has taken a beating on natural surfaces, too. Just ask the grounds crew at Cleveland Stadium when they painted the mud green.

          I still like natural surfaces best (and if your field is mud, let it be mud), but why not let EWU have their fun? Just contrast the unis a bit.

        • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 12:30 pm |

          how would you feel if every team who has artificial turf installed a “matching” color for their unis? should the vikings have purple turf? should the saints install black turf? what about at the meadowlands? should the giants get a boise state turf which they can swap out for a hunter when they switch the stadium over for the jets?

          and (just imagine if the ducks got a chance to do that on a synthetic field) … would it be green one week, neon yellow another, black a third and charcoal in a fourth?

          c’mon jim…the possibilities are endless

          and they’re all ridiculous

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 12:40 pm |

          The Meadowlands could have contrasting green and blue turf every five yards…with shared end zone graphics. Oh wait, you guys don’t share. ;)

          If you HAVE to have turf (which I could do without), what the heck? Let the Vikes go purple or the Ducks go yellow. Charcoal’s not a team color, though.

          Again, your reality is just an illusion. As long as the turf and the unis don’t blend to give teams an unfair advantage, I don’t really care. Yes, some turfs would look better than others and it could be taken too far, but that’s life.

          There’s been talk of installing turf with little fiber-optic blades of “grass,” where you could swap colors with the flick of a switch. I don’t know how many years we are from that, but don’t be surprised when it comes.

        • The Jeff | September 19, 2010 at 1:30 pm |

          Yes, grass is green, and plastic carpet is whatever color you want it to be. The astroturf of the 70s & 80’s looked every bit as fake as the red turf does now, despite being a color that sort of resembled green.

          There is a valid point in not wanting a team to go monochrome in the same color as their field – but that doesn’t make the field itself bad. Boise State should wear more orange, not change their field.

        • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 4:35 pm |

          grass is green, and plastic carpet is whatever color you want it to be. The astroturf of the 70s & 80′s looked every bit as fake as the red turf does now.

          back then, yes

          now…it’s sometimes hard to tell who has a “real” field and who has synthetic turf

          unless, of course, your field is red

          seriously, why is it so hard to understand that playing on a red (or blue) field is absolutely assinine?

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 8:54 pm |

          Why is it so hard to accept it?

          I know, just because you can do it, doesn’t mean you should, but where is it absolutely written that fake grass must look like real grass?

          If this is just an OCD thing, that doesn’t make it a law for everyone else. The only problem I would have is if it affected the game (reflecting too much sunlight, or something like that).

          Are you against painted basketball courts as well?

        • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:11 pm |

          I’m with the jimvilk on this one. Surprise surprise.

    • StLMarty | September 19, 2010 at 11:24 pm |

      Do you guys even care one iota about the number of ducks (real ducks, not Oregon) that dive into Boise State’s field?
      That makes y’all wack. Quack and wack.

      • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 11:40 pm |

        Make the field orange, then.

      • LI Phil | September 20, 2010 at 12:01 am |

        you’re nuts marty

        i love that

  • JGoodrich | September 19, 2010 at 10:42 am |

    Anybody else find it unusual that Notre Dame’s starting non-QB skill position players all have single-digit numbers?

    ABC/ESPN had their introduction graphic with them like this:

    5-Allen(RB), 7-Jones(WR), 6-Riddick(WR), 3-Floyd(WR), 9-Rudolph(TE).

    Too bad Floyd isn’t 8 for the straight flush.

    • phillydevil | September 19, 2010 at 11:04 am |

      ASU’s starting linebackers wear 6-7-8. And they were all teammates at the same high school

    • Ricardo Leonor | September 19, 2010 at 11:15 am |

      I dont know why but for some reason, I have always had problems with TEs or LBs wearing single digit numbers.

      Just something in me says that those positions are…kind of “tougher” or “stronger”….I don’t know if you those are the right words, but to me they just don’t look right.

      I have no problem with WRs, RBs or DBs in single digits….

