Gear up for the 2020 MLB Season with new gear from Nike

Monday Morning Uni Watch

Pink Football Ribbon

By Phil Hecken

Are you ready for five weekends of pink some football? Think Pink.

Yes, the NFL’s annual pink parade was in full force yesterday, showing their love for the boobies and their hatred of breast cancer. A noble cause, indeed, and it would be fantastic if they were to do it just one day. But October being Breast Cancer Awareness Month, the NFL has to show how much it really cares.

OK then, there was more than just pink in the NFL yesterday, so lets look at that first:

• Two clubs, the Baltimore Ravens and the Arizona Cardinals broke out their alternate black uniforms yesterday, coincidentally both against New York teams.

• This week’s Antoino Garay watch has a decidedly “Find A Cure” theme.

• The Rams went back to white pants, while the ‘Skins wore burgundy.

• Anyone know what this is on Laurent Robinson’s sock?

• I’m guessing it’s because he has a busted right hand, but Mike Vick had a decidedly Thriller look going on yesterday.

• The New York Football Giants’ super stretchy pants continue to annoy me.

Josh Cribbs continues to wear leg warmers on his forearms. I’m guessing he’s not getting fined for this.

• Several players flouted the low white sock rule yesterday.

• Gotta love the fans: Start ’em young. … This lady either has divided loyalties or is extremely confused as to what “fan gear” means. … Um–OK then. You stay classy, Arizona. … Hey Look! Ricko was at the Chiefs game. And so was Ben Traxel!

• Apparently not all the teams got the memo, part 1: for some reason, the Titans forgot the pink captaincy patch. Trust me, everyone else had it.

• Apparently not all the teams got the memo, part 2: some teams obviously don’t care about women’s health, because they didn’t have a pink ribbon sticker on the back of their helmets. Correction: Apparently the Niners did have the sticker, it’s just almost impossible to see on the gold helmet and with all the other clutter.

• Not sure why this photo is in black and white but Laurent Robinson was caught with his pants down, both literally and figuratively. Expecting a spike on the game’s final drive, he wasn’t ready for a slant pass on third down. (Thanks to Matt Mitchell)

But the real star of the day was the color pink. Lots and lots and lots of pink. Never one to be subtle, the NFL made the 9-11 stuff look like child’s play. Dig:

• One of the better pink displays (ok, the best) was to have many of the cheerleaders donning pink.

• Fans would never want to be left out of a good promotion, would they?

• Every single goal post was covered with pink padding.

• Many players were attired in pink sideline caps.

• Unless you played for the Titans, you had a pink captaincy patch.

• Didn’t Ocho Cinco get fined for a pink chin-strap? I’m wondering if Chad Henne will.

• The cleats yesterday were, um pink. Matt Powers just made that image his wallpaper.

• Interestingly, Nike and Reebok cleats weren’t solid pink, but anyone with an UnderArmour contract had solid pink shoes.

• Guys who wear doo-rags or headbands shockingly had pink ones.

• Some, but not all, teams had pink ribbon stickers for their helmets.

• Didn’t get too many shots, but a bunch of guys wore pink leg warmers yesterday. A couple guys on the Cardinals really had high leg warmers

• Of course, the refs had pink ribbons and lanyards, and I saw (no photo) at least one with a pink whistle.

• In case you weren’t aware, this was Breast Cancer Awarness Month, the NFL added painted ribbons on the field.

• The balls didn’t want to be left out of the exercise, so the NFL made sure they got ribbons too.

• Oh yeah, the coaches got ribbons as well. Well, all except Jason Garrett, since he clearly hates breast health.

• It was hot out there in a lot of places, so that meant lots of towels. Lots and lots of pink towels.

Phew. I think you get the point. I think we ALL get the point. The NFL really cares about breast cancer. And for one weekend, this is a great thing. Four or five weekends? Please…we get it. Sell your stuff, auction off stuff for charity, give a whole mess of PSA’s, whatever it takes. But just stop the incessant pink accoutrements for the rest of the season, OK?

If I missed anything, let me know below.


Benchies HeaderBenchies

by Rick Pearson


Ah, the vernacular. Such an evolving thing….

10-3-11 d- desk mess

And, as always, the full-size.


2010-playoffs-alex rockleinTracking The Playoffs

Last year, Alex Rocklein showed off a really neat playoff tracker, in which he tracked playoff teams wins & losses, not only by their wins and losses, but also by uniform!

He’s back again this year.

Three of the series are now knotted at 1-1, with the Brewers taking a 2-0 lead over the D-Backs. Both the Brewers and the D-Backs wore softball tops yesterday, so the uni-gods couldn’t punish either team. Perhaps they just felt sorry for Milwaukee. It sure was a good weekend to be from the Cream City, no?

Here’s your updated 2011 MLB uniform tracker.

Thanks, Alex. Back tomorrow with another updated graphic.


Vilk 5 & 1Jim Vilk’s 5 & 1, NFL Edition

Jim got his 5 & 1 to me early last night. Too bad I didn’t finish this post until after 2AM.

Let’s see how he did (and guess how many photos are of kickers):


Honorable Mention to Minnesota/Kansas City – A close-but-not-quite tribute to the best-looking Super Bowl ever.

5. Jets/Baltimore – If any team deserves to wear all black, it’s the Ravens…and only the Ravens.

4. Miami/San Diego – It was no reach to add this game to the list.

3. Carolina/Chicago – Yeah, those regular everyday Bears jerseys are no slouch, either.

2. Pittsburgh/Houston – I don’t luv ya, blue, but I do respect you.

1. Washington/St. Louis – I miss the arched shadows at old Busch Stadium, though.

And the bad one: Atlanta/Seattle – Well, that one was easy…


Thank you Jim. You (and I) are now officially off MMUW duty.


