THE Jeff Tweaks MLB (Part I)

THE's AL Splash

By Phil Hecken

A few weeks ago, I ran a post with my buddy, Jim Vilk, (Jim & Tim Tweak MLB), in which Jim, with able assistance from Tim E. O’Brien, attempted a league-wide set of revisions for many major league teams. In the comments which followed, “THE” Jeff Provo expressed his opinion of said set:

Too much build-up for not very much change. I’m disappointed in you Vilk. I was expecting much more than just making the wordmarks 5% smaller and moving an inch to the right to split at a different point. I mean, where’s the mono-orange for Baltimore? Or some tiger striping of some sort on Detroit? Come on man”¦

The Tribe jerseys do look good though.

As I am wont to say, opinions are like certain body parts, in that everyone has one. Jeff certainly had his. While I didn’t feel he was being unkind or untruthful, I felt THE had laid down a bit of a gauntlet. So I offered him a challenge I knew he couldn’t refuse: Show us what you got.

Here we are, a scant few weeks later, and THE Jeff has taken up the gauntlet — and come back with a tweak for every MLB team.

I like Jeff. Despite our occasional rows in the comments, I believe he means well — like the little brother I never had, I think he sometimes posts certain things just to get a reaction or get under our collective skin. And while I find myself disagreeing with him on most everything, like a blind squirrel, THE occasionally finds that nut of genius in his own thought patterns. What you are about to see, then, will probably be met with a similar reaction to my own. “What Are You Thinking?” But look closely at these — for every seven or 12 bizarre, off-the-wall, never-in-a-bazillion-years-would-any-MLB-team-wear-this uniform concept, he does come up with a gem. Seriously, if MLB would ever consider a couple of the not so crazy concepts, they might actually work. Each uniform will simply be labeled “One” “Two” or “Three” (rather than Home, Road and Alternate) if applicable, because as we all know, in THE Jeff’s world, there should be no “home” or “road” unis, just a requirement that teams don’t *clash*.

We’ll do the American League this weekend, and hit the Senior Circuit next week. THE Jeff is not long on explanations, so if you are left scratching your head, just post a comment — he’ll probably be more than happy to explain…

THE Jeff Tweaks MLB
By Jeff Provo

I don’t want to bore everyone with a big wall of text, but before we get to the concepts, I thought I should explain the basic thought process behind it all. Phil asked me to conceptualize the MLB, so I did. I’m not really much of a baseball fan, so I consider this whole project to be an exercise in design and creativity/insanity. I came up with 2 goals and one rule for myself to follow:

1. Add more color to the league – because white vs gray is boring, and changing one of them to navy doesn’t really help.
2. Make the teams more distinctive from each other, for the same reason

…and the rule:

“No one is untouchable. Change *something* for every team, regardless of whether they actually need it or not.”

I agree with the general idea that a few teams are untouchable in reality, but what fun is tweaking a league if you can’t touch some of the teams?

One last note – I’ve depicted all NOBs as straight, simply because I don’t know of a quick, convenient way to arch them in my graphics program I just did 30 teams in a week, I’m allowed to take shortcuts. If you think a certain team should have an arched NOB, you’re probably right.

Now then, to the uniforms!

(traditionalists may want to skip ahead now)

American League:

Baltimore – Monochrome Orange. (One & Two)

Boston – Number font changed to match the logo (One, Two and Three)

Chicago Sox – I liked the beach blanket jerseys, so I did something similar in their current colors. (One, Two and Three)

Cleveland – Caveman font, with a feather, and something different for striping (One and Two)

Detroit – Used the same D on the jersey & hat, and added more orange… and stripes. (One, Two and Three)

Kansas City – Added gold… and a “crown hat” (One, Two and Three)

LA Angels – I made a new logo mixing the classic A with the winged A, then realized it was too wide to use on the hat. (One, Two and Three)

Minnesota – Changed the M logo to match their new Minnesota script. (One, Two and Three)

NY Yankees – Put the bat down, I didn’t change them that much. (One, Two and Three)

Oakland – Lots of green and yell…err gold. (One and Two)

Seattle – Dark teal uniform, powder teal uniform. Who needs gray? (One, Two and Three)

Tampa Bay – Tried out that little sunray thing as a hat logo. (One and Two)

Texas – I’d like to think the 3rd uniform is reminiscent of a sheriff or other western law enforcement type. (One, Two and Three)

Toronto – Blue Jays should be blue. (One and Two).

Yes, there are some darker colors… that’s why they have cool flow jerseys and moisture whicking fabrics. Plus they’re in the shaded dugout for half the game anyway. So, no, you can’t complain about that part.


OK, Jeff. Thanks. Definitely some duds there, as I’m sure you’ll be the first to admit, but I gotta say, there are definitely a couple I do really like. Not a fan of the pullover look on some of those, and on a couple, I think you could have used a pullover but went for a button-down. But I did really like what you did with this, this, and this, and if you lose the off-color placket, this is a winner.

We’ll be back with the National League next week, and those are even wilder and crazier (in some cases), but there are a few real future-classics. Seriously. But that’s all for today.

What say you Uni Watchers? I’m sure you’re just dying to let THE know.


Benchies HeaderBenchies

by Rick Pearson


Always good to target a market segment. Even better to actually know something about it…

d-bazoeka ALT

And, as always, the the original.


all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks

We have another nice of tweaks today.

If you have a tweak, change or concept for any sport, send them my way.

Remember, if possible, try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per tweak. You guys have been great a keeping to that, and it’s much appreciated!

And so, lets begin:


Up first is Hyatt Werling, with four NFL concepts for us:

Dear Phil,

My name’s Hiatt Werling, with four more tweaks that follow the theme of changing an NFL team’s color scheme based on something that I can in some way relate to the team or the city. I’d like to made such a tweak for all 32 teams. As a disclaimer, obviously I don’t think any team should ever use any of these, they’re just for fun and to see what I can come up with. Here’s 17-20:

Bills – Canada Set: As we all know, the Bills have been playing games in Toronto, and may move there someday, as I’ve heard, so I wanted to make a uniform set that reflected that but still kept their classic red and blue colors intact.