      • jdreyfuss | September 19, 2010 at 6:39 pm |

        What about fullbacks? They always look weird to me when they have numbers below 35. Except Jim Brown, of course, but he wasn’t a blocking back.

  • CWac19 | September 19, 2010 at 10:45 am |

    Hey Phil,
    Just wanted to throw in my two cents on your comment re: the new Sabres alternates that: “the retro inspired wordmark doesn’t need the overline.”

    In a vacuum, I’d agree. But, given the overline on the traditional Sabres logo (over the buffalo), I actually think it’s a neat detail in this context. (Incidentally, I’ve always thought both the overline and underline around the leaping buffalo was semi-extraneous. Would love to know the thought process of the logo designer that inserted those two “slashes.”)

  • Brad | September 19, 2010 at 10:46 am |

    The Padres have worn monochrome on the road 25 times this season. Sand jerseys and pants.

  • DJ | September 19, 2010 at 10:56 am |

    The San Diego away uniform is khaki, not sand. “Sand” is the gold-flecked color that is used as the trim color on the home whites and the navy alternate.

    • James Craven | September 19, 2010 at 9:15 pm |

      And as we all know, come 2011, khaki is out and gray will be back in.

      • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:12 pm |

        Quite unfortunate. The wordmark on the jersey is what should have been abandon.

  • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 11:07 am |

    “C’mon Jim. The Ducks don’t deserve this one.”

    It’s not just the Ducks, Phil. They had help from Portland.

    Let’s do the math. First, the Vikings. Lose the swooping stripe, the team name under the numbers and the Eagles font (although I suppose I could live with that). Minus 2.5

    Now, Oregon. Hate the number font, carbon’s not a school color, lose the Teletubbie bellies and the sweaty-back look:
    Minus 4

    Boise State. Yes, the butt stripes are horrendous. Lose the BRONCOS stripe under the numbers and the shoulder stripes. Otherwise, the helmet is fine, the number font is cool and the color scheme is awesome.
    Minus 3

    Wyoming. Yeah, I could do without the WYO and the uneven helmet stripe (but I could live with that one). Otherwise, great contrasting uni.
    Minus 1.5

    Before we do the final tally, an overall view. Portland/Oregon was green and dreary, whilst Boise/Wyoming was a color palette special. And I think we’re all grown up enough that we can stop equating yellow and brown with potty time, right? Good.
    Minus 1 to the Vikes/Ducks.

    Final score:
    Phil, minus 7.5
    Jim, minus 4.5
    (your results may vary, scoring totals are not official and do not reflect the views of Uni Watch, Incorporated)

    Obviously, I don’t have a problem with NDL, so that didn’t factor into the equation. Beats Name On Backside any day. And now you know the method to my madness.

  • concealed78 | September 19, 2010 at 11:15 am |

    Woof… on all those monochrome looks. There is just something about mono looks that looks too bush league, too softball, too high school / college baseball, h.s., college & Pro football, too Cuban national Baseball Team (sorry I suck at HTML)

    … just too un-MLB like. It just doesn’t look like a modern MLB baseball team. The answer to bring more color into MLB is expanding the palette, thicker stripes, high socks, full stirrups and even trucker caps. There is just way too much dark colors and the lack of bright colors for contrast in MLB for mono to work.

  • Ricardo Leonor | September 19, 2010 at 11:17 am |

    I actually like Wyoming’s uni…..though I am sure I am in a small minority here….

    • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 12:13 pm |

      It sure beats this,
      doesn’t it?

      Hard to see on that photo, but that diamond on the side of the regular jerseys really bugs me. Missouri has the same thing, as do some other schools:

      Wyoming should make yesterday’s alt unis their regulars.

    • Oakville Endive | September 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm |

      I’m part of that minority, something about a really rich athletic gold uni – and I love the logo on the helment. However the striping on their helmet is stupid, so is it for the Denver Broncos – I can’t believe its lasted as long as it has – it’s something a young kid comes up with, I know , because my helmets designs as a kid in the 70″s had that design.