Uni Watch News Ticker (Compiled by John Ekdahl). Tim Tebow is getting some billboard love in Denver (Brady Phelps). … Here’s a funny look at what could have been, assuming you’re not a Giants or Dodgers fan (Kurt Esposito). … Chris Hilf noticed that the shoes Pitt’s Ray Graham wore Friday night appear to be from last year’s Coal Bowl/Backyard Brawl. … From Mattias Mangberg: “All goalkeepers in the Swedish Eliteleague are wearing a helmet sticker in honor of goalie Stefan Liv who died in the Lokomotiv Yaroslav plane crash. Rangers goalie Henrik Lundqvist has said he will wear the same sticker.” … From the UK’s Guardian: “FC Barcelona stars in a sweat over new shirts” (Martin) … Randy Williams noticed an old promotional shirt he received at a Rays game might have the wrong skyline. … The Rangers gave Henrik Lundqvist an “A” for his return home to Sweden (A.J. Frey). … Colorado State will have new basketball unis this year (Rob Montoya). … Mike was at the Nashville Predators/Washington Capitals preseason game on Wednesday night and saw that Thomas Vokun of the Caps still had the vector logo on the back of his jersey. … Mater Dei High School in Santa Ana, CA has added a memorial decal for former player Tyler Holtz, who died last week in Afghanistan (Kyle Mackie). … Flyers goalie Sergei Bobrovsky has a new mask and here are the pics (Matt Pesotski). … Looks like the Blackhawks need to get their act together – wordmark and vector side-by-side (Eric Lovejoy). … Here’s a great gallery of pictures from the New Orleans Saints‘ first season (William West). … Please NFL, never ever let it get to this point . I beg you (Grant). … Uni Watch isn’t the only nook of the web sick of Nike’s Pro Combat nonsense (Phil). … From Shane Bua: “I was at the Providence-Springfield AHL preseason game tonight (yeah I know, AHL preseason), and stumbled on this. I’m not sure if Providence was short-handed with Andrei Khubodin up at NHL camp, but they borrowed Springfield goalie Dan Taylor, who played in a Providence jersey and his red Springfield pants“. … Peter Gaston was watching ESPN’s pregame and noticed Nate Burleson with a blacked out NFL logo on his practice jersey. … Whoever is in charge of painting Jacksonville’s field will probably be getting a stern talking-to today – check the arrows in this picture (Justin Bates). … Central Michigan was wearing yellow pants at home Saturday. This is the first time they’ve done that since they switched to Adidas in 2009 (Andrew Monson). … CBS was having some problems with their graphics yesterday (Josh in Ohio). … Steve Smith was sporting Under Armour and Oakley logos on his helmet (John Koziol). … The Jags’ Drew Coleman was missing the NFL logo on his jersey (Tom M.). … Larry Bodnovich found some good stuff on E-Bay. “Pricey because they are small. But I always though very cool.” … And last but not least, we have this from Jim Vilk: …I come across this Shutdown Corner article, the subject of which really deserves its own Snickers commercial.


That’s all for today. If you missed yesterday’s post, be sure to check it out and cast your vote for the final-finalist in the Seahawks Redesign Contest (we’re down to the two finalists now). Also, some great college football uni roundups from Terry Duroncelet.

I’ll be back again tomorrow while Paul continues to fend off bears in the Sconnie woods. Everyone try to enjoy your Monday.


“Kids are stupid.” — LemonVerbena

177 comments to Monday Morning Uni Watch

  • Pierre | October 3, 2011 at 7:12 am |

    Is Roger Goodell wearing pink tassel loafers to work every day this month? Jerry Jones wearing pink cowboy boots? No? Maybe that’s because they would look ridiculous and undignified…and people would laugh at them.

    Both of my parents died of cancer. Cancer is bad…all cancer, whether it’s lung cancer, skin cancer, pancreatic cancer, breast cancer or whatever other type afflicts a person. But why must the powers who run professional sports always turn a good cause or honorable sentiment into a ridiculous display involving dressing up professional athlethes in garish attire. Folks it’s ugly. Or is that why they do it…because cancer is ugly we need to make players look ugly? And for an entire month?
    Instead, why not decorate stadiums in pink? Why not hang banners? Why not pay for public service announcements throughout the games?

    It’s annoying. It doesn’t make me want to reach for my check book to support the cause. It makes me want to grab the channel changer.

    • dootie bubble | October 3, 2011 at 7:56 am |

      I’d like to see one weekend dedicated to cancer awareness instead of a month. To make sure it’s not just a shallow promotion players and owners should turn over their salaries and gate fees from that one game to cancer research. I could get behind that. On second thought, if they’re willing to fork over the cash I’d put up with a season of cancer awareness ribbons.

      • Pierre | October 3, 2011 at 8:06 am |

        Pardon my cynicism, but I can’t help but think there’s an element of NFL image polishing in play here. Forget about the thuggish behavior of our players sometimes that make headlines…look at what good citizens we are by supporting breast cancer awareness FOR A WHOLE MONTH!

        I still say if they were sincere then all NFL executives and owners would wear pink shoes and accessories to work for an entire month. Or they could fork over a lot of cash instead…

        • AnthonyTX | October 3, 2011 at 10:22 am |

          I’m inclined to agree. It just makes the NFL look good in the eyes of the average fan, helps bring in fans that are women (my girlfriend loves the pink accessories), and gives them a chance to pat themselves on the back.

          Also: can we come up with a better term than “Breast Cancer Awareness?” I’m well aware of breast cancer, and not just because of close family experience. I think we all know that it’s a thing that exists. Any ideas for a better name?

    • Casey Hart | October 3, 2011 at 9:57 am |

      Agree on the whole pink overkill thing, but it does seem like, at least in terms of the players, there is at least slightly less pink on the field than last year. I count that as progress.

      • Pierre | October 3, 2011 at 10:35 am |

        Not in the Saints game…they were all decked out in pink. Even face mask brackets.

        However, a quick survey of photographs of other NFL games showed that some players such as Philip Rivers, Eli Manning and Reggie Bush eschewed pink entirely. I’m sure there were others.

    • walter | October 3, 2011 at 2:51 pm |

      I’m not enough of an authority to decree that support of a cause has no place on the field, nor that breast cancer is a scourge that deserves our best efforts to eradicate. There are many cohesive arguments for either side. I wish they’d support anti-bullying measures and gay rights. But those are just my flavor-of-the-month causes: Probably best left off the football field.

    • Swanny | October 7, 2011 at 7:27 pm |

      You are absolutely right, couldn’t have said it any better!!!!

      • Swanny | October 7, 2011 at 7:30 pm |

        Pierre was right. The very first comment at the top.

  • Moose | October 3, 2011 at 7:17 am |

    It looks like the McDavid logo on Laurent Robinson’s sock.

    • MPowers1634 | October 3, 2011 at 8:46 am |

      Correct on the McDavid logo!

      • Derek Linn | October 3, 2011 at 3:50 pm |

        Yeah, it looks like he is wearing full length compression leggings instead of socks.

  • R.S. Rogers | October 3, 2011 at 7:39 am |

    Vilko lost me with #5 there. I mean, sure, Vikes-Chiefs is a pretty good game, uni-wise. Even with Minny wearing its modern unitard of surrender. But that matchup doesn’t get anywhere near a list of best-uniformed games, much less Super Bowls. There are minimum requirements for consideration here, and one of them is that pants and jerseys must contrast between the teams. Anytime both teams wear white pants, that’s an automatic exclusion from “best ever” consideration. Don’t get me wrong – dueling white pants can still be a “pretty good” uni matchup, or “above average,” or even “not bad.” (For those who don’t speak Minnesotan, “not bad” is high praise.) But when both teams whitewash their tights, the G never stands for “greatness.”

    • Jim Vilk | October 3, 2011 at 11:59 am |

      There are minimum requirements for consideration here, and one of them is that pants and jerseys must contrast between the teams.

      Nah, but that’s a tiebreaker. If two teams with great unis both have white pants, but two teams with less-than-stellar unis have contrasting pants, I choose the former.

      The Chiefs, who have been to two Super Bowls, have in my mind the best uniform in the NFL (and AFL, as was the case). Both times they were matched up against a team with great unis, but the Chiefs look better in red-over-white or white-over-red as opposed to white-over-white. Throw in some mud on the field and some on the unis, and SB 4 was the best-looking.

      Now if the Titans were still the Oilers, and if they wore this
      instead of what they wore against the Rams, then SB 34 would have been the best-looking game. Even though it was in a dome.

