When the NHL was Fab


By Phil Hecken, with Tim E. O’Brien

A few weeks back, I ran a nice set of NHL uniform concepts from one of our more talented graphic artists, Tim E. O’Brien. That was just a small portion of the NHL makeover Tim has planned, and we’ll be taking a look at the rest of the NHL concepts a little on down the road. But before we do that, one of the things Tim had discussed doing, almost off-handedly, was redoing some of the uniforms from defunct NHL teams. In fact, in the comments that day, just such a suggestion arose, and that was all the prodding Tim needed. So today, I’m pleased bring you more of Tim (yay!) and his concepts for teams who no longer call those uniforms or cities home. Here’s Tim:


While I wasn’t quite finished tweaking NHL teams, commenter Mike D (whom I have to assume is the Mike D from the Beastie Boys) gave me the idea to take a crack at teams of yesteryear.

With such a great idea, I immediately got to work and found four teams ripe for an update. So what follows is first, a new look for four former franchises.

“The Defunct Series”

California Seals: LOGO | CREST | HOME | ROAD | THIRD

The Seals – in their California incarnation in particular – had great colors and unis, but the logo reminded me more of a bird with a fish head than a seal. So I tried to remedy that with an updated logo and script.

The unis are basically just updates of previous unis. Though I had considered making the yellow jerseys the road uni and coming up with a different third, I figured this might go against NHL uni-policy.


Hartford Whalers: CREST | LOGO | HOME | ROAD | THIRD

This is the first team in the Defunct Series which I didn’t feel the need to edit their crest. I did edit the whale logo a bit and I considered moving the whale tail up a bit higher off of the W but decided against it.

The uniforms are fairly straightforward updates of classic Whaler unis, but it was hard to keep the bold striping patterns of the old team on the new edge cuts. I’m not thrilled with my third. I tried a gray alt but that looked forced and the blue alt – to me – starts to encroach A LOT on the Canucks’ identity (though, they seem to have just stolen a lot of good design ideas from the Whalers). If you have any better ideas for a third, let me hear ’em.


Minnesota North Stars: CREST | LOGO | HOME | ROAD | THIRD

With the North Stars, the first thing I tried to do was fix their logo. To me, a team named the North Stars should have a logo that points north (up), not northeast-ish (up and to the right). After that, these home and road are actually pretty similar to my Dallas Stars set (with notable and significant differences), which makes sense since those were partially based on old North Stars unis, but I give these unis their own flare (like the arrow and star on the pants).

I love the Third jersey here, which is a fauxback, and even considered making the home and road based off of this pattern, but decided to go with the more modern feel for the regular unis.


Quebec Nordiques: CREST | HOME | ROAD | THIRD

I think the old Nordiques logo is a train-wreck. Now, I understand that, design aside, people love the ‘Diques logo, so – just like the Seals – I tried to update the logo while improving the design.

From what I gather, the old logo was a mashup of an N, an igloo and a hockey stick and puck. First, I rid the logo of the hockey equipment (we know you play hockey) and I give the logo a much more balanced overall shape. The door to the igloo is framed by an N for Nordiques and also appears as an entrance to a stereotypical igloo.

I even flirted with a wordmark alternate logo, but decided that might be a bit much.

The home and road unis are pretty much just updates but the third is an homage to the flag of Quebec.


“The American Classic”:

North Stars vs. Seals: Who ever said fantasy has to be realistic? In my world, the NHL would add more outdoor “classics” and this particular one would take place in Oakland California.

Pitting the Minnesota North Stars vs the California Seals, both teams would wear throwbacks to 1975-76 with their current (Tim E.-created) logos and slightly altered pants stripes.


“The Heritage Classic”:

Whalers vs. Nordiques: The second classic I would add would be a return of the Heritage Classic – the Canadian team version of the Winter Classic.

Quebec would host this Canadian outdoor game and face an old WHA rival, the Hartford Whalers.

Once again, both teams would be wearing throwbacks to 1975-76 but this time the unis would be dead on replications of the ’70s originals.

Well, that’s it for now, until next time, happy tweaking.


Thanks Tim! Man, I wish most of those teams not only never left their original homes, but would have kept a variation of their old unis in their new arenas. Great job.

OK readers. What say you?


NFL PlayoffsPickin’ The Playoffs, By Uni

Every year when the NFL playoffs roll around, I play a little game with myself where I pick the NFL playoffs by the spread, choosing the better uniform as my guide. Having tried this in the past with college ball, I realize it doesn’t work so well — but the pros? Different story.

Two years ago I went 7-4 (or was it 6-5) and last year I went 7-3-1, so clearly there is something to this. Now, I didn’t have a weekend post last weekend (wait, what?)…so I didn’t get to offer my choices — but trust me when I tell you I would have gone 2-2. Here’s how:

• Houston -4 v. Cincinnati: Clearly the Bengals (even wearing their least noxious all-whites) have the worst uniform in the league (at least IMHO), so there was no question I’d have simply selected Houston by process of elimination. Final score? Texans 31 – Bengals 10. Easily would have covered the 4 I would have given with Houston. W (1-0)

• New Orleans -10.5 v. Detroit: A little tougher, since the Saints have a propensity to wear all black leotards. I would have said, “If they go black-monotard, I’m picking the Lions.” Well, they did, and still cruised 45-28 (for a 17 point win). Getting 13.5 wouldn’t have covered that spread, so that would have been a loss. (1-1) [On a side note, I would have taken the Saints if they wore their gold pants, since that’s a pretty kick-ass uni, and would have been better than the Lions. But they didn’t, so my pick was Detroit]

• New York Giants -3 vs. Atlanta: Another easy one — the Giants home blues are one of the top 10 unis, and Atlanta, no matter what iteration they’re in, are always one of the worst. The final score was G-men 24, Falcons 2. Easy cover. (2-1)

• Pittsburgh -7.5 vs. Denver: Another easy pick, unfortunately Jesus Tebow proved up to another challenge, guiding the Broncos to an overtime win. Those mono-blues are awful (even though they wore white pants), and while I’m not as big a fan of the Stillers roads, I surely would have picked them. So that would have been loss #2. (2-2)


So now we’re up to this week and it’s time to pick this weekend’s games:

New Orleans -3.5 at San Francisco: Outdoors, on the grass at I’m Still Calling It Candlestick…and the Niners in one of the games nicest unis. No matter what pants the Saints wear, gold or black (which looks particularly heinous), I’d take the Niners. Getting 3 and a half? It’s always risky taking the home dog, but I’m gonna do it. Gimme the Niners and 3.5.