  • Mike Hass | September 19, 2010 at 11:31 am |

    Buffalo’s new 3rd uni is quite interesting, and I like the new wordmark. However, the double solid yellows remind me too much of driving in the car pool lane. I don’t know if pavement markings give the best impression.

  • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 11:34 am |

    Tone down your shade of teal a bit, and yeah, I’d wear that Marlins monochrome!

    The Reds need to go mono now. The Cubbies are a possibility, as well.

  • Jet | September 19, 2010 at 12:01 pm |

    Phil, you said it’s “hard to find fault” with the new Buffalo Sabres unis, and all I can say is, “hey, this is UniWatch, we can find fault!!”

    It’s just so damn frustrating that once again, a team ALMOST gets it right. The bright blue third jersey is the CORRECT blue for this franchise, their ORIGINAL blue. They should leave off the small logo under the wordmark; it looks like an afterthought and it’s too close to the wordmark anyway. Otherwise it looks sweet, even with the double solid yellow stripes that remind Mike Hass of pavement lines.

    Yeah, it’s great that the stupid slug logo and idiotic patterning of that jersey is history, but if they’re gonna go with a fauxback, why not get the freakin’ blue correct?!?! Go with the original blue and not that black-tinged blue hue. Yeah, I know the psychology — “if we blacken our colors, it’ll make us look and play tougher and meaner.” Well, Jim Schoenfeld and King Kong Korab had no problem mashing bodies wearing the bright blue unis back in the 70’s.

    Another thing wrong with the fauxbacks – the blue sleeve and waist stripes on the white jerseys are too thin. Looks weak.

    Oh well…


    • Mark K | September 19, 2010 at 1:11 pm |

      I have to agree. The white jersey retains all of the elements that made the former third (now home) a disaster. Random piping, pit stains, unnecessary grey/silver stripes that blurr the main striping, logo with more blurr-inducing grey added, wrong color blue, and on and on.

      Sure it’s better than the slug but by itself it’s a disaster.

      And to hear people say they’re glad “the Sabres went back to their original look”- seriously? Are people that clueless??

      • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 1:21 pm |

        agree mark…i didn’t really have the time to do a full on “original” vs. “fauxback” analysis, but there are many obvious inconsistencies between the two, not the least of which is they put the original royal on their third uniform…

        but the striping is way off, the front uni number, and the extraneous piping are all different from the original

        that’s why it’s a “fauxback” and not a throwback

  • Chris from Carver | September 19, 2010 at 12:06 pm |

    Loved the Patriots tweak. As someone who’s only seen them play in the royal blue and navy blue jerseys, these would be a welcome change. It’s a nice hybrid. The only thing I don’t like is the stars in the shoulder epaulets. I do however like them in the striping in the pants.

  • KT | September 19, 2010 at 12:28 pm |

    Washington: Total re-brand. New name, new logos, new everything. The uniforms are very modern.[/quote]

    Washington Warthogs was the name of an indoor soccer team that played in the old CISL from 1994-1997.

  • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 1:03 pm |


    vikes in throwbacks vs. the fish

    • FormerDirtDart | September 19, 2010 at 1:11 pm |

      To bad the Cardinals aren’t wearing their new BLACK jerseys @ Atlanta. Probably would have confused the hell out of the Falcons fans

    • scott | September 19, 2010 at 1:39 pm |

      Are the Vikings only going to be wearing those a couple of times during the regular season?

      • The Jeff | September 19, 2010 at 1:41 pm |

        I’m pretty sure the league rule says they can only do it twice.

        • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 2:31 pm |

          i believe it’s twice during the regular season and once in the pre season

          i know a couple years ago the chargers wore their powder blues for a playoff game, but that required special permission and i don’t know if any teams are still permitted to do it

  • TJ | September 19, 2010 at 1:16 pm |

    As a lifelong Sabres fan and saw the evolution of the original blue and gold, red & black goathead, and the buffaslug I am finally happy to say that the Sabres are officially back!