Jets – Second Team Set: New York is big enough to have two of every team, and it’s kind of an unspoken understanding that the Giants, Yankees, Knicks and Rangers are the primary teams, and the Jets, Mets, Nets (when they move to Brooklyn) and Islanders are the secondary teams. So, to better represent their second banana status, I tweaked the Jets uniforms with the blue from the Islanders, the orange from the Mets and the silver from the Nets.

Broncos – Orange Crush Set: I took the idea of the Broncos “Orange Crush” uniforms one step further and gave them the colors from the actual Orange Crush label. Of all the eyesores I’ve come up with, this one, in terms of the colors, is probably the worst.

Rams – Gateway Set: I know it’s a little cliche to use the Gateway Arch for a St. Louis tweak, but the arch is an impressive symbol with a very nice shape, and so I wanted to try incorporating it into the Rams’ current uniforms.


Next up is newcomer Jason Von Stein, who has a whole set of Bills tweaks:


My name is Jason Von Stein and this is original artwork that I wanted to send you for my ideas for the upcoming Buffalo Bills Uniforms.

I hope you like them.

These are the home uniforms:

Home (white pants)
Home (dark pants)
Home (alternate)

These are the road uniforms:

Away (dark pants)
Away (white Pants)
Away (alternate 1)
Away (alternate 2)

Great sight by the way, if you like these I would like to send more your way.

Attached are jpegs, let me know if you need another file type.

Thanks for looking,

P.S. Go Bengals (Ugh, why did I pick the Bengals)


Next up is another first-timer, Matt Thiede, with a logo tweak for the NFL:

For my first ever tweak, I decided to update the NFL Equipment shield for the move to Nike in 2012. the old shield has been around since 2002 when the Reebok contract started.


I found the template for the nike pro combat shield, and with a little bit of Paint magic, i was able to come up with this.


Hope you enjoy it,

Matt Thiede


Good stuff fellas. Back with more tweaks tomorrow.


Ditch The BlackParting Shots

The Mets won 2 in a row at Citi Field Shea, a first this season. In Thursday’s win, they wore what is being called “The Hybrid” — that is, the black/blue road cap with black sleeves and (if you could see them) black socks. Last season, this was only worn with the snow white uniform.

In last night’s victory, the Mets went full on BFBS. While the wins are welcome in what is thus far an extremely disappointing season, more than a few Mets fans now fear that the Mets will feel the “hybrid” or BFBS will bring them success.

I personally hate both looks. But interestingly, in both the comments on here, and in the excellent Mets Police blog, it seems that even those Mets fans who detest any black prefer the full on black jersey & cap to the “hybrids.”

Now, I am finding out that I may be in the major minority here, but I can’t believe that this is viewed less favorably than this. Seriously? One is a baseball uniform the other is a softball top. Neither is good, but I’m still really shocked that people prefer the black tops to the hybrids.

Yeah, I get that one is more of an alternate while the other is just a clusterfuck. But still, if the Mets have to have a softball top, shouldn’t it at least be blue? They could even have a home one. To my mind, the least amount of black on the uniform, the better.

And it’s not even like the BFBS jersey is aesthetically pleasing. The royal script with white outline and orange dropshadow undoubtedly looked much better on a designer’s computer than it does on the field. Even worse is black cap. There’s too many layers and it gets too muddied to even make out anywhere but up close. I understand why they probably couldn’t actually wear this, but c’mon — how much better does that look?

We knew the wearing of the black accoutrements would never be permanently shelved at home, but two wins in two days wearing the hybrids and the BFBS doesn’t bode well for the “Ditch The Black” movement. And I still say the less black the better — if the Mets have to have an alternate, let them go back to blue.

Anyway, back to the beginning — what say you, Uni Watchers — Mets fans and haters alike — if the Mets have to wear some black — which is better — the hybrid or the BFBS?

Oh and, the black the Mets wear — it did NOT come from the Giants. Don’t believe me? See the kicker quote:


They did NOT take black from the Giants. That was (and for some folks still is) a back-door rationalization. Just a coincidence. Total BFBS. — Paul Lukas


One Final Thing — hope all St. Louis & midwest-area Uni Watchers are OK following yesterday’s severe weather & tornados. Give us a shout if you’re OK.

107 comments to THE Jeff Tweaks MLB (Part I)

  • The Jeff | April 23, 2011 at 8:03 am |

    You’re right, the “hybrid” as you call it is a better look if the Mets have to use black.

    I wonder if the black jersey would work better if they ditched the white on it. Just pure blue & orange lettering. Maybe I’ll mock up something later, just for the hell of it.

    • CWac19 | April 23, 2011 at 8:05 am |

      Damn, The Jeff. I thought I would finally have the honor of First Comment of the Day!

      • The Jeff | April 23, 2011 at 8:31 am |

        Sorry, I’ll try to let you comment first next week. ;)

    • CWac19 | April 23, 2011 at 8:12 am |

      I’m torn on hybrid versus all-black. Kind of like choosing between a root canal and a kick in the crotch. Forced to choose, I suppose I would go with the hybrid. That said, I’m going to defend the so-called “softball” alternate. I’m not offended it by it in concept. I like it as a “sometimes thing.” Brings a touch of personality. And just to add one more idea that could be a different thread in its own right: I’m a fan of powder blues, and I’m disappointed that the Rays and Royals have decided to go with half-measures. I wish one team (the Royals would be the most logical, given the association of the powder blues with their “glory days”) would have the stones to go back to a powder road set. That is all.

      • besty | April 23, 2011 at 4:35 pm |

        I totally agree CWac19. Powder blue tops only look bad but if they went full on it would look much better. I have never understood either why UNC baseball wears Carolina blue tops with gray pants on the road. Go full Carolina blue. that would look natural for them.

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 9:26 am |

      They probably tried that and decided it didn’t look good; that it didn’t stand out enough against the black background. Look at the “NY” logo on the hybrid cap. It’s hard to make out from more than a few feet away.

      One of the reasons I actually like the blue/white/orange script better than the blue/orange/black script is that you can actually read it from a distance; the word “Mets” stands out starkly against the black background. The black drop-shadow on the blue/orange/black script makes it too thick and muddled against the white (or off-white pinstriped) background.