New England -13.5 vs. Denver: I’m not particularly a fan of the Pats unis, but their homes are certainly better than their roads, and the Broncos are still caught in a time-warp with their once-trendy swooshified uni-set. Their white roads aren’t as bad as those awful mono-blue things they’ve been wearing recently, but still, no outfit is better than the Pats. So, I’ll give up almost 2 TDs in this one. Gimme the Pats minus 13.5.

Baltimore -7.5 vs. Houston: It’s highly unlikely the Ravens will go purple over black, and I actually quite like their normal home uni (they definitely won’t have their black tops, since the no-alts-in-the-playoffs rule applies). The Texans usually go white over blue, but occasionally will break out the white trou. Still, I prefer the Ravens Purple over white, so that’s who I’m takin’. Gimme the Ravens and take the seven-point-five.

Green Bay -7.5 vs. New York: While the Giants’ homes are pretty sweet, their roads, especially with the super-stretchies, are not. Plus, they’re going up against possibly the best-looking uniform in the game. While I hate to pick against the G-men, the uni dictates otherwise. Gimme the Pack and give up 7.5 points.

Well…there ya have it. Gotta improve on that 2-2 opening week to take at least three of four. How about you guys? If you’re *betting* men and women, how to you pick your games?


all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks Concepts

We have another new set of tweaks, er…concepts today. After discussion with a number of readers, it’s probably more apropos to call most of the reader submissions “concepts” rather than tweaks. So that’s that.

So if you’ve concept for any sport, or just a tweak or wholesale revision, send them my way.

Please do try to keep your descriptions to ~50 words (give or take) per image — if you have three uniform concepts in one image, then obviously, you can go a little over, but no novels, OK? OK!. You guys have usually been good with keeping the descriptions pretty short, and I thank you for that.

And so, lets begin:


We start with Jonathan Nisula, with some Iggles concepts:

I modernized the old “Randall Cunningham” era uniforms on DeSean Jackson. I eliminated most of the black trim and went with silver pants, along with tweaking the shade of green. Enjoy!

I sent you the away version yesterday, and now I will send you the home version


Next up is Bryan Brunsell, a yinzer with some Panther ideas:

I stumbled across your website in my own “design-related sports interests” – great job!

I’m a designer as well, 20 years in the biz and I love sports. I’m from Pittsburgh and obviously surrounded by the Steelers, Pirates and Penguins all the time, which is great. But I’m writing to you about Pitt Panther College Football… in particularly their uniforms.

Just like you, I am very sensitive to uniform design, etc… and in 2009 i submitted a proposal to the Detroit Lions to update their logo, uniform, etc… Well, my recent obsession is to update the Pitt Panther uniforms back to their Pitt “Script” logo and brighter color.

See my Flickr images

and my Facebook page:

I have stats and numbers to back up my claim to switch back – this info is listed on the Dedicated Facebook page. Is there any chance to write an article on your page about this or “Guest Blog?” Or can you write about what I’m doing? I’m trying to gain momentum online to pressure Peterson into the change and get local support. The fan base wants it….

Let me know!

All the best


And we close with Adam Triesler, who has several NFL concepts for us:


Chargers: Whenever I play Madden I always get a little out of hand with uniform combinations I use in games. I played recently as the chargers and paired the current helmet with the throwback powder blue jersey and old gold pants. I thought it was a very interesting but pleasing combination, so I ran with it.

Rams: I’m not a big fan of the Rams current color scheme, possibly because they seem to have a different combination for every game, but most likely because it will never compare to the royal blue and yellow. I chose to hark back to the short period when the Rams had neither gold or yellow, and used white for the horns. I love the old combo but I think using the navy helps it pop a little bit more.

Eagles: I have never understood why Philly strayed from using kelly green and gray, and I also have never understood why they chose to pair dark green with black. The colors are too similar and it just doesn’t work. I like the details and trim of the current uniform, but wanted to bring back a lighter green, and a set of gray pants.

Falcons: In my opinion, the Falcons have one of the best uniform histories of any NFL teams… until 2003. I think the new logo is great, but the uniforms just need so much work. I remember seeing a white prototype helmet from a few decades ago and always wished I could’ve seen it on the field. I love the old red and black helmets, and would be thrilled if they came back full time, but I couldn’t pass up an opportunity to see a uniform with the white

Titans: I was devastated when the Oilers moved, as they had my favorite uniform ever. I don’t think the red trim would fit in with the Titans, so navy is fine, I just don’t like it as a main color. Also, the shoulder seems way too big, I think yokes are more for hockey sweaters than football jerseys.

Broncos: As all readers of this site know, the 1962 Broncos logo is a regular topic of discussion, and frequently a topic of arguments. I wanted to have a little fun with that idea, and this fauxback should put it all to rest: one side brown, one side blue. This would make for an interesting game to watch on tv, as the quarter changes, so does the color.

Thanks for viewing,
Adam Triesler


That’s it for today. Back with more next time.


Benchies HeaderBenchies

by Rick Pearson


How does that “impact/velocity/distance thing” work again?…

1-14-12 d-overhand

And of course, the full-size.


That’s it for today everyone. Two great NFL games today, and then another two tomorrow. Hope everyone has a super Saturday.


“Press release boilerplate is obnoxious, but never more so than when they try to fellate the potential season-ticket buyers.” — Walter

196 comments to When the NHL was Fab

  • TheSmokingPun | January 14, 2012 at 7:16 am |

    No Scouts concept, for shame. KC rarely gets any respect anyways in the hockey realm. Oh well, back to bed.

    • Russ | January 14, 2012 at 9:32 am |

      Cleveland Barons.
      Pittsburgh Pirates.
      Montreal Wanderers.
      Vancouver Millionaires.
      Hamilton Tigers.
      Colorado Rockies.
      Winnipeg Jets.

      • Gusto44 | January 14, 2012 at 9:51 am |

        Interestingly,the 1925 NHL Pirates had a uniform which featured a gold jersey with two black lines and a black “P”. From a design perspective, it bore a resemblance to the gold pillbox hats the baseball Pirates would start wearing in 1977.

      • Russ | January 14, 2012 at 6:44 pm |

        Oh, also, Atlanta Thrashers.