  • kevodrums | September 19, 2010 at 2:39 pm |

    Saw Michigan State’s new unis for the first time last night. I thought the jersey looked pretty good, but the TNOF (team name on front) could have been larger. The pants, however, were a disaster

    • NickV | September 19, 2010 at 6:10 pm |

      I believe that Michigan State has both the Green jersey worn last night with the white Shoulders, as well as a more traditional plain Green jersey. i believe that they will be wearing both this season.

      Does anyone know WHY Stanford wore the Univ of Arizona hand-me-downs last night? Any particular reason?

      As for Wyoming, I like Yellow or Gold Alternate jerseys, often to break the monotony of certain unis./ I usually like the Wyoming uni. But, I DO NOT LIKE the Brown Pants/Brown socks idiot-thug-wannabe look that my beloved Saints have worn too often in the recent past. If you must wear Bark pants (and hopefully, you should not) then wear a sock with some type of contrast that is a look altogether different from a spandex body suit worn by women at the gym …..and there should NEVER be the name of the team written down the legs of the pants, not ANYWHERE on the pants. Not on the legs, not on the ass, not on the knees. Never. Nowhere.

      To me, it is the equivilent of a man having a tattoo on this lower back above his behind. Like the idiot in the beer commercial. There s simply no good reason for it.

      • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 8:35 pm |

        I agree on the backside part. I don’t even like it when girls do it, so it’s worse when the players sport that look.

        When I first saw the name down the leg I started to say no, but I’ve had lots of sweatpants like that, plus it’s almost as good as a pants stripe. So I went with it.

  • Eric Ely | September 19, 2010 at 3:17 pm |

    I don’t have a shot but Charles Woodson has got some issues with the NFL Equipment logo on his collar. It’s actually overlapping his jersey number. A good shot can be found at about :36 left in the 3rd quarter.

  • Graf Zeppelin | September 19, 2010 at 4:16 pm |

    Again with the F***ing whites?!!?!!?!

    • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 4:26 pm |

      at least rexy has the good sense not to put them in green pants

      wrong socks…again

  • Soobie23 | September 19, 2010 at 4:48 pm |

    Seems to me more players are losing their helmets the first two weeks of the season. Could it be helmets that don’t fit, or different manufacturer, or some other reason?

    • Gusto44 | September 19, 2010 at 8:24 pm |

      It’s the crazy hairstyles with the dreadlocks etc. which contribute to the problem.

  • Eric Ely | September 19, 2010 at 4:49 pm |

    Is Tom Brady going the Brett Favre route with tape over his ear holes? I thought I saw something just before the commercial break at the end of the first quarter.

  • Oregonbobby | September 19, 2010 at 5:03 pm |

    Football should be played on GRASS. That being an impossibility at this point, let the field turf be any color a school/team wants.

    WYOming looked good, despite the bumper stickers.

    Oregon looks awful, always looks awful, always will look awful.

    Monochrome must die!

    BFBS must be stopped.

    Viva Revolution!

  • =bg= | September 19, 2010 at 5:26 pm |

    1. I set my PC to run checkdisc upon bootup. I do not advise this. I took FOUR HOURS.

    2. Didn’t know there was a LANGUAGE button on the cable remote. Spent the first two innings of the Brewers @ Giants in ESPANOL. Erp.

    3. Cowboys lost again, and strangely, this doesn’t bother me.

  • Lee | September 19, 2010 at 5:35 pm |

    Well the radio guys that said the Titans were were going with the all whites were wrong, sorry for the bad intel. But one of the Tennessee coaches appeared to wearing one of last year’s pink brimmed sideline caps.

    • NickV | September 19, 2010 at 6:43 pm |

      Actually, the Titans White over White would look pretty good. The Blue jersey shoulders would be a pretty good offset.

      The first year the Titans changed out from the old Oilers uni, there was a pretty good video arcade that had the Titans wearing White over White, abnd it was a pretty sharp uniform.

  • Oakville Endive | September 19, 2010 at 6:37 pm |

    I’m surprised that Florida at Tennessee is No 2. I like orange, but that’s way too much orange. Florida’s uniform always strikes me as a restrained mess. Not a complete mess, like the Bills, but a mess nonetheless. The orange helmet, the blue pants – not a great colour combo to start with.