  • CWac19 | April 23, 2011 at 8:04 am |

    I, though not a Mets fan, would love to see them “ditch the black,” as well. I am tempted to draw a comparison with the Jets, who let black creep into the uniform design in the Boomer Esiason days, but then eventually saw the light and returned to a beloved, classic look. Here are a few reasons why the comparison fails: 1) The Jets only used black as a trim color (and, in that respect, it was less offensive, IMHO); they didn’t have a cash-generating black alternate to justify canning; 2) The Jets were in a position of ditching a fairly generic uniform set in favor of classic, very distinct unis, associated with the ONLY moment of glory in the franchise’s history — they were guaranteed to be a merchandising bonanza. The Mets are in a position where they have never COMPLETELY abandoned their traditional look (just marginalized and hybridized it), so that any kind of fauxback risks getting greeted by yawns by all but die-hard Mets fans and true uni aficionados. There is an opportunity to generate revenue with a blue alternate, but I think the Mets have put themselves in a spot where a return to the traditional won’t do much for them from a $$$ perspective. 3) Building on my point about the Jets cashing in on the nostalgia and the unique, classic look of their fauxbacks, I submit that the Mets have no equivalent. With respect to the ’69 Mets, see point (2) above — just not different enough from the cream pinstripes and road grays. With respect to the ’86 Mets, well, would anyone on this board actually argue that the mid-80’s uniforms were actually good-looking by any measure we use here? Double-knit. No button-front. Pairing racing stripes with pinstripes. The Mets could cash in with a 6-game deal like the Dodgers have, but I can’t see them bringing back (and wouldn’t want them to bring back) the unis of the ’80s. Sorry, Mets fans, but I don’t see a lot of hope…

  • Padday | April 23, 2011 at 8:15 am |

    The more you talked about the BFBS Mets alternate and the more photos you showed of it the more I began to like it. Obviously I disagree with it in principle but I still think it works aesthetically. The black is offset with enough colour to keep it interesting and the rest is settled by the natural charm of the Mets “look” (the script, colourscheme, logo etc). I really don’t think its fair to criticise it aesthetically when the major beef with it is based on non-aesthetic grounds.

  • Juke Early | April 23, 2011 at 8:17 am |

    When it comes to the body part everybody has, keep in mind – some need a c bag. . ..

  • Greg B. | April 23, 2011 at 8:32 am |

    Black belongs nowhere on a Mets uniform. But if the gov passed a law requiring some, give me the hybrid.

    I don’t understand why, if they want an alternate jersey, they didn’t use the Mets blue.

  • Kyle Allebach | April 23, 2011 at 8:39 am |

    I have to admit, that Gateway Arch Rams jersey is kickass. I’d love to see that implemented into the real Rams uniform.

    • Joel Manuel | April 23, 2011 at 10:32 am |

      I agree, especially in the “alternate” colors (which should be their primary colors, IMO).

    • Plasnick | April 23, 2011 at 8:56 pm |

      Yes, the arch is brilliant. And because the logos and colors are kind of similar, the “Crush” Broncos uni looks like the WLAF Barcelona Dragons.

  • RJSim | April 23, 2011 at 8:47 am |

    I get it… Walker, Texas Ranger. Clever.

    Hybrid all the way… the BFBS jersey doesn’t fit the Mets. Pirates, yes. Mets, no.

  • Kyle Allebach | April 23, 2011 at 8:48 am |

    Also, for the “hybrid” Mets uniforms, I think they look fine, but black isn’t a Mets color. If there was some team who decided that their colors were blue, orange, and black, so be it, but the Mets aren’t a black team. I like the color black, but only as long as it’s an official team color. The black hat looks really bad too. Is it really necessary to have the white outline WITH the freaking orange outline too? Why do you treat the hat like the Patriots away numbers?

  • RS Rogers | April 23, 2011 at 8:49 am |

    No no no, the contrast placket is what makes that A’s set the best of The Jeff’s mods. The A’s canary tops are the best new-uni development this year, and The Jeff’s reinterpretation is even better.

    Well, maybe tied for best with the Indians set. That’s exactly the right approach for the Indians to ditch Chief Wahoo and finally achieve a stable, distinctive look. This is tough for a diehard Twins fan to say — and man, are the Twins dying hard this year — but I’d be unable to keep hating the Tribe if they looked that good.

  • RS Rogers | April 23, 2011 at 9:04 am |

    For this baseball fan who’s always kind of liked the Mets, the issue isn’t whether “the Mets are a black team” or not, or whether the black-from-the-Giants excuse is a glaring retcon. A team’s colors are whatever the team wears. Black is a Mets color now, and the Mets are a black team. Maybe they shouldn’t be, but they are, and that’s just a fact. So the primary issue for me is whether the Mets use black well and thoughtfully. And that’s where the Mets fail. The BFBS smock and the hybrid are equal offenders in this regard; they’re indistinguishably bad.

    If the Mets were to go back to the drawing board and choose to redefine themselves as a blue-from-the-Dodgers, black-from-the-Giants team, with or without orange highlights, I think they could establish really terrific, distinctive, and very New York unis. Royal blue can work as a bright-color partner with black. The problem is that this is not what the Mets did, or show any sign of ever doing. They just threw a can of black paint at a well-designed blue/orange identity. It was vandalism. Hell, worse than vandalism; if it had been truly random, at least some of the blue/black combos would accidentally have had proper contrast and separation between black and blue elements. You almost have to work at it to get the blue/black combo as wrong as the Mets do.

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 9:18 am |

      I agree, RS, but I think the hybrid uniform is a worse offender in this regard, as I explain in my comment below. The BFBS puts the Mets colors on a neutral black background. The hybrid uniform, OTOH, splashes the black all over the place.

      Also the “Mets” script logo on the BFBS is still in Mets colors. Even though it’s on a black background, which, yes, is wrong, the script itself looks OK. The hybrid unis add black to the script itself.

      There’s no question the Mets got a lot wrong when they decided to do the “Mets in Black” thing in 1998, and it’s Amazin’ that they still haven’t fixed it all these years later.

      • RS Rogers | April 23, 2011 at 10:21 am |

        Good points. Here’s where I don’t so much disagree as I guess maybe feel more strongly about one element: The blue piping on the BFBS smock. The script, with blue outlined by orange almost works on a “neutral black” background. Almost; the proportions aren’t quite right, and so it looks like crap. As does the similarly treated cap logo. But it’s a near-miss. The piping, though, is a textbook example of how not to mix black and royal. The fundamental issue here is that you can’t just drop royal on black. The two colors need separation and mediation of some kind. Not only does the lack of contrast make the blue-on-black element hard to see, the black actually distorts the apparent color value of the blue. (Same thing at work for teams that let purple and black abut.) So under most lighting conditions, that BFBS smock either has no visible piping, in which case why bother putting piping on it, or it has violet piping that clashes badly with the blue and orange on the lettering.