    • Memal | January 14, 2012 at 10:21 am |

      I like your list too Russ, and hopefully TheSmokingPun he might consider that team next time. I always admired KC’s jersey and nickname concept.

    • Will S | January 14, 2012 at 8:41 pm |

      for a very good KC Scout update check out the nCw team on Chakal’s website.


  • Y Bother | January 14, 2012 at 7:46 am |

    Everyone of Tim O’Brien’s changes are a step backwards from the original defunct identities.

    • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 8:42 am |

      So where are your concepts?

      • Arr Scott | January 14, 2012 at 9:03 am |

        That’s a ridiculous standard. Anyone who takes seriously the idea that it’s illegitimate to judge work without demonstrating one’s ability to produce superior work would also have to dismiss Paul’s criticism, whether positive or negative, of any new uni design, since where are the pro unis Paul has designed?

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:09 am |

          There’s a difference between actual criticism and troll comments. You can judge a design without necessarily being able to create better yourself… but you need to do it with more than just “LOL these all suck”.

        • Arr Scott | January 14, 2012 at 9:23 am |

          Agreed, but that’s not what Y said. “A step backwards,” while vague, is actually on point, since Tim expressly framed his designs as intending to take the old designs and bring them forward into a more contemporary design language. There’s no difference in value between what Y said and if I said, “Each of these concepts succeeds in updating the team’s identity.”

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:30 am |

          I suppose you’re right… but his comment combined with the name of “Y Bother” just screamed troll to me.

        • hugh.c.mcbride | January 14, 2012 at 4:20 pm |

          I enjoyed the redesigns, I appreciate the time & effort that went into creating them, & I wholeheartedly agree w/ The Jeff’s response to Y’s trolling.

    • Memal | January 14, 2012 at 10:17 am |

      Y Bother, why bother sharing your Hatorade with us? Your vague hating points are just that, vague and hating without a scrape of supporting details.

      I loved all of Tim’s designs and felt he has done the best job I’ve ever seen on this site of doing an update while staying true to the spirit of the original. Fantastic job Tim and troll elsewhere Y Bother, please.

  • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 7:50 am |

    I like the updated Seals logo. Beyond that, nothing really jumps out at me.

    /What the heck is a Nordique anyway?

    • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 8:46 am |

      Well, I could be wrong, but I believe a Nordique is an old, old wooden ship that was used during the Civil War era.

      • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 8:58 am |

        Really? Damn Canadians… the team is named after a type of ship, and they use an igloo for a logo? That’s just dumb. At least there’s no maple leaf on it…

      • Matt Beahan | January 14, 2012 at 9:41 am |

        Tim, I have never wished this site had a “like” button for comments more than I do now…

        • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 10:09 am |

          Yeah, I think THE missed that one… (Nordiques = Northerners)

        • Memal | January 14, 2012 at 10:13 am |

          I second that, hilarious!

      • M.Princip | January 14, 2012 at 1:38 pm |

        I loved the old Nordiques logo, and Tim’s take is a nice variation of it. Also, really like how the Avalanche adapted from it.

      • hugh.c.mcbride | January 14, 2012 at 4:23 pm |

        Tim: Any truth to the rumor that Central Park was created by Joe Pepitone so the Nordiques would be able to train on natural grass?

        (Kramer + Wacky Hockey Faux-Trivia = Win, right? RIGHT?!?)

    • Russ | January 14, 2012 at 9:29 am |


      I love their new logo. I never saw the igloo in the old one, perhaps because they covered it with all the equipment. (I never forget to bring my hockey stick and puck on my igloo building expeditions.)

      It does look a bit odd at the center of the jersey, though. Maybe the jersey would look better with the fleur-de-lis and use the igloo on the sleeve.

      I also wish this design had seen the ice for at least one season:

      • DJ | January 14, 2012 at 10:00 am |

        The Nordique logo concept does very little for me, it looks like a non-descript blob of color.

        The mistake was removing the stick and puck. The Nordiques never had the history that say, the Canadiens or the Leafs had, so they would need the extra visual cues (especially in non-game settings like web designs, some forms of advertising, etc) to say “we are a hockey team.”

        I suspect that if the Nordiques returned, they might go with a wolf logo as their primary, and the original logo as part of a third, throwback uniform. Alternatively, they’d go with the “classics” and keep the wolf as an unused concept.

        • DJ | January 14, 2012 at 2:13 pm |

          Another problem with this Nordique concept: it does not lend itself to one-color rendering, which is needed for print media (you’re not always going to have the benefit of color printing, so your logo needs to be capable of being printed in only one color).

        • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 2:17 pm |

          From a Journalism major:

          Print media is dead.

      • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 10:05 am |

        Eh… those colors are off. This is what they actually looked like:


        Considering it was another 1990s teal whore, probably best these never saw the ice.

        • DJ | January 14, 2012 at 10:29 am |

          Perhaps, but the use of the wolf as a logo/mascot/totem was, and is, a good idea. Especially as other stereotypically Northern animals have been used by other NHL teams (orca by Vancouver, bear by Minnesota, polar bear by Toronto as their mascot “Carlton,” husky by Calgary as “Harvey the Hound”).

      • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:08 pm |

        As a teenager (1976-1983), my contempt for the Nordiques’ uniforms could not have been higher. Now I regard them more highly. But at the time, I thought,”Why is a team wrapped in Quebec flags using a red elephant pushing a lawnmower as its mascot?”


  • GDM | January 14, 2012 at 7:57 am |

    Bryan – I’m a WVU fan who lives near the ‘burgh, but I have to say your Pitt designs are awesome. I don’t care for the current Pitt word mark, logo (the hyena-dog/dino-cat), or color scheme (the flat, vegas gold helmets look terrible). Clever idea putting the script Pitt on a blue helmet (hadn’t thought of that, but it looks great!) and on the pants (striking and unique).

    With the move to the ACC, wouldn’t it be great to see Pitt reclaim their identity on the gridiron!


    • DJ | January 14, 2012 at 10:38 am |

      Using the script “Pitt” on the pants is too much — it’s something that screams “Boise State.”

      The current Pitt uniforms are close, very close, to what people want (the look of the Tony Dorsett/Hugh Green eras). If you want to bring back the sleeve striping, use a spandex undershirt, as has been seen frequently in other Nike designs). Tweak the colors. If they went to navy/mustard or royal/mustard, I think it would be much better. And of course, the script “Pitt” on the helmets.

  • Chris | January 14, 2012 at 8:08 am |

    Oh, baby, those Chargers unis ran a shiver up my leg.

    • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 8:36 am |

      A proper Chargers uniform should always have some form of lightning bolt pants striping. Yes, that is a rule.

      Other than that, it’s not a bad look.

      /and the damn gray mask should be powder blue.

      • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 9:26 am |

        Gray facemask is neutral.

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:28 am |

          *angry glare*

        • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 9:39 am |

          I could totally see you flunking out of G.A. Color Theory. Gray’s standard assent is not open to opinion.

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:44 am |

          As I’ve said before… if gray is neutral, then so is black. You want to see a bunch of teams using black facemasks? Hell, even better… you want to see a team take the field with a mixture of white, gray and black facemasks? No, you don’t.

          There’s a difference between color theory neutral and sports uniform neutral.

        • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 9:56 am |

          Black is not neutral in any sense at all. lol, jesus christ Jeff, color theory applies to sports uniforms – most definitely.

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:59 am |

          How the hell is black not neutral? Grayscale is neutral. That’s white, black, and everything in between.

        • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 10:11 am |

          Well let’s see… black is dark, nothingness, no light /lack of light. Where do you get “neutral” out of that? Black or white is the opposite of neutral in every sense.

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 10:21 am |

          Black or white is the opposite of neutral in every sense.

          Wait, what?

          Did you just seriously say that white isn’t neutral?

          What the fuck are you smoking?

        • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 10:45 am |

          I’d ask “what are YOU smoking”, but I know years of being a Raiders fan caused the brain damage. Jeff, you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about when it comes to color theory; just let it go. White is not neutral. Obviously I can’t help you with your mental problem – maybe a therapist or a college color theory class or something could. But don’t spout rhetoric on this site like “black or white is neutral” because it’s not.

          Are you sure you’re not someone sent over from the Creamer boards to cause trouble?

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 10:50 am |

          So, I’ve never actually taken a class on Color Theory, but please, explain to me exactly how “lack of hue” doesn’t equal neutral.

          If white isn’t neutral, then why is EVERY DAMN TEAM IN AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL SPORTS required to wear it?

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 11:36 am |

          Without starting a huge discussion of semantics and/or terminology in uni-world, I think it’s fair to say that the white jersey requirement made white “universal” more than neutral. If teams were gonna have to wear it half the time, meany incorporated white into their other uni elements for home-road continuity, a sense of overall design. Many did not, and that was (and still is) their choice.

          Gray and black were more seen as neutral when applied to items seen as equipment, and as they related to factory colors worn by everyone…because that’s all that was available. Shoes were black. Facemasks were gray (yes, early-on sometimes white or “clear”, too) as were practice tees, sweatshirts and sweatpants.

          They became established as such in the years before those things were able to be easily and profitably produced in custom colors. That is to say, until suppliers knew there was enough retail market to justify producing them.

          Also, there IS a difference between how these colors are labeled in the larger world, and how they’re treated in the uni-universe. Also a difference between light and “pigment”, for lack of a better term. Yes, in science black is the absence of light. In the tactile world (paint, ink, fabric, and such) it’s a color.

        • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 11:44 am |

          very true, ricko

          but THE’s point (if i may speak for him) on many of these “traditions” is his belief, right or wrong, that many of these colors came into being because technology didn’t exist to create something else

          now that we can, he feels there is no longer a need to keep such colors, because in his mind, they don’t make sense (and while i may not necessarily agree, i do feel it’s a very legitimate point)…if the vikes could have matched their purples, don’t you think they would have? etc…

          now, we’re accustomed to always (or almost always) seeing one team in white, and i, for one, love a gray facemask, even though the technology certainly exists that neither is necessary


          as we are fond of saying,

          just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should

          love the divergent opinions on this

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 12:10 pm |

          Was just giving background. Not really taking sides.

          Except on two points.

          1. Was trying to distinguish white as “universal”, because it is, by rule. Think maybe we could set it apart from the “neutral” discussion, which is where it seems to get all knotted up.

          2. Just because something is available, doesn’t mean someone MUST use it. If a team decides to continue to regard their facemasks, say, as equipment and stay with gray, that’s their call. If it isn’t their call, then we should be roasting the Packers for wearing black shoes instead of forest, cheddar or white. Or the Colts for not wearing royal or white.

  • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 8:09 am |

    Ah another two kelly green & silver Eagles concepts with the current set. A very popular concept choice. Those colors really do deserve a much better logo, helmet & standard number set. I would distance anything from the current Eagles set as far as possible.

    And we all know why the Eagles changed: it was the mid-1990s, to drum up merchandise sales and to darken up look “tougher”. They had a classic look and didn’t appreciate it at all. Maybe they’ll get it right one of these years.

    • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:16 pm |

      My color-blindness hurts my perception of green and green-based hues such as teal and aquamarine. Particularly as these colors are shaded darker, approaching black. The Eagles’ “Midnight Green” is a thorny color for me, and I find it indistinguishable from the anthracite color they use, especially on the pants stripe. It would help me a ton if they went to kelly or grass green.


  • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 8:15 am |

    I would love for the Titans to go to that solid light blue & white set, but that helmet logo still doesn’t do it justice. Something just seems really off-balanced about that comet logo tho it is roughly based on the Tennessee flag. They should definitely ditch the shoulder yoke & dark tops & pants. Excellent job.

    • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 8:31 am |

      So…. pair that uniform with http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/265/titans3.jpg/ ?

      I don’t really mind their logo, but I do think they need to add more light blue to the helmet if they’re gonna use it as their primary color. Make the navy stripes light blue, or something.

      • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 8:55 am |

        That helmet would be much better.

    • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:20 pm |

      It’s not that the comet symbol is *bad*; It’s just not in the same league as the oil derrick!


  • Robert | January 14, 2012 at 8:27 am |

    The Texans only go for all-white when they play at home. Normally it’s the opening home game, so called ‘Liberty White Out’. On the road, they stick with white jerseys, blue pants.

  • RobDC | January 14, 2012 at 9:12 am |

    While I prefer the northeasternish North Stars “N” I’ve got to say that third jersey is fantastic (I also loved the Ducks third jersey from Tim’s previous set of revisions). Fantastic stuff Tim! If only this Olympic year was a winter games year, I’d beg for a set for the various national squads.