    It’s been said many times, but love the Redskins new look , its brillant.

    • NickV | September 19, 2010 at 6:46 pm |

      After only two games the Redskins new Yellow pants look pretty settled and have a really good, comfortable, why-didn’t-they-do-it-sooner-than-this look.

      The new look is a solid “B”. When they tweak and coordinate the uniform striping eve a little bit it will then be an “A”.

    • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 9:00 pm |

      If it were the same shade of orange, Mr. Endive, I’d agree with you. But with so many teams trending toward darkness, I like a little brightness.

      Probably shoulda made Ala./Duke #2, though.

      I like the term “restrained mess.” And sometimes I like to see it. Complete messes are a bad thing, but every now and then a restrained mess can be fun.

      • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 9:04 pm |

        “Complete messes are a bad thing.”

        and yet, somehow wyoming gets a pass

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 9:11 pm |

          One and a half imperfections does not constitute a complete mess. In fact, Wyoming was the most orderly of the four teams in our discussion – “normal” block font, no silly striping, etc.

        • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 9:35 pm |

          one and a half?

          try seven…that’s right SEVEN

          1. white helmet with NO OTHER white on uni…
          2. “COWBOYS” down pant leg
          3. brown socks
          4. screwy helmet stripes
          5. “WYO” (airport) wordmark
          6. nike signature spirograph on shoulders
          7. brown pants

          8. (not “pictured”) — white helmet/yellow jersey/brown pants/brown socks is just awful — school colors or not

          any of these elements by itself could be excused or explained…together, it’s a gigantic mess

          not to mention that no team should EVER wear brown pants, and, unless you’re wearing a brown suit or brown shoes, no human should ever wear brown socks

          brown socks with black shoes, even on the gridiron, is a fashion faux pas second to none


          now, their standard roadie is no picnic, but it’s at least coordinated, and their regular homes suffer from bumpersticker syndrome…but at least they make sartorial sense

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 9:49 pm |

          1. The numbers were outlined in white.
          2. So?
          3. So?
          4. Touche, mon ami. But it could be worse.
          5. Ditto.
          6. Don’t have HDTV, so I couldn’t see it. Inconsequential.
          7. At least they were better than the Browns’ plain pants.
          8. School colors are school colors. Speaking of which, Portland State’s are forest green and white, so take another point off for you for BFBS helmets.

          How does the standard home uni make more sense? It’s the same colors, only inverted. And it looks worse.
          And don’t give me the business suit comparison. Although oragnaized sports is a business, the dress codes are not interchangeable.

        • Oakville Endive | September 19, 2010 at 10:03 pm |

          A couple of comments on Brown and Gold

          1. The Boston Bruins Winter Classic uni’s were well-received , and they were brown and gold – so it can be done.

          2. When I think of the my early youth – brown and gold – were the colours I associated with Fronteer Land. (maybe I only had that association —but the Broncos initially had those colours , Montana had similar copper and gold, and Wyoming. (all fronteer land places) Only Wyoming has kept the colours, albeit they do seem to struggle with it, different unis at a rapid rate. Their helmet logo design remains constant and I view it as a classic.

          As to Florida / Tennessee, it just doesn’t belong as No 2 in my opinion. It wouldn’t make my list period. Ohio/Ohio St is easily more eye pleasing.

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 10:07 pm |

          Ohio/Ohio State almost made the list, but the lack of pants stripes on Ohio was a factor. On sunny days, an all-white uni is a little too bright, even for me. I like a little more contrast. Had it been a cloudy day, or if they wore green pants, they were in.

          Good point on the Bruins unis. That’s about the only one where I haven’t heard the usual pee and poop jokes.

        • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:16 pm |

          Most of us are begging the Pads to go back to brown and yellow and Y O gets ridiculed? I’ve always loved the Cowboys look. Wore out a brown U-dub hat in college. The words on the pants could go away but stick with the rest. Classic.

        • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 10:17 pm |

          the battle of ohio was a fine looking matchup…not every team has to wear dark pants with a white jersey…stripes would have been nice, but since you don’t think file folders, ass stripes and names down a leg are enough to make for a worst matchup, im not surprised you didn’t pick this for a best

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 10:23 pm |

          File folders and butt stripes are usually enough for a worst matchup, but when you’re going against Bellotti fonts, teletubbie sweat jerseys, swoopy bumpersticker lines, BFBS, Carbon For Carbon’s Sake, etc., it’s almost a total wash. At least I thought it out instead of just going by whatever other people tell me I need to think.

  • Gill | September 19, 2010 at 7:37 pm |

    May I suggest a look at coaches’ attire? Seems everyone wants to look like Belechek.

  • PatrickinMI | September 19, 2010 at 8:24 pm |

    Wanna do a monochrome for the Astros? Put them in rainbow pants as well. Then again, I guess that really wouldn’t be monochrome. Multichrome maybe?

  • Lee | September 19, 2010 at 8:45 pm |

    Sorry about the bad intel on the Titans unis, but one of the Tennessee coaches was wearing one of last year’s pink brimmed sideline caps.

  • Samuel Lam | September 19, 2010 at 9:05 pm |

    Watching the SNF game right now and about 65% of the players I see are wearing that Reebok stretch fabric.

  • Al | September 19, 2010 at 9:08 pm |

    Some of the pant stripes on the giants away pants seem more spread out (stretched) than others — see the CB Thomas.

    As for the colts, as paul mentioned in his preview, the “shoulder” stripes are rediculous.

    • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:19 pm |

      We can put monkeys in space but can’t get full shoulder loops on football uniforms. Does Reebok need competition or what.

    • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 11:25 pm |
  • Lindsey Pannell | September 19, 2010 at 10:09 pm |

    I was surfing for some innovative sports info and discovered this on Bing! This is a very interesting write-up! Really appreciate you for submitting this!

  • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:25 pm |

    Monochromes: These are plenty acceptable –
    Diamonbacks –
    Cubs –
    Reds –
    Rockies – and
    Marlins (toned down as the jimvilk said) –

    Those would all be upgrades in my book. I’d be all for it. And VERY nice colorizing fellas. I’d also be okay with this Good job on that pic Phil! Best thing you’ve done all day!

    • LI Phil | September 19, 2010 at 10:28 pm |

      larry did that colorization

      • LarryB | September 19, 2010 at 10:33 pm |

        Thanks Phil,

        I just checked in to see if anybody saw or posted about the helmet in the stands on the Giants game

      • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:34 pm |

        Still searching for your best of the day….maybe it was the “ass stripe” comment. But clean up both WYO and Boise and I like it them both. Need a serious simplification but the blue/white/orange thing vs. the white/yellow/brown combo is neon perfection. Keep it. Bright colors rule.

      • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 10:37 pm |

        Very nice Larryb.

        And jimvilk, I never thought I see it on this site. KSU in the no. 1 slot. Couldn’t be any better.

        • Jim Vilk | September 19, 2010 at 11:04 pm |

          After I made the pick, I had a feeling you’d be happy about it. Savor the victory.

  • pop music | September 19, 2010 at 10:33 pm |

    Thanks for this amazing post! I was actually wondering about this but my good friend Mr. Google helped me find you!

  • JD | September 19, 2010 at 10:37 pm |

    What kind of helmet is Eli Manning wearing this season?

  • Art | September 19, 2010 at 10:48 pm |

    Those latin heritage jerseys are so stupid. Show heritage to another nationality by changing the language? In America no less?

    Why are latins the only ones pandered too, why does no one else get a heritage night in sports?

    Changing the language is not a heritage thing, but rather something insulting.

    • =bg= | September 19, 2010 at 11:02 pm |

      Sorry, don’t buy that argument. Here in SF, the Giants predictably have a big Hispanic fanbase.

      Gigantes goes over big. It says you’re in touch with your fans. The Giants have also done promotions with Italian night too.