        Both Mets looks to me are so bad that they make the Blue Jays look like design geniuses by comparison. The Jays don’t exactly do the blue/black combo well, but they don’t do it nearly as badly as the Mets. If two different uni approaches are each uglier than the Blue Jays, “which one is better” is, to me, a meaningless, unanswerable question. It approaches the level of a koan. Which is better, the hybrid or the full BFBS? Mu.

        • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 10:39 am |

          I agree for the most part with respect to royal-on-black; hence the white outline of the “Mets” script on the BFBS jersey.

    • Gusto44 | April 23, 2011 at 1:11 pm |

      I could understand the blending of the black, orange, and blue for the Mets if this was 1961, and the memory of the departed Giants and Dodgers was still strong. But even by 1971, that ship had sailed, and the Mets had established their own identity, strengthened by the world championship of 1969.

      There are young Mets fans in New York today who don’t know and don’t care about the colors of the old New York Giants. I think the best approach for the Mets is to go back to the drawing board and eliminate black, return to the color scheme where most of the success occurred.

  • Mike | April 23, 2011 at 9:08 am |

    Love that Royals crown cap!!

    • Coleman | April 23, 2011 at 9:21 am |

      Agreed. I also really like the name down the buttons. I’m sure there’s a specific name for the style, I just know I love it.

      • LI Phil | April 23, 2011 at 11:33 am |

        vertical placket lettering

        • traxel | April 23, 2011 at 11:51 am |

          Too long. How about “Button Letters”.

        • LI Phil | April 23, 2011 at 4:20 pm |

          how about “no”

        • traxel | April 23, 2011 at 11:03 pm |

          Too short.

  • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 9:10 am |

    Allright, let me try to explain this. Forgive me if I say anything blasphemous.

    Let me preface by saying that I absolutely agree that, as a generally matter, (1) softball tops suck, and (2) if the Mets are to have a softball top, it absolutely ought to be blue. I also agree that the Mets should eliminate all of the black from their on-field color scheme, including the BFBS jerseys, caps, drop-shadow and accessories. They can go right on selling them if they want, alongside all the other merchandise that doesn’t match what’s worn on the field. They need only to go back to what they wore in 1995, 1996 and 1997.

    But here’s why, given a choice between the BFBS and the hybrid, I prefer the BFBS, in the sense that I think it’s less egregious.

    First, aesthetics. I actually kind of like the blue/white/orange script on the black background; obviously I differ with Phil on this, and it’s a matter of personal taste. But I think there’s another explanation.

    I like the blue/white/orange/-on-black better than the blue/orange/black/-on-white. I just think the former looks better than the latter. But more than that, on the BFBS uniform, even though the color black (which, again, does not belong in the Mets scheme) dominates, it’s just the background color; it’s the canvas, not the painting. (Yes, it infiltrates the skyline logo too, but let’s set that aside for now; the original BFBS in 1998 had the blue skyline logo). The script itself is still in true Mets colors. By contrast, adding the black drop-shadow to the blue and orange script on the white and pinstriped jerseys, makes black part of the “Mets” script logo. That’s why, I think, it bothers me more. The BFBS jersey sets the true Mets colors against a neutral black background. The hybrid jersey adds black to the Mets script and sets it against a neutral white background.

    The other reasons have slightly more to do with the dishonesty, hypocrisy and stupidity surrounding the hybrid uniform (which I talked about in yesterday’s comments) than with pure aesthetics, but as a general matter I just think the hybrid uniform looks terrible. In a way, it reminds me of the Buffalo Bills uniform, in that none of the elements seem to match or go together properly. And there’s a reason for that; the “snow-white” uniform and the black/blue two-tone cap were not meant to be worn together. They were not designed at the same time, and neither was designed with the other in mind. In fact, the snow-whites should have been discarded in 1998 when the BFBS came along, as there was no need for two “alternate” home uniforms, but instead of discarding it or simply leaving it alone and wearing it with the blue caps, as they did in 1997 after they realized no one liked the white caps, they added the black drop-shadow to it and started pairing it with the new black/blue cap they were so freaking proud of. (They also added the black drop-shadow to the otherwise gorgeous road grays, but kept it off the pinstripes for one more season.) Eventually, they were wearing that cap in just about every game, and it became the de facto road cap by the end of 1998. By 1999 it was the de facto home cap as well. That the team went years with the blue cap still being the de jure home cap, then more years with it being just the de jure home cap even though it was rarely worn, just made the whole exercise that much more stupid and that much more frustrating.

    Again, I don’t mean to praise the BFBS uniform or advocate its retention. But I could deal with it as a standalone alternate because at least its elements make sense and fit together. All it does it put Mets colors on a black background, whereas the hybrid uniform, with its black trim and accessories, appears to splash this unnecessary extra color all over the place, with no rhyme or reason to it.

    That’s why I think the BFBS sucks less than the hybrid.

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 9:14 am |


      That the team went years with the blue cap still being the de jure home and road cap, then more years with it being just the de jure home cap even though it was rarely worn, just made the whole exercise that much more stupid and that much more frustrating.

    • Padday | April 23, 2011 at 12:50 pm |

      Great points. As it is, the BFBS’s only crime is putting the traditional Mets look on a black background, which one could argue (I wouldn’t) is nearly equivalent to putting it on a white background due to its neutrality etc. In other words, it’s problem is that it’s a BFBS and therefore part of the broader BFBS problem rather than just a Mets problem. As I said in my comment earlier, a lot of what makes the BFBS jersey look alright is the natural Mets elements and the fact that the Black doesn’t interfere with those.

  • jim greenfield | April 23, 2011 at 9:16 am |

    I like the Texas tweek but it sure could use red socks with blue and white stripes. Bring back the stripes to the players who go high cuffed.

    • jim greenfield | April 23, 2011 at 9:23 am |

      And Jeff, please no return to pullovers!

  • jdreyfuss | April 23, 2011 at 9:21 am |

    The best tweak was the A’s color set with the contrasting headspoons, no matter what Phil thinks of them.