  • Arr Scott | January 14, 2012 at 9:17 am |

    I’m seeing marked improvement in Tim’s design work, both conceptually and in terms of technical execution, with each new set he shows us. I’m particularly fond of the Seals and especially Nordiques logos, and the North Stars jersey crest. The North Stars primary logo is decidedly lacking in character though, unusually so for Tim. And while the thirds are by and large fun ideas, none of them do anything for me in execution. They feel like first drafts, whereas the rest of the unis Tim offers feel like fully matured work. Either too little contrast between crest and jersey, or in the case of the Nordiques, the third is too literal to be clever or fun. But that sounds like I’m focusing on the negatives, when in fact those are the few false steps I see in otherwise excellent work. Any one of these would be above average in the actual NHL today.

    I appreciate that Tim took seriously the idea of “updating” for most of these designs. Sort of like how the Twins post-1986 script actually speaks the same visual language as the 1961 script, most of Tim’s designs here take the basic elements of the old logos and translates them into a more contemporary visual language while retaining the qualities of the original. Tim set himself the right challenge, and met that challenge. Ultimately, that’s why these concepts generally work so well for me.

    I suspect that the limitations inherent in designing for a beloved defunct team provided valuable discipline to the project, so I’d love to see Tim do more offer defunct-team concepts. Especially baseball and other hockey squads.

    • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 10:15 am |

      Thanks Arr.

      “The North Stars primary logo is decidedly lacking in character though, unusually so for Tim.”

      Yeah, looking back, I wish I had done a custom script or something, but at the time I was kind of enamored with the simplicity of their old logo. http://www.sportslogos.net/logo.php?id=246

  • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 9:30 am |

    BTW here’s that (supposed) 1974 Falcons white helmet prototype that Triesler mentioned:


  • Bernard | January 14, 2012 at 9:31 am |

    For anyone in Big Ten Network country: right now BTN is showing the 1969 Michigan-OSU game, in color, and it looks fantastic. Will be on until 10:30.

    • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:40 am |

      Just flipped over to it… what really sticks out to me is the players all wearing “NFL style” socks. Michigan’s got navy and OSU has red with gray & white stripes. Why the hell did they ever stop doing that? It looks so much better than the bare calves we see so often in college football today.

      • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 9:53 am |

        It’s also refreshing to see a field without all of the digital overlays on it.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 10:28 am |

          Not mention no scores and news items streaming across the bottom of the screen

      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 10:14 am |

        This has been on before, but don’t recall it looking this good. Wonder if they’ve re-mastered it.

        Bare calves seen today?
        Short crews socks and exposed calves have been by far the most common choice in college football throughout the TV era, and well before.

        Until the 80’s, that is, when high white socks became the fashion, a look which then later largely disappeared as the everyday style. After that, bare calves returned.

        It is probably easier to list those those who regularly wore stirrups under their crews that those who did not, because it a far shorter list.

        As the weather cooled in November and December teams would add them, yes, but not many began the season with them.

        But, yeah, the crew-over-stirrup in this games does looks good. Also worth noting that Michigan was one of only a handful of teams that still wore black shoelaces in 1969.

    • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 10:18 am |

      What’s that piece of cloth extending from the shoulder almost all the way to the elbow?

      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 10:25 am |

        Some kind of “arm tube” or something?

    • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 10:27 am |

      What the F is that on field numeral font, that 3 in “30” looks straight outta soviet Russian propaganda

  • Rob H. | January 14, 2012 at 9:48 am |

    Just saw on Sportscenter Giants K Lawrence Tynes expects his foot to be black after kicking in 15 degree weather – and he wears a shoe! I wonder how those barefoot kickers handled really cold weather. If it was really cold did they put a shoe on, or did they kick barefoot no matter how cold it was.

    • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 10:16 am |

      Many of them would wear a heated boot on the sidelines until it was time to go to work.

    • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 10:20 am |

      “K Lawrence Tynes expects his foot to be black after kicking in 15 degree weather”

      Dude, black is not the preferred nomenclature. African-American, please.

      • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 10:30 am |

        What are you, a park ranger now?

      • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:25 pm |

        You only have to say “African-American” once to a West Indian to realize we shoulda stuck with “Black”.


        /Sadder but wiser
        //Damn euphemisms
        ///Damn slashies

        • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm |

          Walter, I love you, but sooner or later, you’re going to have to face the fact you’re a goddamn moron. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118715/quotes


        • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |

          Shut the fuck up, Donny. :)


        • Rob H. | January 14, 2012 at 6:27 pm |

          Mark that a zero, or you are entering a world of pain!

  • Gusto44 | January 14, 2012 at 9:58 am |

    Good job by Tim on those defunct team designs, would like to see more from the past, as has been mentioned in the opening comments today. The old California Seals should have adopted his logo for sure.

    I’m with Bryan on the need for Pitt to return to the script, the current block design is stale, and without historical precedent. I’m partial to the yellow helmet with the matching face mask. Wouldn’t mind seeing a redesign which incorporates the 1997-2003 panther head into the uniform, probably the pants.

  • Winter | January 14, 2012 at 10:29 am |

    1) I’ve always loved the Whalers logo. Always thought that was a great piece of design.

    2) I agree with one of the above comments that KC gets little respect, but I don’t think that’s only associated with hockey. I’ve always thought KC should have NHL and NBA teams back. (And why doesn’t St. Louis have an NBA team?)

    3) Next year, the Texans should break out the red jerseys over the navy pants. I know there’s issues with the sponsorship issues on the red jerseys, but that’s another discussion.

    • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 10:33 am |

      Right. What NFL team wouldn’t want to look like the Florida Blazers…

    • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 10:38 am |

      There’s a bunch of cities that don’t have NBA teams (Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Buffalo, Baltimore, St. Louis, Kansas City, Louisville, Seattle, Vancouver) most had teams at one point or another but couldn’t sustain the product. I don’t think it comes down to a city “should” have a team, but in K.C.’s case, it’s probably the Oklahoma Thunder taking away fans in the region & it being another small market.

      • Winter | January 14, 2012 at 10:56 am |

        I suppose it depends on how you define the “region”. Dallas is much closer to OKC than KC is, and no one is worried about the Thunder impinging on the Mavericks, do they? Do the Bucks worry about impinging on the Bulls?

        As for those other cities you’ve listed, I’d be fine with teams in any of those cities, although I’ve never really considered Louisville.

        • TheSmokingPun | January 14, 2012 at 11:17 am |

          NHL would be more successful here anyways. Nothing to compete against. NBA would always be competing against KU basketball and the occasionally good MU or KSU teams.