      • Gusto44 | September 20, 2010 at 1:43 am |

        Will the Giants also be wearing jerseys in their name in italian? Just don’t know how changing the team name to a foreign language proves that you’re in touch with the Hispanic fanbase. Wouldn’t another promotion demonstrate to the Hispanic fanbase the organization cares about them? Why mess with the uniform?

        These politically correct actions in the realm of sports are troubling.

        • Art | September 20, 2010 at 1:50 am |

          Thank you Gusto, you make alot of sense.

          You just assume that whole fanbase doesn’t speak english and somehow the team is in touch by putting spanish on their jersey?

          Unless you have alot of other languages, you shoulder pander to just one nationality. Especially in a sport that already is full of hispanics from players to coaches.

          You should never change a uniform name just to “appeal” to people. This sickens me.

  • A2 | September 19, 2010 at 10:55 pm |

    not nfl related but yahoo just posted what the Ryder Cup team will be wearing:
    What is this considered: a throwback uniform?
    sure is snazzy…

    • James Craven | September 20, 2010 at 6:36 am |

      Paul will adore that purple button-down sweater straight out of the Mister Rogers collection…

  • traxel | September 19, 2010 at 11:11 pm |
    • StLMarty | September 19, 2010 at 11:30 pm |

      Very offensive. They should be ashamed. But then again, Bill Snyder did a lot of things to help corrupt college football. So… I’m sure they feel no shame.

  • Brandon | September 19, 2010 at 11:56 pm |

    Not offensive at all.
    As someone who has worn the uniform. Is it in appreciation(even if not handled properly)? It is a family day that KSU has done before that is where the photo comes from. If I were still enlisted I’d enjoy a 10 dollar ticket to see the game.

  • Jim Vilk | September 20, 2010 at 12:14 am |

    Lest I forget to honor Dave Diles…

    Here’s this weekend’s Slippery Rock score: SRU 33, West Chester 27.
    If The Rock could lose that white outline around the white numbers, that would be one fine jersey. Still looks good as is.

    • LI Phil | September 20, 2010 at 12:18 am |

      if that were D-I, it couldn’t have made the top 5 (no stripes on the pants)

      • Jim Vilk | September 20, 2010 at 12:21 am |

        Night game. It was in play.

        Only don’t like all-white pants on sunny days.

  • Paul Cain | September 20, 2010 at 1:46 am |
  • Jim Riggers | September 20, 2010 at 7:45 am |

    I noticed the Colts had the old AFC logo in their end zone last night. Does anyone else still have the stale logos on their field?

  • Johnathan Lavecchia | September 20, 2010 at 8:55 am |

    I have been surfing online more than three hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours. It’s pretty worth enough for me. In my opinion, if all webmasters and bloggers made good content as you did, the internet will be much more useful than ever before.

  • Alex P. | September 20, 2010 at 2:11 pm |

    For crying out loud Buffalo – just use John Slabyk’s design!

  • FrankLoyd | September 20, 2010 at 2:32 pm |

    Hear Hear.

    Alex P. is dead on, the fauxback styling brought to us by Reebok and the morons in Sabres management can’t even properly copy the suggestions made on the New Blue And Gold years and years ago. In fact, the similarly styled script logo that Slaybk came up with is in my opinion, waaaay better than this goofy new / old thing.

    I might be nitpicking, but the one thing in the Bison’s logo that was unique in the script, was the capital B. The Sabres / Reebok seemed to not be so nitpicky, so they just selected any old timey looking scripty B and called it a day … whereas it looks to me like the New Blue And Gold made a proper homage and redrew the original B:

  • watch movies online for free | September 20, 2010 at 6:01 pm |

    I would like to thank you for your efforts that you have made in writing this blog. I am hoping the same good content from you in the future as well. In fact your great writing abilities has helped me to start my own personal blog. Really the blogging is spreading its wings rapidly. Your write up is a fine example of it.

  • Andrew A. Sailer | September 20, 2010 at 6:10 pm |

    I don’t know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog.I will keep visiting this blog very

  • Pet Vitamin | September 21, 2010 at 8:09 am |

    Great post!