    That badge on the Rangers alt looked more like a U.S. Marshal’s badge than a Rangers badge. The Marshals have a thin circle with bubbles on the points of the star, like so. The Rangers have a thicker circle and the points of the star are cut off by it, like this. You could probably just recreate that on the jersey. It looks like text would be large and clear enough to read from a distance on a 3-inch patch.

    • The Jeff | April 23, 2011 at 9:46 am |

      Didn’t know that about the Rangers badge, definitely something that would be tweakable. Someone should tell that to the team though, they used that as a logo themselves a few years ago, I didn’t create it.

  • Bryan | April 23, 2011 at 9:25 am |

    I’ve been a Mets fan my entire life, and I absolutely HATE the fact that there is any black in the Mets uniforms. However, I prefer the BFBS over the Hybrid because of the hats. I feel that the Hybrid hat, black top with blue brim and orange-outline blue interlocking NY is absolutely hideous. Personally, I find the blue and black to clash horribly, and the orange outline makes it even worse. I much prefer the all black hat.

    Of course we could just stop all of this nonsense and wear strictly blue caps with the orange NY full time, home and road.

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 9:27 am |

      I’ve always wanted to see them try wearing the blue caps with the BFBS jerseys. I think that would look good.

      • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 10:50 am |

        They actually did do that for one game in 1998. It reeked. The orange-on-blue cap and the busy-ness of the black top totally clashed. I don’t think a blue cap and a black top are automatically a mis-match, but those particular blue caps with those particular black jerseys didn’t match at all.

        Somehow, the Mets powers that be could figure that out in one night, but 13 years later, they still let them take the field in black sleeves and socks under a white uniform with blue writing and piping.

        • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 11:27 am |

          I don’t remember them ever doing that. Are there pics anywhere?

        • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 11:39 am |

          …black sleeves and socks under a white uniform with blue writing and piping.

          That, I think, is a good articulation of why the hybrid uniform looks so ugly.

          What might it look like if they wore blue sleeves and socks with the white uniform and the black/blue cap? Would that be better?

          I notice that when they wear blue caps, socks and sleeves with any of the uniforms, the black drop-shadow is less noticeable and therefore more tolerable. Is it the caps, or the socks and sleeves, that ruin the look?

          Anybody want to try doing a mashup?

  • MEMAL | April 23, 2011 at 9:47 am |

    THE Jeff: Great stuff, inventive twists on some of those duds. I am all on board for the whole “one jersey unless it conflicts” concept. I love seeing color on color and like to think that we’re slowly inching our way closer to having that full time since we do see it more frequently now then we did in the past.

  • StLMarty | April 23, 2011 at 9:57 am |

    Unscathed in St. Louis.
    Feeling fortunate.
    Why do the Rangers have Klinger’s Mud Hen cap.

    • The Jeff | April 23, 2011 at 10:05 am |

      Why do the Rangers have Klinger’s Mud Hen cap?

      Take your pick:
      A. The Rangers wore it first.
      B. I’m originally from Toledo and prefer that hat.
      C. What?

      • StLMarty | April 23, 2011 at 11:42 am |


  • RS Rogers | April 23, 2011 at 10:28 am |

    One thing The Jeff got completely wrong: Dismissing his hybrid Angels-with-wings logo as being “too wide” for the cap. I mean, has The Jeff even seen what that The Jeff fellow put on the White Sox cap? If that’s not too wide, then neither is his Angels-with-wings logo. The Angels set needs The Jeff’s winged cap logo.

    • pushbutton | April 23, 2011 at 11:19 am |

      Does anyone else love the 1962-70 halo on the crown? I don’t seem to ever see it in tweeks.

      I liked the Angels, Rangers & Mariners tweeks.

  • JCC | April 23, 2011 at 10:34 am |

    I’m a long time Mets fan and I agree with you that if forced to choose anything with black in their uniform that the hybrid is much better than the BFBS. If they are going to have an alternate I agree also with the blue or would even like to see an orange as long as it was done tastefully.

  • Chris | April 23, 2011 at 10:44 am |

    No Mets fan here…but the hybrid looks WAY better! I liked the black when they first came out with it, but shouldn’t they have thrown it away right after they threw away the “Subway” World Series? If the Mets have to have black then why not every Friday night or something stupid like that? Why not honor the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants and get back to those beautiful Dodger Blue and Giant Orange uni’s. And even if you like the black, you have to say that after the Mets where their “official” uniforms…it makes the black look that much worse. BFBS is almost as bad as my Cubs wearing a stupid ® on their own bullseye logo. Both teams need to stop dicking around and change!

  • Sprint45 | April 23, 2011 at 11:00 am |

    I am a lifelong mets fan and must say the bfbs is much better then the alternates. The black and blue hat looks awful, plus there is no reason black sleeves should be worn with a white jersey with orange and blue trim.

    • jdreyfuss | April 23, 2011 at 11:20 am |

      That’s why the Mets’ style guide puts blue accessories with the home whites and not black. They’re not supposed to be wearing black with those uniforms.

      • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 11:51 am |

        When the hybrid caps and black tops first came out in ’98, the Mets still word blue accessories with everything, even the alt black jerseys.

        IIRC it was John Franco who initially asked, “Why are we still wearing blue belts with black caps?” on picture day, during which the team was outfitted in the white alts and the hybrid cap. Apparently that the caps still had a blue bill and insignia was lost on Franco (see the Cardinals road uni), but nonetheless, at some point into the season they started wearing black belts/socks/sleeves whenever they wore the black tops and/or two-tone caps.

        The hybrid caps with the snows weren’t my favorite look, but at least it was tolerable with the blue accessories. The full-on hybrid look of today is a straight-up, unholy mess.

        • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 12:17 pm |

          I don’t ever remember the blue accessories being worn with the BFBS jerseys, or with the hybrid caps on any uniform. I’d love it if someone can find pics of this…

        • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 1:02 pm |

          Graf, here’s one of blue sleeves with the black top from early ’98:

          That popped up in GIS from this UniWatch entry:

          The story says that photo was from 1997, but the black tops didn’t come until ’98, and they were paired with the all-black cap starting in ’99.

          Notice that even this look still contains more blue than the current black-on-white hybrid insanity.

        • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 1:56 pm |

          OK, that’s a start. Was everyone wearing blue sleeves or just Leiter? And blue socks? Also, where was that taken? The background doesn’t look like Shea; I remember them wearing the BFBS jersey and two-tone cap on the road that year as well, but with blue sleeves and socks?

          I’m not saying I don’t believe you; I’d just really like to see this because I don’t remember. I’m trying to figure out exactly when in 1998 the hybrid cap became the de facto road cap, and when it became the de facto home cap. I’ve been calling libraries to see if they have hard-copy back issues of Newsday from 1998; in the age of the Internet and electronic storage, they don’t archive anything in hard copy or even microfilm anymore.

          This is what uni-geekery has brought us to. :)

  • DenverGregg | April 23, 2011 at 11:23 am |

    Best in show by THE Jeff: Cleveland, Seattle, Oakland, Balto, Tampa, Kansas.

    Could take or leave: Minny, Yanquis, Chisox, Toronto, Satan’s Own.

    Best left out: Angels, Detroit, Tejas.

    • jdreyfuss | April 23, 2011 at 11:28 am |

      I’d say that’s a pretty good assessment, although I’d take the Rangers with few tweaks to the alt.

      • DenverGregg | April 23, 2011 at 1:11 pm |

        If I had to choose, I prefer the Texas alt to the primary because of the lettering on the primary.

  • jdreyfuss | April 23, 2011 at 11:27 am |

    I forgot before. To Matt Thiede: the beveled look doesn’t look good on anything. That would look much better as a solid shield.

    I’m also not sure about charging a shield with another shield. There’s a reason the old logo used a teardrop shape for the background instead.

  • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 11:33 am |

    I stand by my original statement on MetsPolice. I don’t like the black, wish the Mets would can it altogether, and figuratively pray for the return of a BLUE alternate jersey.

    That said, I’ll take unnecessary and consistent over an unnecessary train wreck. The black tops are what they are, but having black screw up everything else in the uni sets are far worse. I get the sentiment that black jerseys = even more black, but to that same end, a *tainted* white jersey doesn’t carry nearly enough virtue to overcome the sheer stupidity of wearing black sleeves, belts, & socks with a white uniform with blue piping and blue writing with an orange outline. I’d wager that in the entire history of quirky and sometimes hideous MLB uniforms, no one has ever had one so blatantly *mis-matched*. For goodness’ sake, it’s so ridiculous, they had to force the dropshadow in there for it to remotely make any sense at all.

    The black tops are a tired, superfluous concept, but at least they’re sanely executed. The hybrids are just a complete (I’ll borrow your choice of word here) clusterf***. Until the Mets start wearing orange or green or purple belts and socks with the black alts, I will have to concede them as the lesser and more contained evil of the two.

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

      I feel the same way. Well said.

  • subway | April 23, 2011 at 11:33 am |

    I’ve never liked the BFBS look. I don’t mind the two tone cap but I’d really like to see them ditch the black altogether and go with three tops; cream, snow whites and greys. And if they want to wear softball tops, why not try orange? Anyone done an orange Met teak?

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

      They had orange ST/BP jerseys in 2003-04. They were hideous.

  • Coleman | April 23, 2011 at 11:35 am |

    Can’t believe no one has mentioned how awesome today’s Benchies was… Great job as always Ricko!

    • Jim Vilk | April 23, 2011 at 12:00 pm |

      Mazel Tov, Ricko!

  • libertyernie | April 23, 2011 at 11:43 am |

    Love that new M cap logo Jeff designed.

  • traxel | April 23, 2011 at 11:44 am |

    THE, I’ll get back to you after while. Will have some serious rebuttage.

    Snared these stirrups from the local Junior College yesterday. You Pitt peeps might want to take a look…

    Great to see schools incorporating stirrups back into the ensemble these days. Need to have a good convo about logos on stirrups.

  • traxel | April 23, 2011 at 11:47 am |

    And to prove we still love RPM, I made him a DIY to get him better entrenched to the KC area.

    Found the jersey at Goodwill for $3. Already had the number and name on the back. I added the Phila A’s patch and made the KC sleeve one. The Braves stirrups just seemed to fit. Love that rup.

  • Jim Vilk | April 23, 2011 at 11:52 am |


    Very nice! I also like the White Sox and Yankees tweaks.

    I’m one of those who thinks the Tigers home unis are untouchable, but if they switched to yours I wouldn’t complain much. Same with your Royals crown cap. I love the KC hat, but I’d wear yours, too.

  • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 12:05 pm |

    And just so I’m not b*tching about the Mets all day….

    THE Jeff’s white Baltimore, Kansas City gold on blue, and Oakland gold all rock. I’d be down with Oakland green, too, with the regular green cap. Detroit’s orange trim intrigues me, but I can’t commit to liking it or not. The tiger stripes would make a cool one-time special promo look.

  • Mike | April 23, 2011 at 12:45 pm |

    Hybrid Mets uniform is MUCH better than BFBS softball top. The BFBS jersey makes watching the awful Mets like seeing your ex-girlfriend happily married to an ugly rich guy.

  • walter | April 23, 2011 at 12:49 pm |

    I like the hybrids. Softball tops belong in the ’70s, IMHO. To my eyes, when there was no black, blue had to play the role of the background. When black is added, the blue comes out more. It seems more vivid and vital. And yes, Paul, using the New York Giants cap on top of the whole ensemble would be a billion times better!

  • Rob S | April 23, 2011 at 1:00 pm |

    If the Mets have to wear black caps, why not just flip the colors on the NY? That way, it stands out much more, while still representing both main colors and not being an exact Giants replica.

    • LI Phil | April 23, 2011 at 1:02 pm |

      because that would make far too much sense

      (nice job)

      • Rob S | April 23, 2011 at 1:05 pm |

        Of course it would. (And thanks.)

        Even though I’m not a Mets fan at all, I’d prefer to see them ditch the black because it’s just not a good look for them, hybrid or full BFBS, period.

    • walter | April 23, 2011 at 1:06 pm |

      Perfect! Do it!Cut! Print!