      And just to pick a nit, Minn./KC was HM yesterday, not #5. ;)

      • Jim Vilk | October 3, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

        Although, to use your requirement, these two would make excellent choices as best-looking:

        In retrospect, perhaps I should have ranked those higher than SB 14 when I did my list.
        But I stand by my #1 pick.

        • R.S. Rogers | October 3, 2011 at 3:21 pm |

          I’d have ranked Super Bowl XX a lot higher than you did. Personally, I’d rank X or XIII or XLIV above XXVI. But that’s just because I’m not a fan of how the Skins’ burgundy plays against the Bills’ red. Still, the great thing about your list, for me, is that although I disagree with almost every particular ranking you did, once I start trying to change the slotting and order, I find that I wind up with very similar rankings for very different reasons. It’s like, I may like this or that particular matchup more than you, but once I try to move it up the list, I find that it bumps other things too far down relative to one another, so I have to move other stuff back up, and in the end it all winds up about where you put it in the first place! It’s like, I feel like the trees are in the wrong places, but I’ll be darned if I can make the forest look any better than you did.

          I just don’t like teams to wear the same color pants is all. Or helmet. I want contrast, darn it!

        • Jim Vilk | October 3, 2011 at 6:02 pm |

          Ah, you were looking at Caleb’s list. He did all of ’em…I just did a 5&1 at the bottom.

          For the most part, I hear you when it comes to contrast. It isn’t my *top* priority, but in my little book of uni matchup tiebreakers, it’s very high on the list.

  • Pierre | October 3, 2011 at 7:40 am |

    I couldn’t bear watching any more pink NFL yesterday afternoon so I switched over to the Yankees/Tigers game. Nice uniforms… But then I switched over to the College World Series…oh, wait, that was the Brewers/Diamondbacks game!

  • Defo Maitland | October 3, 2011 at 7:45 am |

    Re: Evan Longoria T-shirt

    The wrong skyline how? Because those aren’t the outlines of St. Louis buildings?

    Otherwise, it’s probably a reflection of the fact Longoria was a starter at the 2009 All-Star Game at Busch Stadium.

    • Craig D | October 3, 2011 at 8:34 am |

      If that t-shirt was an All-Star game related shirt, they could have done a better job of pointing that out. When you have to guess, they failed in the design.

      • Defo Maitland | October 3, 2011 at 8:45 am |

        Fair enough. The concept may have seemed obvious to the designer at the time, but it’s certainly very confusing out of context.

        • Dumb Guy | October 3, 2011 at 9:42 am |

          Maybe it was a Rays-Rams mix up of some kind?????

      • -DW | October 3, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

        Maybe they either didn’t have the STL ASG logo to print those shirts up or they didn’t have the rights to the logo.

        My question is, and I bet it will not get answered, where did he get the shirt in the first place?

        • Mike C | October 3, 2011 at 1:01 pm |

          I have a Jason Bartlett one from the same series. They were shirts given away to commemorate the Rays who made the 2009 All Star team.

    • M. Sullivan | October 3, 2011 at 1:51 pm |

      I was at that game and have a couple of t-shirts. It was definitely an ASG promotion.

  • R.S. Rogers | October 3, 2011 at 7:46 am |

    Saw a kid, maybe 12 years old at most, with his family at the grocery store yesterday; they’d obviously just come from a youth football game. He had a coat on (because it’s like 50 degrees here in Washington, which means that anyone not wearing enough Gore-Tex to summit Everest might die of hypothermia) so I couldn’t see his jersey, but beneath his football pants were socks in several shades of gray, as if to simulate a black-and-white version of whatever colors his team actually wears, with a giant bright pink ribbon in full color on each side of both socks. So it’s not just the NFL. Or rather, presumably because of the NFL, everyone has to do it, including Pop Warner or intramural middle school or whatever peewee league this kid played for.

    Apparently there are adults in positions of responsibility out there who believe that 12-year-old boys suffer from a lack of breast awareness.

  • Steve | October 3, 2011 at 7:49 am |

    I’m guessing the reason the Rays shirt has the St. Louis arch was because Longoria went to the All-Star game that year, which was in St. Louis.

    • snowdan | October 3, 2011 at 1:15 pm |

      That was my first thought too. Def could have been executed better though, you know, like the words All Star or something.

  • RJ | October 3, 2011 at 7:55 am |

    FWIW, the youth football team my daughter cheers for sorta went pink for the day, some guys (age 8-10) had pink eye black, even less had sweatbands, only one kid on the opposite team went pink (socks) it looked awful they had very Air Force Academy-ish unis.

    All the Cheerleaders for our side went with pink hair ribbons and pompoms. That looked good without being over the top. It was done as a unit.

    • timmy b | October 3, 2011 at 10:38 am |

      Pink eye and black eye in the same game??

      Those are TOUGH kids!

  • Chris M | October 3, 2011 at 8:10 am |

    Surprised to see no mention of the front of Ryan Fitzpatrick’s jersey completely torn off.–nfl_medium_540_360.JPG

    Good thing they have spares on hand.

  • lemonverbena | October 3, 2011 at 8:13 am |

    It’s true! (Stupid kids).

    p.s. In San Diego, the pinkness also extended to press credentials and security wristbands.

  • Kevin Poss | October 3, 2011 at 8:22 am |

    Yeah, Robinson’s “socks” are actually McDavid tights..

    And one point on the NFL Officials (if anyone cares)- the Referee (White Hat) had PINK stripes on his white hat ( . This wouldn’t typically surprise me, but the WHITE HAT is typically SOLID WHITE (no stripes – ).. ugh, thanks PINKtober… but I digress.

  • Kevin Poss | October 3, 2011 at 8:25 am |

    Here’s a link to the McDavid “tights”.. not the best image but that’s the logo

  • Desmond Jones | October 3, 2011 at 8:32 am |

    That was a logo creep on Laurent Robinson’s leg. He was wearing tights.(I believe it helps keep cramps away, or something like that.) They likely from your friendly neighborhood running or biking store. It’s extremely hard to find tights that are colored, let alone colored the correct shade to wear with your uniform, hence the unknown brand. The logos on these tights tend to hang out in strange places on the lower leg. Nike does this as well, but I’m pretty sure their logo is on the ankle. Not quite sure what brand this is though. Sorry.

    • MPowers1634 | October 3, 2011 at 9:07 am |

      In the black and white pic, it’s on his compression shorts too.

    • Andy | October 3, 2011 at 12:04 pm |

      1. Everyone makes colored tights, and it’s very easy to find them in your team color, especially online, from pretty much any sportswear brand, and they sell them at every store, including Walmart and Target.

      2. McDavid is not an unknown brand. Much of their compression wear and equipment is still made in the U.S.A. and it is, in my opinion, of much higher quality than that of the ‘sportswear giants.’ McDavid basically invented the padded Nike Pro Combat gear before Nike released and marketed theirs. Many pro athletes use McDavid gear. I think they rely on the quality of the product and word of mouth to sell their gear rather than guerilla marketing tactics, which is why you may think they are ‘unknown.’

  • Immm | October 3, 2011 at 8:33 am |

    Hey, just a quick question: I was watching the Vikings/Chiefs game yesterday, and on the helmet logo of Toby Gerhart of Minnesota (and at least one other Viking I saw but who I cannot remember), right about down the middle of the horn, there appeared to be black tape. I think it was only on one side of the helmet. Did anyone else see this, or get a picture of it, or know what it was about?