      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 10:56 am |

        In other words, the NBA has enough candidates for contraction as it is?

        • Winter | January 14, 2012 at 10:58 am |


        • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm |

          I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve mused, “Why doesn’t (sample city) have (one of the four major sports)?” It costs a lot to try, and fail, just for the sake of saying, “Well, we won’t make that mistake again.”


    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 10:51 am |

      i for one (and i believe THE too…)…

      would love to see the texans in red over blue

      yes, yes…THE is with me on that

  • Gary | January 14, 2012 at 10:38 am |

    I would buy every single one of those Hartford Jerseys, including the Heritage Classic one…. I really wish that there was a way for the city to get that identity back, even if it were just for their minor league team… The Connecticut Whale logo just doesn’t do it for me.

    • Teebz | January 14, 2012 at 11:58 am |

      The city gave up the identity when they didn’t renew the license on the team because it was costing them money rather than making them money. Blame whomever decided that idea because the city of Hartford owned the Whalers logo for a decade.

    • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 12:26 pm |

      Mitchell & Ness has a boatload of Hartford the Whale gear on their site; no jerseys tho plenty on ebay. Another long-debated purchase…

  • Jet | January 14, 2012 at 10:47 am |

    The Seals were my obsession as a youth, so I’m a bit misty-eyed to see my team get some attention here on UW. Nice job, Tim! The revised crest looks good up close but from a distance it looks like the outline of NY state… probably because that’s where I’m from and I’m used to seeing that shape.

    Interesting that you hearken back to the 75-77 N.Stars jersey for the heritage and third jerseys. I always liked that brief design but it’s associated with a lousy period for them. I never liked what followed, which seemed to have too much yellow, then of course they really mucked it up by adding black. But their inaugural design was nice too, just a bit of yellow and nice bold white stripes.

    Folks, don’t give Tim a hard time for not doing the KC Scouts and other defunct teams; I’m sure he’ll eventually get to them.

    My only complaint is that the dark jerseys are designated as “home” and the light jerseys as “road.” Just one more reason for me to dislike the modern game…


    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 10:53 am |

      i’d bet dollars to donuts tim is working on more defunct teams and also olympics concepts as i type this

      right tim?

      • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 12:20 pm |

        No… Maybe…

    • SoCalDrew | January 14, 2012 at 11:21 am |

      Loved the Seals resurrection, maybe the Sharks will see them and do an “Oakland throwback” night?

      • Jet | January 14, 2012 at 11:34 am |

        I’d love that!


      • Teebz | January 14, 2012 at 12:00 pm |

        Technically, the Oakland franchise still exists.

        Oakland -> California -> Cleveland -> merged with the North Stars -> Dallas Stars.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 12:11 pm |

          Was hoping someone would point that out.
          Thanks, Teebz.

        • Jet | January 14, 2012 at 12:29 pm |

          yeah, “technically”… but as someone who lived and breathed and agonized Seals hockey, and followed them faithfully in Cleveland…my team (Seals/Barons) ceased to exist with the “merger”. My team disbanded and another existing team took 10 of its players. You want to call that a “merger”, so be it. Nothing against the North Stars; I always had a soft spot for every one of the first six expansionists, but my heart was broken and I was just a marginal hockey fan after that.


        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 12:47 pm |

          Yeah, being “absorbed” is about the same thing as being contracted, isn’t it.

          But it does mean they have nothing to do with the Sharks.

        • Mike 2 | January 14, 2012 at 5:19 pm |

          True – but the San Jose expansion was in a sense an unwinding of the merger. I know that San Jose is an expansion franchise, but the Gunds (former owners of Cleveland) took half the team with them and both the North Stars and the Sharks participated in the expansion draft.

        • TA | January 14, 2012 at 5:19 pm |

          Actually, they do have something to do with the Sharks. The last owners of the Barons were the Gund brothers, who took over the North Stars when they merged. Then, 13 or so years later, the Gunds were making noise about moving the team to San Jose; instead the NHL brokered the deal for them to sell the Minnesota franchise and get a San Jose expansion franchise. The Sharks were sort of “broken off” from the North Stars, as they were allowed to claim a certain number of Minnesota players, and then both the Sharks and North Stars selected players from other teams in the expansion draft.

    • interlockingtc | January 14, 2012 at 12:34 pm |

      Jet, that original Seals logo was one of my obsessions as a youth. Tim’s update is nice–easier on the eyes, I guess– but nothing beats the glory of that original. It is so wonderfully weird. Where is the seal? Which end of the, uh, beast, is facing forward? The stick–if that’s what it is–is supported how? Not that I’m complaining, mind you. I love that it still perplexes and fascinates me after 40-some years. Not many logos can do that. How that logo came to be and the thinking behind it is my personal white whale.


      • Jet | January 14, 2012 at 2:43 pm |

        Even more bizarre is that there were two versions of it – the “C” that surrounds the seal at one time extended all the way around to form an “O” for Oakland. And they only used the logo on their unis when wearing the original green/blue/white colors, not the Finley-era green and gold…


        • walter | January 14, 2012 at 2:49 pm |

          And for continuity’s sake, the giant “C” about to swallow the mascot was carried over as a graphic device when the Seals became the Barons.


          /John Baby’s #1 fan

      • Valjean | January 14, 2012 at 2:47 pm |

        Agreed — seems to have some real staying power. I admit to being obsessed with it (both the “California” and “Oakland” versions) back in the day.

        And beats the heck out of Sparky. Nothing against Chuck Schultz, of course — but even a hockey fan like him couldn’t save the Seals at that point.

  • Connie | January 14, 2012 at 10:58 am |

    Now that Robert (above) has told us that the Texans won’t wear their white pants when facing the Ravens, I won’t pick too big a fight with you, Phil, over your preference for the Baltimore home uni. I don’t like it much, really, and not because I don’t like purple-and-black. As you’ll recall from your own undergraduate days, the Lord Jeffs of Amherst College have often looked terrific in those colors. I just don’t much like how the Ravens use them. The Texans always look classy to me, even with the blue pants. But still, no fight, Phil.