  • walter | April 23, 2011 at 1:03 pm |

    WAY DIGGING uniform tweaks by THE Jeff! Always remember, they’re just ideas. Nobody’s taking an axe to my esteemed favorites. Pullovers are good for some teams (Toronto, Angels, Padres) and some should always have buttons (Yanks, Tigers, RedSox, Dodgers)

    • jdreyfuss | April 23, 2011 at 3:09 pm |

      I hadn’t thought about this before, but aside from the Dodgers all the teams whose uniforms work best with buttons are the ones that don’t have to worry about parsing a word across the Rubicon. They Yankees, Tigers, Cubs, and others all use crests and the Red Sox have a two word name.

      Everyone else should probably just use pullovers.

  • Skycat | April 23, 2011 at 1:06 pm |

    The hybrid is superior to the BFBS simply because there is less BFBS. Having said that, if the Mets are so in love with the black, get rid of the blue and just do a complete ripoff of the New York Giants. The black and orange hat is really one of my favorite.

    The Jeff’s tweaks were kind of intriguing — really hit and miss. Even though I’m more of a traditionalist in preferring the white and gray unis and shunning the vest look, I especially liked what The Jeff did with the Tigers by incorporating orange into their home unis. There is also something to be said for the stripe motif he introduced for the Indians. The White Sox look, of course, was reminiscent of their 1982-86 unis. For all the color The Jeff has added to his tweaks, it would make much more sense to go back to that look rather than the boring black, white and gray they currently employ.

    Lastly, I think that teal is probably a worse color than purple for uniforms. It’s such a wishy washy color in that it doesn’t know if it wants to be blue or green. With purple, at least, there’s an element of boldness. Teal is muted and subdued and sucks out any competitive spark from any uniform that uses it.

    • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 2:28 pm |

      >>The hybrid is superior to the BFBS simply because there is less BFBS.

      That’s the reflexive answer, but there are limits to everything. The blanket statement, “less black is better,” means Zubazz stirrups, plaid sleeves, and a tri-colored belt with the dropshadowed white jersey would still be preferable to the black one.

      I’d do away with the black tops if it were up to me, but while they do make me roll my eyes, they don’t make me want to gouge them out like the mix-and-(don’t)-match hybrid unis do.

  • Josh Williams | April 23, 2011 at 2:18 pm |

    This picture was on ESPN Page 2 in an article about the new NCAA Football game. Maybe those long rumored blue pants for Auburn are going to become a reality this year. I hope not, though…

  • Brian Erni | April 23, 2011 at 2:23 pm |

    wooohoooo! my blue mets jersey and old carpeting made an appearance ;) thanks, phil!

    honestly, just to chime in on the mets: there’s no look they have that i hate more than the hybrids with the snow whites. it’s god awful. yeah, i prefer full BFBS to the mish-mash look. but that being said, they’re both terrible. i always thought though that the ’98 mix of hybrid cap with black jersey was still bad, but underrated. it at least brought more blue to the BFBS look.

    nevertheless, DITCH THE BLACK.

  • Alex | April 23, 2011 at 2:40 pm |

    As a Met fan, I definitely prefer the hybrids (good name for it, btw, instead of “black and blue”) over the all blacks.

    To be honest, I’m tired of the snow white unis. Definitely wouldn’t mind seeing an all blue top like the picture linked, minus the orange piping.

  • Nicholas | April 23, 2011 at 2:42 pm |

    Bulls vs Pacers is Color on Color!

  • traxel | April 23, 2011 at 2:49 pm |

    THE, thanks for the work. Fun stuff. Here are some reactions….

    Baltimore — I really don’t like that bird logo but I like your bird hat. The O’s hat should go away forever.

    Boston — Uhh, no.

    Chicago Sox — YES!!! I like ’em! Most of it anyway.

    Cleveland — Well, the feathered caveman C is kinda cool.

    Detroit — I would have used the hat D instead of the jersey D. You’re on to something with the grays.

    Kansas City — Crown hat? Maybe if you’re 7 years old.

    LA Angels — Like the retro color combo better than the currents.

    Minnesota — Really don’t need two navy hats.

    NY Yankees — Well, you had to do something.

    Oakland — Why did you choose the right side for the A instead of the left they used to wear?

    Seattle — Fun to see dark pants. Needs to happen somewhere.

    Tampa Bay — Sunburst on the hat, I’ve done that too.

    Texas — Same color pants and socks? Meh…

    Toronto — Well, something sure needs to be done.

    Good job Jeff. I have some similar details on some of mine. That Tigers one has a bit of an Ochocinco touch. Let’s save it for the Frontier League. Thanks for the work, I know it takes time and some were probably rushed. I’ll be waiting for the NL…

    • Ricko | April 23, 2011 at 2:56 pm |

      “Fun to see dark pants. Needs to happen somewhere.”

      It does…

      Okay, so I’m not a fan of dark pants in baseball. Doesn’t subtract from there being some nicely inventive stuff here today, The Jeff.

      • LI Phil | April 23, 2011 at 3:16 pm |

        i thought you liked this

        • Ricko | April 23, 2011 at 4:44 pm |

          Yeah, on ONE team.
          And for what began, to a great extent, as a throwback design for the Bicetennial.

        • Ricko | April 23, 2011 at 4:46 pm |

          (leaving out letters lately, too, apparently)

        • traxel | April 23, 2011 at 7:15 pm |

          Oh, and Jeff, I probably sounded WAY to critical. That is because I barely touched on any of the good stuff….because it didn’t need to be touched on. It was fine. And there was plenty of it.

          Ricko, do you like dark pants for collegiate softball? I do. With short pants only (baseball shorts don’t count). Long dark pants are too much.

          Phil, I AGREE with you on the Mets and black. Mark this day.

    • The Jeff | April 23, 2011 at 8:45 pm |

      It’s kinda funny, Phil had basically the same response to my Texas uniform. Here’s what I told him:

      “The solid blue was meant to invoke blue jeans… jeans, black belt, badge logo… just taking the Walker, Texas Ranger thing a step too far. The Rangers could still wear the white or gray pants though, I didn’t want to draw every possible combination…”

      Honestly, I thought I’d get more negative response than I have… I know a lot of people here prefer the more traditional looks.

  • Nickbob | April 23, 2011 at 4:00 pm |

    Mets fans should stand firm, no black, period. Or start the rumor that black is the Wilpon family color.
    Love the Oakland set. That Angels logo belongs on the hat. The tiger stripes belong to Cincinnati, even if the Reds have no use for them.
    The Seattle set has a nice look for a Florida team, but Seattle is losing it’s heart to Rave Green. It would be fun to see how a tweak using that hue to replace the teal would look. It’s true that the rest of the country would loath it, that’s part of the appeal.

    • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 5:30 pm |

      >>Or start the rumor that black is the Wilpon family color.

      No, that would be red, i.e., “in the.” ;)

    • The Jeff | April 23, 2011 at 8:51 pm |

      I did seriously consider throwing some neon green onto Seattle, but it just didn’t work for me.

  • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 4:35 pm |

    I think I might prefer the BFBS to the hybrid for the same reason I thought this looked better than this. True, they’re both ugly as hell, but the arrangement and interaction of the colors, even though they’re the same colors, just looked better on the former than the latter.

  • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 4:36 pm |

    Allright, trying again….

    This looked better than this.

    • Rob S | April 23, 2011 at 6:07 pm |

      Thanks for making me seasick…

  • Sparks | April 23, 2011 at 5:58 pm |

    The oft-repeated simile of the Mets’ black alts being a “softball uniform” kinda echos my point. As un-Mets as it may be, I can at least envision some other team in some other non-MLB league dressing like that. I can’t, however, imagine any other team on any level donning the particular combination of colors in the hybrid look. Seriously, even a self-respecting beer league softball team wouldn’t wear black belts and sleeves with that top. To paraphrase Phil’s original post, one is a softball uniform, one is a clown suit.

  • Nickbob | April 23, 2011 at 6:32 pm |

    Sparks, point taken, but if you were a Wilpon would you want advertise that your family bleeds wealth, or use the symbol of profit -black ink- in an attempt to substitute a perception for substance? A New York equivalent of all hat and no cattle. If Mets fans want lose the black, they’re going to need to get a little rough.

    • Graf Zeppelin | April 23, 2011 at 8:25 pm |

      I’ve been waiting for a Ditch the Black petition kiosk outside Shea/Citi.

      • Paul Lukas | April 23, 2011 at 11:34 pm |

        Still getting the occupancy permit lined up.

  • CWac19 | April 23, 2011 at 6:46 pm |

    Didn’t generate a lot of response the first time around (my comment WAAAAY up top), so I’ll throw it out there again. I think the Mets have painted themselves into a corner here. I just don’t see what monetary motivation they’ll have to make the change away from the black. I can see people buying a blue alternate or a mid-80’s special edition fauxback, but let’s face it, uniform changes are driven by the almighty dollar, and they’ve never gotten SO far away from the traditional duds that a “back to the future” look would be a big profit-driver. (The Blue Jays, on the other hand, are (inexplicably) sitting on a gold mine with their classic sets — either mid ’80s or early ’90s.)

    • LI Phil | April 23, 2011 at 8:51 pm |

      i’ll play

      (sarcasm tags on)

      what makes you think the mets would need monetary motivation to make the change away from black? could they not do it purely for the aesthetics?

      (tags off)

      that being said, and one cannot of course dismiss any uniform changes without figuring that the almighty dollah is the driver, but why couldn’t the mets at least either (a) ditch the black alt for a blue alt; (b) introduce a NEW blue alt to supplement the current black one, making one the home alt and one the away alt — and get rid of the snow whites in the process; (c) FIX the black jersey and cap so they don’t suck so bad

      i hate BFBS, but i don’t necessarily hate black uniforms — if they’re going to continue to wear the gaddam things, at least wear a GOOD bfbs uni — they already dumped the script NEW YORK black alt (which is good) but if they’re so hurting for jersey sales, how about using the black alt for the road alt, and make the blue top the home alt? mind you, im not advocating FOR this, but i’m trying to figure out how to make it worth their $$$ while

      the simple fact of the matter is that royal and black LOOK LIKE SHIT together — they need to pick one or the other, preferably not the latter option

      the oregon ducks are BFBS (among their 2,456 combinations) but at least their BFBS uni looks great … if the mets are so hell bent on wearing BFBS, the least they could do is design something that doesn’t look like it was designed by ray charles — maybe that means they need to ditch the royal (bear with me) except for the mini-headspoon and sleeve piping and go with SOLID ORANGE for the wordmark — and use the NY giants cap…at least that look wouldn’t suck…and it’s just as “mets” as the current BFBS jersey is

      i don’t know the answer — i agree that there probably is no way the mets can return to their uni greatness without taking a huge financial hit

      what i wouldn’t mind seeing is if majestic could make a road jersey that approximates UA’s treatment … im sure one reason the gray roadie isn’t a huge seller is it looks like every other team’s gray roadie…toss in a new one (a la UA’s fauxback look) and that might move the sales meter

      • Skycat | April 23, 2011 at 9:03 pm |

        Amen to the SOLID ORANGE for the wordmark!

  • CWac19 | April 23, 2011 at 10:10 pm |

    I can feel your frustration, Phil. It frustrates me as a Mets observer (non-fan). If there’s a glimmer of hope out there, it’s the Kansas City Royals. As with the Mets, they introduced BFBS but otherwise didn’t make drastic changes to their uniforms (just screwed them up enough with black). And they were able to kick the bad habit. The Royals, however, had the potential gold mine of the powder blues (which actually had some franchise history behind it, so that it didn’t amount to PBFPBS).

    I’ll throw you another glimmer of hope, as well. I have said before, and I will insist on this until it happens — the Mets are crazy not to capitalize on the potential of merchandise with METROPOLITANS or Metropolitan Baseball Club or some sort of stylized MBC on it. There’s your tie to history (and this particular franchise’s corporate name, if not its tradition), and an angle that could successfully pull them back to the future and ditch the black.

  • mole | April 23, 2011 at 10:23 pm |

    let me start off by saying that i am probably of a younger generation than most of the other readers

    First off, i feel that the Mets hybrid jersey is actually very aesthetically pleasing, it may not be a good looking METS uniform, but if a team would come up with a blue orange and black color scheme, that jersey would look very nice, especially at night.

    Secondly, for those of you that complain about softball top jerseys,the future is bleak for you, high schoolers today are getting use to softball jerseys as most high schools cannot afford home and away uniforms and a cheaper solution is to have a solid color jersey with either white or grey pants. Also, some high schools don’t even provide socks so they can save money, resulting in most kids wearing their pants down.

  • Rich | April 23, 2011 at 11:21 pm |

    Tweaks looked good today. I liked “options” one and two for both Detroit and Kansas City.