    • nobody | October 3, 2011 at 10:13 pm |

      like what the eagles did way back when as a memorial? maybe he had someone close die of breast cancer or something

  • MPowers1634 | October 3, 2011 at 8:48 am |

    In the second “low white” pic of Hakeem Nicks being tackled by the Cardinal, the cardinal is NOT wearing ANY whites and low blacks with the Jordan Brand logo.

  • MPowers1634 | October 3, 2011 at 9:06 am |

    Paul, Phil and to any UWer in the know…

    This past Saturday I was only scheduled to work a 7PM Varsity FB game, so during the morning I tidied up my garage, which is home to about 90 pairs of my sneakers.

    I purged and collected 60 pairs which I have not worn for a year or two and decided to give them away.

    I live on a dead end so a garage sale was out of the question.

    Thrift store would take too long.

    Ebay…not worth the hassle, although there is probably alot of money to be made.

    I will probably just bring them to the salvation army.

    Any ideas?

    • AnthonyTX | October 3, 2011 at 10:26 am |

      Salvation Army is a great place to give them. There may also be a Goodwill dropoff location near you. Check out to see where the closest one is. You won’t make any money, but you do get a warm fuzzy.

    • John English | October 3, 2011 at 11:28 am |

      Any local homeless shelter would love to have them as well. Lots of folks who need shoes – and they might get a little closer to the source of need in taking them there.

    • Jim Nedelka | October 3, 2011 at 12:08 pm |

      Hey, Ref –
      Why not auction those 60 pairs for the benefit of Cancer Patient palliative group?
      True, a Breast Cancer Clinic might seeem obvious in PINKtober, how about going one better and raising $$ for a Children’s Cancer Ward? They could use the funds for new toys/games/books.
      Or, maybe raise $$ for a nearby patient/parent hostel (I know Ronald McDonald House is the natural default, but there may be other not-as-well-funded charities in your area.)
      In any event, thanks for trying to do something for those who may not be in a position to help themselves.

      • -DW | October 3, 2011 at 12:21 pm |

        I like the homeless shelter idea better.

        He already said he didn’t want to auction them off.

  • MPowers1634 | October 3, 2011 at 9:09 am |

    BTW, our crew all went the pink whistle route on Saturday night.

  • pushbutton | October 3, 2011 at 9:12 am |

    Why is breast cancer the Official Cancer Of The NFL? Not total snark here; is there a backstory I’m not aware of?

    • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 9:32 am |

      Because the breast cancer groups have the best marketing departments.

      There’s a whole mess of different cancers out there, but you don’t see Lung Cancer Month or Prostate Cancer Month or Skin Cancer Month, do you?

      Of course I think the NFL needs to knock it off before they start doing more harm than good. The pink looks so damn stupid and there’s so much pink crap EVERYWHERE, at some point you’re going to start getting a backlash. It may be a good cause, but if you keep shoving it in people’s faces, they’re eventually going to tell you to fuck off.

      • Pierre | October 3, 2011 at 9:47 am |

        I’m already at the point to tell them to f*ck off…

      • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 9:52 am |

        there actually is a prostate cancer awareness month

        but their lobby in congress isn’t so strong

      • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 11:43 am |

        Typically lung cancer is self-inflicted while breast cancer is not; hence the lack of a national sympathetic movement.

        In the Breast Cancer Movement’s eyes, the only “harm” is assholes like you & I who say “I don’t care who you are – take your ribbon & pink shit & fuck off!” – and that makes *us* the bad guys.

        Jeff & I actually agree on something. It’s all just one big special interest group grab to get the most money & publicity.

    • JimWa | October 3, 2011 at 11:28 am |

      “What EXACTLY do you think you’re doing?!?!?!?”
      “I’m … checking you for breast cancer …”
      “Uh, yeah! Sure. Seriously!”
      “Wow. The NFL really does care.”

    • -DW | October 3, 2011 at 12:36 pm |

      The NFL could do a Cancer Month for each month they play.

      August – Pearl – Lung Cancer
      September – Yellow – 9-11/Support Our Troops/POWs
      October – Pink – Breast Cancer
      November – Lite Blue -Prostrate Cancer
      December – Lavender – All Unspecified Cancers
      January – Black – Melanoma
      February – None – The Super Bowl – The NFL hates cancer awareness.

      *Note* – I am not unsympathetic to cancer survivors or their victims.
      My father is a two-time Prostrate Cancer survivor.

      • -DW | October 3, 2011 at 12:38 pm |

        “The NFL hates cancer awareness.”

        Maybe that was a little much…..

        • JimWa | October 3, 2011 at 3:03 pm |

          That depends … do you mean that the NFL is trying to raise awareness that the league hates cancer, or is February celebrating that the NFL hates cancer awareness?

        • -DW | October 3, 2011 at 5:05 pm |

          That the league hates cancer.

      • R.S. Rogers | October 3, 2011 at 3:33 pm |

        I think DW has a winner here. Just need to add, “March-July – Green – Brain Injury.”

  • pushbutton | October 3, 2011 at 9:26 am |

    I’ve been off work sick for a week and watching some old NFL games on bootleg video…and I noticed something intriguing.

    In two Monday night games from 1972, both the Houston Oilers and the Miami Dolphins are sporting a black stripe down the middle of their helmets. Looks especially striking on the Oilers, as it replaces their normally red stripe. Looks like they maybe used inch-wide black tape for the job.

    The Oilers also have one of those golfcart-type “helmet carts” on the sideline and….I swear to God…. it even has a big black stripe down the middle! Wish I had the ability to make a screen grab for you.

    Anyone have a clue who – or what – they were memorializing?

    • -DW | October 3, 2011 at 2:01 pm |

      Going out on a limb here, maybe the Olympic athletes that were killed in Munich?

    • Matthew Radican | October 3, 2011 at 3:14 pm |

      I found a YouTube video ( of halftime highlights from the Nov. 27, 1972 Miami/St. Louis game. It showed highlights of 5 games. None of the 10 teams had a black stripe on the helmet. Since the Oilers game PushButton mentioned was also a MNF game, perhaps the stripe was sort of a ceremonial thing for being on MNF? It was only the 3rd year of MNF.

  • puckboy | October 3, 2011 at 9:30 am |


    The shoulder fabric on the Eagles green jerseys no longer seem to be made of dazzle material. It is now apparently a flat/matte nylon fabric. In the past, the Eagles practice jerseys (used in training camp) had the non-dazzle material for the shoulder area. Compare to the game jerseys for 2008 back on the Meigray website. Obvious that the material was dazzle in previous seasons.

    Paul, can you help me out here?

    • Kyle Allebach @ School | October 3, 2011 at 10:23 am |

      What in the hell? Dazzle? Please…

    • Andy | October 3, 2011 at 12:07 pm |

      Dazzle is that shiny synthetic that the shoulders of replica jerseys are made of.

  • Shane | October 3, 2011 at 9:34 am |

    Next weekend is going to be a hot mess with the Pats in red and pink. Yikes. And I LIKE the throwbacks.