    Until now. How the Sam Hill can you say that the Patriots uni — home or away, I don’t care — is better than the Broncos’ away outfit. It’s not enough to say that the Denver unis are stuck in a time warp. All long-term distinctive unis are stuck in a time warp. I mean, the Packers are stuck in 1965 and the Giants are stuck in 1960, but they picked good times to get warped in. The Pats are stuck in a godawful phase of the 1990s. Oh, let me unburden my heart! [sobs] I don’t like those stupid Denver varied-width stripes! Yuck. It’s just that New England dropped Pat Patriot, and he was my favorite of all time, and the team started winning without him, and the fans liked all that Flying Elvi metallic nonsense because the team started winning big big-time, and only odd aesthetic malcontents would whine about their beloved Pat.

    I just can’t go on.

    • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 11:02 am |

      The Patriots can’t be stuck in the 90’s, that uniform didn’t come into existence until 2000.

      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 11:09 am |

        Wouldn’t that mean it likely was designed in the 1990s?

        • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 11:16 am |


          By the same standard, the Falcons & Jets 1990 uniforms (the Jets added black trim, the Falcons switched to black jerseys and black helmets) were products of the 80’s, as they’d have been designed in ’89.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 11:41 am |

          Wasn’t being nit-picky.

          Was just saying it’s the time frame that influenced the designers, that’s all…that perhaps they weren’t as “forward thinking” as they may have convinced themselves they were. And that would still make it a 90s look.

      • Connie | January 14, 2012 at 11:09 am |

        It’s all a tear-smudged blur, TJ, sorry…

    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 11:02 am |

      “I just can’t go on.”

      no question

    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 11:06 am |

      oh and conn…while i never saw them quite like this (thank god), i only recall seeing the lord jeffs in white

      /what the hell has become of NESCAC football?

      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 11:10 am |

        I think it’s the college equivalent of nine-man.

      • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 11:22 am |

        I think I need to have a serious uniform discussion with the Lord Jeffs.

        • hugh.c.mcbride | January 14, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

          Start w/ their name. “Lord The Jeffs” has a great ring to it — and w/ one well-placed comma it can also be used as both rallying cry & expression of exasperation when/if the squad falls short of expectations.

  • pushbutton | January 14, 2012 at 11:13 am |

    A hearty thumbs up for Adam Triesler’s Rams design.

    Funny how removing an eye-catching color can make a design bolder. The Rams really ought to do navy and white.

    • The Jeff | January 14, 2012 at 11:17 am |


      • Connie | January 14, 2012 at 12:10 pm |

        Yeah. I mean No. I mean I’m with The Jeff.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 12:22 pm |

          Gold-cheddar-whatever is part of the whole “California” thing that is the Rams’ history…even though they did begin in Cleveland and are now in St. Louis.

          Golden State. Golden Bear. Gold Rush. Hollywood. Sunshine. Golden Gate. SO many things made it appropriate for that team as pro sports exploded in popularity in the 60s and into the 70s. Rams, Chargers, 49ers all used gold in that era. Not to mention the Warriors, Seals, A’s, Lakers, Kings, Padres, Conquistadors and Rockets.

          Shoot, even the Raiders originally wore gold.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 12:42 pm |

          Personally, I think it’d be interesting to see the Rams go with something based on this…
          Would work against white just fine (see WVa and Wyoming this year and Broncos in AFL 50th unis), and would be okay against most colors, too.

    • hugh.c.mcbride | January 14, 2012 at 4:37 pm |

      I understand all the reasons why the Rams *should* wear the yellow/gold — but I agree that the blue/white combo is lovely. Return to LA + Return to Blue & White would be two excellent moves, IMHO.

      • hugh.c.mcbride | January 14, 2012 at 4:38 pm |

        To clarify, IF a team ends up relocating to LA, I’d prefer it be the Rams — & IF said squad does indeed return to La-La Land, I’d enjoy seein’ ’em harken back to yesteryear w/ a return to blue & white.

      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 4:44 pm |

        I just know I remember when those royal-white Rams played the royal-white Colts twice a season (both in the West back then) it wasn’t exactly visually exciting.

        Much better when the Rams wore the cheddar.

        • pushbutton | January 14, 2012 at 5:13 pm |

          I recall the Rams being darker than royal, whether or not it was navy. But I would want navy today.

          They could absolutely rock 2-color now.

  • Jet | January 14, 2012 at 11:17 am |

    WOW! A 1947 film on hockey in Montreal, shows kid hockey all the way up to the pros!
    and here is an article with commentary on the film

    Some notable scenes – closeup of the Montreal goalie in the dressing room – with two catching gloves! No “waffle” blocker glove! Also game footage against Toronto shows both teams in dark jerseys! And every time there’s a scrum, sticks are WAY high in the air!


    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 12:02 pm |

      hey jet,

      check your e-mail

  • Winter | January 14, 2012 at 11:50 am |
    • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 12:20 pm |

      We were all puking our guts out yesterday over those. So many designs in the 1990s that benefited without the Internet watching over their shoulder. I don’t think we would have seen an 1/8th of the designs that came out had there been a way to gauge the public’s reaction; especially all those gradient NHL 3rds.

  • Alan | January 14, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

    I like the idea of an NHL Heritage game with the throwback unis..very unusual concept. Would be cool to see the Canadiens play the Avalanche wearing the old Nordique uniforms. It’s a shame that the WHA teams not absorbed by the NHL are lost in the shuffle..they had some real beautiful designs. Cleveland Crusaders anybody?

    • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

      The NHL’s official position is, generally, that the WHA never existed.

      If they could just get the Oilers to move out of Edmonton, they might actually be able to convince coming generatins that self-delusion is reality.

      • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 1:27 pm |

        not unlike the NFL’s position in re: AFL for a while…and we all saw how that turned out

        they perked up when the WFL and the USFL came into being though…how was it that the nHl could absorb teams and yet never acknowledge their existence nor records? no one cares aboot hockey enough to make a stink?

        • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 1:28 pm |

          They are mostly Canadians = don’t count.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 1:45 pm |

          NFL at least included player stats. Didn’t wipe out everything before 1966 (or 1970, depending on how you want to benchmark it) as if it never happened.

          The fans took care of that, I guess.

          Y’know…cuz if it wasn’t called a “Super Bowl” it was, I dunno, AAU football or something.

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 1:47 pm |

          I could go off on a long dissertation about the NHL, based on what we dealt with at the time, but it would piss people off.

          Even though it’d be accurate.

        • Gusto44 | January 14, 2012 at 2:21 pm |

          Back in the day, the Birmingham Americans requested to be absorbed into the NFL, when the WFL was getting ready to buy the farm. The NFL said no thanks, and the Americans died with the rest of that league.