    (hey John, I got that dude’s name wrong, it’s ANTON Khubodin)

    • possum | October 3, 2011 at 10:51 am |

      Nothing wrong with the AHL preseason! I spent several hours Friday & Saturday watching it myself.

      • Shane | October 3, 2011 at 2:12 pm |

        It’s definitely fun (I usually hit up 5-10 Albany Devils games a year), but man, Springfield was so depressing. It was beyond freezing in the arena, and attendance? Maybe 150. At least the P-Bruins won, though!

  • Casey Hart | October 3, 2011 at 9:48 am |

    Dear Ravens,

    You dress like crap.


    • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 9:59 am |

      Dear Ravens,

      Wear the purple jerseys with the black pants. Please.



      • Casey Hart | October 3, 2011 at 10:21 am |

        Dear Football Teams,

        Dark pants go with white jerseys, and even then white pants are usually better.


        • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 10:33 am |

          Dear Football Teams,

          Please ignore Casey as he’s completely wrong about white pants with white jerseys. Pants worn with a white jersey should either match the helmet, match the dark jersey or be the same non-white color you wear with the dark jersey. All white with a dark cap is a baseball look, not football.

          The World

          /yeah, I’m bored… sorry

        • Andy | October 3, 2011 at 12:11 pm |

          Dear The Jeff,

          This is a dumb rule you’ve made up, and there are no rules specifying how the elements of a football uniform should be colored up.

          People who don’t like your stupid rules.

      • Casey Hart | October 3, 2011 at 10:22 am |

        (But black over purple is certainly better than black over black.)

        • Casey Hart | October 3, 2011 at 10:24 am |

          (I mean purple over black.)

        • JimWa | October 3, 2011 at 11:32 am |

          Folding an NFL franchise is certainly better than allowing them to wear purple or black over black.


          (you must be running behind, Phil)

        • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 11:40 am |

          No Jim, we don’t want to go back to a 31 team league… that was a mess. Folding a team would be bad unless there’s an immediate replacement. Besides, the team most likely to be folded would be the Jags, who I guess could be replaced by either Los Angeles or Birmingham. Meh…

          Of course, Baltimore *should* be wearing orange and brown and the Cleveland Bulldogs would have a nice conservative red and silver uniform… but the city of Cleveland had to get special treatment…

        • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 12:22 pm |

          31 teams is not a big deal. It’s just at least one team with a bye each week. But the NFL would rather move entire home schedules to foreign soils before they’d EVER contract a team. The NFL better get over itself because the demand isn’t as nationally & extremely strong as it likes to believe.

        • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 12:23 pm |

          “Of course, Baltimore *should* be wearing orange and brown blue and white and the Cleveland Bulldogs Browns and Baltimore Colts would have a nice conservative red and silver uniform never have been allowed to move”


        • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 12:52 pm |

          You can’t do that Phil, forcing the Colts to stay in Baltimore causes far too many changes in sports history. There’s probably no Baltimore Stars in the USFL and no Baltimore Stallions in the CFL, and it probably even changes the 1995 NFL expansion so that the Panthers or Jaguars might not even exist.

          That’s like the sports equivalent to time travelers killing Hitler. You just can’t do it because it messes up too many other things.

        • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 1:48 pm |

          “That’s like the sports equivalent to time travelers killing Hitler.”


          you say that like it’s a bad thing

          i bet if you polled the electorate, a solid majority, perhaps even a super-majority (and certainly damn near 100% of baltimorons) would have gladly done without the stars & stallions if the colts could have stayed

          jacksonville? aren’t they about ready to relocate to LA anyway? and i think charlotte would have eventually gotten a franchise, although perhaps not when they did

        • Rob H. | October 3, 2011 at 2:24 pm |

          Would Jacksonville & Charlotte have still got the expansion teams? Maybe St. Louis and Indianapolis would have got the expansion teams, then. Because since we’re retroactively outlawing relocations, St. Louis never would have got the Rams. But then again, they never would have lost the Cardinals to Phoenix. So maybe Phoenix gets the expansion team.

          Oh, but wait a minute, did we go all the way back to 1960? Then St. Louis never would have gotten the Cardinals from Chicago in the first place. The Kansas City Chiefs would still be in Dallas as the Texans, so the Houston Texans wouldn’t exist (at least not with that name, and also because the Oilers never would have left Houston.)

          And of course, the Boston Redskins would have never moved to Washington, so the AFL probably would not have put a team in Boston to become the Patriots. And actually this brings us back full-circle to the Browns, since the Rams would have never left Cleveland in the first place, either.

          And depending on how far back you want to disallow relocation, Chicago would only have one team, the Racine (Street) Cardinals, because of course the Bears would still be the Decatur Staleys.

        • Jim Vilk | October 3, 2011 at 3:07 pm |

          If you’re going to outlaw past franchise moves, then there would have been no Baltimore Colts. They started out as the AAFC Dallas Texans. And the Orioles would still be the Saint Louis Browns.

          The Colts and Browns should have been allowed to move, just as LeBron James is allowed to sign where he wishes. In those cases, it was the *way* in which they moved that was the problem. Let’s not get overly restrictive here.

        • JimWa | October 3, 2011 at 3:11 pm |

          “… St. Louis never would have got the Rams.”

          Since this city has a very, very short term memory when it comes to sports, there’s a large number of folks around here that would be absolutely fine with this.

          Now, if the football Cardinals had never left for Arizona, would Busch III still have been built? I don’t know if this city would have sprung for a new football stadium while a “perfectly acceptable” one is still in use. It wasn’t until the Cardinals left that the TWA Dome became a possibility, and after THAT a baseball-only Busch III was born.

          Stupid butterfly flapping it’s wings …

        • R.S. Rogers | October 3, 2011 at 3:42 pm |

          That’s like the sports equivalent to time travelers killing Hitler.

          OK, is there any one action that a time-traveller could take that would have, say, a 90 percent or better chance of both preventing Hitler’s rise to power and keeping the Colts in Baltimore?

          Personally, if I had one shot at sports-related, change-the-past time travel, I’d change the order of events in 1956 so that the Dodgers wind up in San Francisco, where there are actual trolleys to dodge, and the Giants wind up in Los Angeles, where people are more into the whole bragging-about-one’s-awesomeness thing, and with that one stroke MLB would be the one league where pretty much every team’s name makes sense even with all the relocations over the years.

    • sotampacane | October 5, 2011 at 2:50 pm |

      Agree. The Ravens black on black look is terrible, especially when they have beautiful home purple jersey’s. I don’t even like to watch games when teams insist on wearing something that looks so much worse than their main colors.

  • Connie | October 3, 2011 at 9:58 am |

    A terrible thing happened to me this weekend. On Saturday morning, I sent in a characteristically minor comment on the occasion of Phils’s revelation that he attended Hamilton College in upstate New York…


    “…Connie | October 1, 2011 at 9:18 am | Reply

    Phil, darlin’, you’re an old Colonial! Always liked the look (if not the calibre) of the Hamilton teams that visited Amherst to grapple with the mighty Lord Jeffs. I’m not an alum of either, but I came to really enjoy Div III football. Talk about love of the game…”


    I then spent the weekend driving and riding around the Northeast as my soccer-mad pre-teens pursued their improbable ambitions of playing for FC Barcelona and driving Alfa Romeos. Basically “Hoop Dreams” for the bourgeoisie. No access to a computer until this morning.

    So it wasn’t until a few minutes ago that I saw Phil’s reply to my Saturday note:


    “… Phil Hecken | October 1, 2011 at 11:01 am | Reply
    we were the um, Continentals, conn

    i’ll never forget the *slogan* in the old sage hockey rink: ‘GO YOU CONTS’…”


    Now, confusing “Colonial” and “Continental” may not seem like a big deal. Except, I presume, for the readers of this blog. Trust me, readers, please: I spent this weekend in incommunicado humiliation, knowing within an hour of dispatching my message that I had committed a terrible blunder. I KNEW that Hamilton are the Continentals. I KNEW that their school colors were Blue-and-Buff, in tribute to the uniform of the Continental Army and Alexander Hamilton during his glory moment of storming the British redoubt at Yorktown. I knew these things. All weekend I could barely keep my eyes on my sons’ exertions, so obsessed and ashamed was I. Please believe me. It’s just that… oh, the horror… I must have been thinking of GWU.

    This is an ugly but true story, and I approve this message.

    • R.S. Rogers | October 3, 2011 at 3:45 pm |

      As a GWU alum, I can only weep in shame at being a Colonial, not a Continental, when in point of fact ceasing to be a colonial subject and earning American independence at the head of the Continental Army, under authority vested by, and returned on war’s end to, the Continental Congress, was the whole point of George Washington’s career. The good folks over at Benedict Arnold College can have the name Colonials; GWU, like Hamilton, should be the Continentals.

  • Vin Eethy | October 3, 2011 at 10:05 am |

    Did I miss it or was there no mention of the Jaguars going white over white for the first time with their current uniforms?

    So much for creating an “identity.”

    • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 10:11 am |

      2nd time

      They did it in the first week of the season, and it was mentioned then.

      /They changed because they wanted to, “weakened identity” my foot.

  • Bernard | October 3, 2011 at 10:08 am |

    I don’t know if Ray Graham’s shoes were from last year’s WVU-Pitt game or not, but that game is definitely the Backyard Brawl and not the Coal Bowl.

    • MPowers1634 | October 3, 2011 at 10:14 am |

      They might have been IDed as well…

    • Simply Moono | October 3, 2011 at 6:07 pm |

      They are, indeed, the cleats from the Backyard Brawl. The script on the back of the cleats and the one from last year’s helmet are the same.

  • Kyle Allebach @ School | October 3, 2011 at 10:20 am |

    How about, in spirit of cancer awareness, for the four/five games in October, use a different “color” each game for cancer awareness? One game for the boobies, one for lung, testicular, stomach, left ear…the list goes on and on! It’ll be like the Oregon Ducks of Cancer Awareness! Never the same combos twice!

    Anything so I don’t have to see pink towels, hats, cleets, captain patches, and dew rags for four games. Anything.

    • Tom V. | October 3, 2011 at 10:33 am |

      4 games? This is a bonus year, 5 weekends in October!

      • Ricko | October 3, 2011 at 11:07 am |

        So becaue we had the star-spangled stuff for 9/11, that means almost 40 percent of this NFL season (37.5, to be precise) players will have worn equipment that most times didn’t match the team’s color scheme.

        Yet they fine guys because their socks are too low or too high. Or there’s too much yellow/cheddar on their cleats.

  • Rob S | October 3, 2011 at 10:21 am |

    But… but… Jason Garrett did wear the pink-trimmed brim on his hat!

    • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 11:13 am |

      yes but he DIDN’T HAVE A RIBBON!!!

      clearly he must be rooting for every woman in america to get breast cancer

      • Valjean | October 3, 2011 at 12:23 pm |

        … or he just had a hard time finding exactly the right color.

        Hard to keep up. And there are, of course, whole other sets for “sympathizing” with natural disasters, terrorist attacks, random shootings, sexual orientation(s) and probably hangnails and hemorrhoids — anything that says “ain’t this a shame”. See the lapels of your nearest prominent Hollywood glowworm for reference.

        • Valjean | October 3, 2011 at 12:29 pm |

          Sorry, copy editor was sleepy: of course, pride is your sexual orientation is hardly a shame.

          And “pride” ribbons are, of course, a whole other set …

        • Rob H. | October 3, 2011 at 2:34 pm |

          I’m sorry, but if the NFL designates a month for “sexual orientation awareness” and everybody starts wearing rainbow trim, then that will be taking it too far, IMO.

        • Valjean | October 3, 2011 at 5:33 pm |

          Well, given that one of their reasons for breast cancer support is that wearin’-o-the-pink doesn’t blend with official colors and brands (and don’t tell me that reason wasn’t in the NFL’s Powerpoint somewhere), rainbow might actually work. Gay pride might not quite square with pro football’s macho image, but heck, who ever would have guessed a woman’s disease would either?

        • Rob H. | October 3, 2011 at 7:29 pm |

          Yeah, but politically it’s hard to offend people by taking a stance about cancer. Taking a stance about a politically charged issue like this, regardless of prevailing modern attitudes toward tolerance, anti-homophobia…etc etc… may or may not be a smart business move in a world where let’s just say not 100% of their fan base may or may not be totally down with flying a “queer” flag. (Not saying that as a slur, just illustrating a point.)

          While a billion-dollar industry like the NFL may enjoy undertaking a PR move like supporting cancer awareness (something that everybody — comments about tired of seeing all the pink aside — is pretty much in favor of), supporting a cause that has less widespread appeal – and would therefore be truly “making a stance” about – is probably still a ways off.

          It’s easy to be anti-cancer. We all hate cancer. If it takes seeing football players wearing pink, and people asking why are they wearing pink, to make them aware of cancer, that’s pretty sad.

          I wish sports would leave the social activism to the social activists. I don’t wanna think about cancer awareness or gay rights when I’m watching a football game. I wanna think about football.

          But then again, I don’t want to think about products that I see in commercials, either, so I guess I can live with it if it’s helping to fight cancer.

          Umm, exactly how is them wearing pink helping the fight against cancer, again?

  • AK | October 3, 2011 at 10:25 am |

    Small error in the MLB Uniform Tracker: it shows PHI winning the first game and STL the 2nd (correct), but it says PHI leads 2-0.

    • mmwatkin | October 3, 2011 at 10:49 am |

      And the Tigers road uniforms are incorrect.

      • Rob S | October 3, 2011 at 11:14 am |

        At that size, the orange and white trim on the Tigers’ road jersey gets practically obliterated… but, it does look like it’s showing a stripe around the cuff of the sleeve, which would be incorrect.

    • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 11:30 am |

      Alternate tops in MLB playoffs? Inexcusable.

      • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 11:51 am |

        They’ve worn them all season, why would they want to stop now? As superstitious as sports teams can be, if you’ve been wearing an alt jersey for 1/4 of your games, why on earth would you stop doing it when you make it to the playoffs?

        • scott | October 3, 2011 at 11:59 am |

          Out of respect for the game.

        • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 12:16 pm |

          Because it goes against tradition, looks bush league and looks cheap. It looks very Spring Training-like, which is just wrong in the most important part of the baseball season. Plus it’s all a ruse to sell more color jerseys.

        • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 12:22 pm |

          Powder blue road uniforms went against tradition too.

          That ship has sailed. Baseball teams are wearing colored jerseys just as often as white & gray. Like it or not, it’s part of the game now.

        • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 12:54 pm |

          Never said powder blue roads were ever right, either. All just a fad. Part of the game or not, I don’t have to like or embrace it at all.

      • sotampacane | October 5, 2011 at 2:28 pm |

        completely agree. When I saw the rays wearing those powder blues I immediately thought of bad karma. Wear your best stuff for the biggest game of the year. Go with the White.

  • Mike N. | October 3, 2011 at 10:49 am |

    Majestic Athletic just posted a brand new sale of “MLB HOT Majestic Jersey Deals” and I am wondering if it is indicative of teams that are changing/tweaking their uniforms for the 2012 season. I know that most on the list are either changing uniforms completely (Marlins, Jays), making minor tweaks (Dodgers, Mets), or adding commemorative patches next year (Royals, Astros, Orioles), but I am surprised to see one team on this list — the Cubs. Does anyone have any idea if they are changing uniforms or adding a patch for 2012??

    Here’s the link…

    • mmwatkin | October 3, 2011 at 11:05 am |

      Very interesting.

      Also noticed the Padres Home uniform was on there. Perhaps they have a patch coming? Couldn’t really think of one off the top of my head.

      As for the Cubs, I wouldn’t be surprised if they went cream at home like the Mets did with their pinstripes. I hope the blue alt is gone for good.

      • Rob H. | October 3, 2011 at 5:10 pm |

        I like to see the Cubs’ Blue Alt become the regular road jersey (like in the 1980s), and them have a new “alt” – a powder blue with pinstripes like the late 1970s road jersey. Enough of this GFGS.

    • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 12:18 pm |

      Could be an overstocked thing, too.

      • mmwatkin | October 3, 2011 at 1:37 pm |

        I originally thought that as well, which is why I don’t take too much stock in player-specific uniforms in that clearance section.

        But why would they put “Customize your own” jerseys in there? They are basically just blanks that are awaiting a name and number. On the surface, the only reason would be that the style is being discontinued or modified.

    • Keith | October 3, 2011 at 1:31 pm |

      Replica jerseys (like the O’s for example) don’t have any patches anyways.

  • Ricko | October 3, 2011 at 10:52 am |

    Said this yesterday, if MLB did the Pink Thing for 25 percent of its season, that would mean 40+ games for each team. Just about anyone would think was a little overboard, no matter how noble the cause.

    The NFL, though, is built on the notion that there’s no such thing as too much of a good thing. “Overdone” doesn’t seem to be in their vocabulary.

    Especially—as some have already noted—because they also seem to need more than their share of “spin”.

    • concealed78 | October 3, 2011 at 11:34 am |

      Chalk me up as another “asshole” – I wish we’d keep the lobbyists & special interest groups out of sports.

  • Mike | October 3, 2011 at 10:55 am |

    The 49ers (including Alex Smith) did have the pink ribbons on the back of their helmets. It was to the left of the memorial stickers but the sticker does not show up very well on their gold helmets.

    • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 11:19 am |


      he did

      for something so important as boobie cancer, you’d think they’d have moved the ribbon to the white center stripe…wouldn’t want the message to get lost somehow

  • Rob S | October 3, 2011 at 11:09 am |
    • Simply Moono | October 3, 2011 at 6:21 pm |

      Vegeta’s a BOSS.

  • Mike Platt | October 3, 2011 at 11:15 am |

    FYI… Phil mentioned that every team was wearing the Pink Captaincy patch. You missed Eli Manning. He didn’t wear it either against the Cardinals.

    • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 11:26 am |
  • Mike 2 | October 3, 2011 at 11:19 am |

    Phil mentioned that the Titans were the only team not wearing the Pink Captaincy patch.

    But Eli Manning did wear it either in the Giants game against the Cardinals on Sunday.

  • Michael Kelley | October 3, 2011 at 12:23 pm |

    Fitzgerald wears Nike cleats and clearly had all pink shoes, save for the black Nike swoosh. So take that, Under Armour!

  • Mike Engle | October 3, 2011 at 12:37 pm |

    Re: This picture, as seen at “This lady either has divided loyalties or is extremely confused as to what “fan gear” means.”
    Cheesehead? Check. Non-orange Elway jersey? Check. Plush monkey around her neck? Yes, but why? Best guess: She’s a little too proud that she attended Super Bowl XXXII. (Then the monkey could be a San Diego Zoo souvenir. But sheesh, lady, that outfit is like a typical Dennis Miller joke. Potentially intellectually rich, but WAY over most people’s heads.)

  • David | October 3, 2011 at 1:22 pm |

    The Chargers endzones had a pink stripe instead of their usual yellow. Sorry no screen shot

    • David | October 3, 2011 at 1:25 pm |
      • Kyle Allebach | October 3, 2011 at 3:32 pm |

        Jesus, that’s drawing the line (pun). I want the Chargers to look like the Chargers, not a cotton candy advertisement!

        • Simply Moono | October 3, 2011 at 6:24 pm |

          That’s funny, because I had a dream about cotton candy last night.

  • puckboy | October 3, 2011 at 1:38 pm |

    PINK BRA to white bra: “Why are you white and not pink this month?”

    WHITE BRA to pink bra: “I support breasts; I don’t support cancer awareness.”

  • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 2:35 pm |

    Anyone else notice something wrong with this pick of the Jaguars’ field.

    check out the 10 yard line markings…

    • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 2:36 pm |

      actually, all of them on the near side, haha

    • Jim Vilk | October 3, 2011 at 2:54 pm |

      Someone didn’t read the ticker. It was in there twice, in fact.

    • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 2:58 pm |


  • Terry Mark | October 3, 2011 at 2:35 pm |

    I noticed in the Blackhawks picture that was posted in the Ticker that the player in front of Marian Hossa (can’t tell who it is, possibly Niklas Hjalmarsson?) doesn’t yet have his uni number on the front.

    I know it’s not required until the start of the season (as Paul documented) but why wouldn’t the equipment staff just apply the numbers on in the exhibition season?

  • Pat | October 3, 2011 at 2:50 pm |

    Surprised that no one mentioned that the Sunday Night game was apparently the Baltimore Ninjas vs New York Storm Troopers.

  • Keith | October 3, 2011 at 3:18 pm |

    Baltimore has quite the solid color history. They used to have the best all white uni (Colts), and now they have the best all black uni (Ravens). Very yin/yang.

  • Kyle Allebach | October 3, 2011 at 3:40 pm |

    I’m not a huge fan of the new gray fad, but these Virginia Destroyer unis (the UFL, if you care) are dynamite, even if they are very Replacements-esque.

    PS: they got road grays too. It looks better in football than baseball, IMO.

    • Rob H. | October 3, 2011 at 4:10 pm |

      I thought all the UFL teams wore various colors from the teal, green, blue and black palette.

      • Mike Engle | October 3, 2011 at 4:17 pm |

        Only Year 1. Promote the league at first, i.e.: every team used the exact same colors of the UFL logo and the same template, just with different “color by number” directions. Now, the teams may actually–egad!–step out of the box and forge their own identities.

  • Eric | October 3, 2011 at 4:01 pm |

    Yeah, the Caps had the front helmet numbers going last night, but the Hawks did not. looks like the Hawks are waiting until the last minute to apply them. They did not have them for any of the preseason games.

  • LiketheRiver | October 3, 2011 at 4:06 pm |

    Looks like Indianapolis took the “Pink” concept a little further along. They dyed our canal Pink.,0,7324062.story

  • Chad | October 3, 2011 at 4:34 pm |

    Cribbs has been wearing those since last season. Says it gives him more friction and a better grip on the ball.

    • jdreyfuss | October 3, 2011 at 8:06 pm |

      I believe he is getting fined for it, but he has a clause in his contract that says the team will pay for it.

  • Douglas King | October 3, 2011 at 5:29 pm |

    I vote next year we split October up to cover Cancers of more than just the breast variety. For example men are more likely to get cancer where’s the prostate cancer awareness? what about Pancreatic cancer which at the moment is essentially a death sentence. Why does the NFL only focus on Breast Cancer awareness when it is already the most well-represented cancer? By splitting it up the NFL can still do their accessories in fancy colors for auctioning but save us from seeing the same thing every week for 4 weeks.

    If the NFL is going to bring awareness to cancer the way they currently do they should focus on more than just one. If they are going to wear non-team color accessories and such they should mix things up. Here’s my suggestion:

    Week 1: Purple, which is the color assigned to cancer awareness in general. this weekend the NFL focuses on raising cancer awareness.

    Week 2: Pink, Breast Cancer awareness – you know the drill

    Week 3: Light Blue, Prostate Cancer Awareness

    Week 4: Neon, Pancreatic Cancer Research – by the time this would be enacted Nike will be the supplier, so they’ll offer a variety of neon colored accessories, each team will decide on what they entire team will wear (one color per team).

    All the items will be auctioned off and all charities will receive the same amount of money (total sales will be divided amongst the 4 charities).

    If we are going to have to see crazy colored accessories I’d prefer there be some variety other than Pink, and I prefer they benefit more than just one charity that is dedicated to eradicating a disease that is ALMOST entirely limited to one gender.

  • Mike Roy | October 3, 2011 at 5:48 pm |

    Hey on the MLB jersey playoff the gentleman has the Phillys up 2-0, and according to the game i watched last night St. Louis won so the series should be 1-1 not 2-0 like he has thank you.

  • GODUCKS! | October 3, 2011 at 6:08 pm |

    The Ducks are wearing new unis for Thursdays game against Cal. HIDEOUS!

    • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 6:25 pm |

      Not saying it’s impossible, but it seems unlikely those are real.

    • Kyle M | October 3, 2011 at 8:02 pm |

      well, Cal is breaking out white helmets. they wore them in practice today.

  • Sam D. | October 3, 2011 at 6:14 pm |

    Phil, when are you going to post your 2011 Mets uni-tracking graphic? I like yours the best!

    • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 10:13 pm |

      i didn’t do one this year (although i did manually track all the games, so i could) — but walter young has been the go-to mets guy this year…his are the ones i’ve been posting periodically this year

  • jdreyfuss | October 3, 2011 at 7:11 pm |

    Stupidity of his comment aside and irrelevant to the annoying song, is anyone else happy they finally found a reason to not use “All My Rowdy Friends” tonight?

    • Simply Moono | October 3, 2011 at 7:32 pm |

      If you compare our Commander In Chief to an evil prick that slaughtered 6,000,000+ people of Jewish descent, you might be a redneck.

    • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 10:10 pm |
      • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 10:12 pm |

        you might want to unprotect your tweets there, timmer…kinda tough to read otherwise

      • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 10:12 pm |

        Oops, forgot i got them blocked.

        I wrote this 3 hours – Only Hank Williams Jr. could successfully get that godawful rendition of #AYRFSF? taken off the air. Best Hitler – Obama comparison ever.

  • Johnny O | October 3, 2011 at 7:45 pm |

    Mark Attanasio (owner of the Brewers) wore an awesome lined suit for game 2 of the NLDS on Sunday.

    • jdreyfuss | October 3, 2011 at 8:00 pm |

      The people at the AP really can’t tell the difference between a man wearing a suit and a man wearing a sportcoat with jeans? That is an awesome lining on his jacket though.

  • Simply Moono | October 3, 2011 at 8:01 pm |

    Mr. Vilk mentioned that the Chiefs (in his eyes) have the best uniform in the NFL (that’s fair) and the AFL (I think the ’61-’65 Chargers have something to say about that), and I remember Paul saying that the Bears have the best uniform in the NFL. Obviously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but in my opinion, the Buccaneers (who are in red-over-pewter tonight) have the best uniform in the NFL, and here’s why:

    I came around at the tail-end of the Creamsicle-Era, but that was my introduction to the team, and it was a great uniform (’92-’96 orange dancer tights notwithstanding). When they unveiled their current set in 1997, I was about as awed as awed can be, and I still love it to this day. It’s one of the *very* few uniforms that was great to begin with, but the next era uniform was even better (give me another example of a pro team that had a great uniform before, and the very next uniform was even better). All four combos look amazing, whether they be R/P/B, R/W/B/, W/P/B/, or W/W/B.

    You can also note that (like the Ravens’ purple-over-white) the Bucs have one of the most CRIMINALLY underrated uniforms in professional sports as a whole.

    Plus, what other pro/college team uses pewter?

    • LDH | October 3, 2011 at 11:28 pm |

      Maybe the Rams. I liked their older look better, but I know that most people prefer the current style.

  • The Jeff | October 3, 2011 at 8:46 pm |

    Number 25 on Tampa with solid pink socks and long pink sleeves. God that looks so incredibly stupid.

    • Pierre | October 3, 2011 at 10:08 pm |

      Ditto…I had to look twice to make sure I was seeing it correctly.

  • Jimmy L | October 3, 2011 at 9:14 pm |

    Not sure if anyone else spotted it but Carolina didn’t have pink captaincy patches either.

    Also, number 30 on Carolina’s captain patch was sewn on at a 45 degree angle. It was annoying me the entire game. Best pic I could find of it…

    • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 9:56 pm |

      nice grab — not only the captaincy patch issue, but the bear has a pink chinstrap too…

  • Tim E. O'B | October 3, 2011 at 10:26 pm |

    The Colts’ Eric Foster’s foot took a right turn at his ankle.

  • TN Jim | October 3, 2011 at 10:53 pm |

    Good place to donate shoes:

  • traxel | October 3, 2011 at 11:00 pm |

    If only that pic had caught my pink hotpants…..

    I’m going as Phil next week…..

    • Phil Hecken | October 3, 2011 at 11:36 pm |


      not bad benji

      just pixture me with glasses and a with a few lbs. on mr. carvey

  • jdreyfuss | October 3, 2011 at 11:40 pm |

    Based on the way Austin Collie looks, I’d say the super-stretchies fit even worse over bulky body pads.

  • sotampacane | October 5, 2011 at 2:26 pm |

    Thanks for the 1 week is enough, 4 is too many. It feels politically incorrect to say this, but that is how I feel as well. It annoys me to see it taken so far, and it is clearly done to try and attract more non football fan viewership.