        • Mike Engle | January 14, 2012 at 2:37 pm |

          Yep, total bull crap. The Avco Cup-winning Winnipeg Jets got to come in with the merger, but had to become an expansion team all over again while being thankful they were allowed to keep Bobby Hull. How magnanimous of Mitt Romney, I mean the NHL!

        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 2:52 pm |

          Bottom line.

          The NHL was not about to give one shred of credibility or recognition to some hockey league started by a bunch of…Americans.

        • Gusto44 | January 14, 2012 at 3:24 pm |

          Oops, should have said the Memphis also wanted to join Birmingham in a possible WFL to NFL move.

  • TN Jim | January 14, 2012 at 1:57 pm |

    Freshman and early enrollee Jarnell Stokes playing in his first game for Tennessee today against Kentucky. Stokes is wearing black shoes while the rest of the team is in their standard white shoes. Why? Tennessee had to order a pair of size 20 shoes.

  • NinerEd | January 14, 2012 at 2:00 pm |

    “Outdoors, on the grass at I’m Still Calling It Candlestick…”

    Well…it IS Candlestick. Has been for a couple of years now since the last naming-rights deal expired.

    My dad always used to call it ‘Stick Park – as he put it, “The candle blew out a long time ago.”

    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 2:08 pm |

      the candle burned out long before the legend ever did?

      seriously, though, didn’t realize it was BACK to being the stick…good…i thought once a place got a corporate monicker, it would never lose sponsorship…tough times in SF?

      • Connie | January 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |

        “… the candle burned out long before the legend ever did?…”

        Stop now or somebody might get hurt.

      • concealed78 | January 14, 2012 at 2:51 pm |

        Venues & stadiums change corporate names all the time e.g. Joe Robbie. Businesses go bankrupt; funds dry up & companies withdraw sponsorship; deals expire. In Oakland it became the Coliseum again for a brief while.

        Really wish they would stop with the corporate names. I decided it wasn’t worth being accurate so I’d rather show my age & call it what it originally was. Unless of course it always had a corporate name.

        • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 2:55 pm |

          im still calling it pro player

        • hugh.c.mcbride | January 14, 2012 at 4:42 pm |

          I think we should call *every* corporate-named stadium Enron Field. You want a reminder that corporate $$$ is all-important? Well, we’ll give u that reminder …

      • TA | January 14, 2012 at 5:11 pm |

        A few years ago San Francisco voters passed a ballot measure banning sponsored naming of city-owned sports venues. It didn’t void existing contracts, so the sponsored name in place at the time at Candlestick stayed until the contract expired, and then the no new naming deal was allowed. (AT&T Park is not affected as it is privately owned by the Giants.)

        • Winter | January 14, 2012 at 8:42 pm |

          There been any rumblings as to what the 49ers’ stadium-to-be in Santa Clara is going to be called?

  • Mike Engle | January 14, 2012 at 2:33 pm |

    Hockey news, but no picture.
    My Habs recently traded away Mike Cammalleri to the Calgary Flames. (Don’t ask me my opinion, I already flushed it out of my system and I don’t need to reopen that wound.) Cammy played for the Flames once before, wearing the #13 he had also worn with LA and Montreal. (Cammy’s father is of Italian heritage, and #13 is lucky to the Italians.) However, this time, #13 is taken by Olli Jokinen. So Cammy has picked up #93 instead. I would have to assume that this is a tribute to Dougie Gilmour, given that Cammy is from the GTA.

    • Mike Engle | January 14, 2012 at 4:29 pm |

      With a display picture like THIS on his certified Twitter page:
      It’s very safe to say NHL.com is correct about his new number. I just Tweeted him to ask about a Gilmour connection–I’d be surprised if he answers, but we’ll see!

      • Mike 2 | January 14, 2012 at 5:23 pm |

        According to the National Post, its a tribute to Gilmour. Which is weird because Gilmour didn’t wear 93 with the Flames, he wore 39, he didn’t wear 93 until he got to Toronto.

        • Mike Engle | January 14, 2012 at 5:49 pm |

          But as I stated, Cammalleri is from the GTA, and as a result of Gilmour’s subsequent individual success (starting with the Leafs), it’s fair to state that he’s more closely identified with #93 than #39.

  • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 4:01 pm |

    Nice, the Saints are wearing gold pants today.

    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 5:10 pm |

      still not a better uni than the niners…

      but yes

      /too bad both teams have *gold* helmets and pants tho

      • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 5:21 pm |

        Your better uni pick is looking pretty good right now.

        • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 5:51 pm |

          it’s a long game…

          and damn that marques colston is good…anyone know where he played college ball?

        • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 6:00 pm |


      • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 5:21 pm |

        Wow, has such a thing ever happened in football before?


        • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 5:23 pm |

          Know what else I heard?
          Sometimes high schools use college or pro logos on their football helmets.

          (where are those damn sarcasm tags, anyway?)


        • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 5:47 pm |

          i meant for the matchup slappy, not because it’s never happened (and yeah, i know you’re being sarcastic)

          just the saints in their gold/white/gold would match up even better against a team who wasn’t also wearing (albeit a different shade of) gold

          /dammit…is the mothervilker wearing off on me now?

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 6:12 pm |

    Just got home, how in the world did the Niners score 17 points. Nice red end zones too.

    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 6:19 pm |

      they should have more

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 6:14 pm |

    Brees scares me. The only way to beat him is for the Niners O to control the ball and keep him OFF the field.

  • Kyle Allebach | January 14, 2012 at 6:14 pm |

    For the love of cheesesteaks, please stop paring Kelly green with the cartoon wings. It’s like putting Toy Story in the middle of a Tom and Jerry cartoon: it doesn’t look right.

    • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 6:42 pm |


  • Paul Lukas | January 14, 2012 at 6:54 pm |

    Just noticed that Justin Smith of the Niners (who made that last sack) is another player who goes bare-handed and finger-taped:

  • CWac19 | January 14, 2012 at 7:25 pm |

    Not a fan of the Niners’ wordmark. Liked the old “Old West” font.

    • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 7:27 pm |

      Old West (also my preference) has been gone a long time.

      • CWac19 | January 14, 2012 at 7:29 pm |

        Yeah, but so had the traditional unis, and they’re (mostly) back.

  • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 7:42 pm |

    It’s interesting that in the recent New York Times piece on football laundry that Paul posted, the heavily-painted field at Candlestick is regarded as being notoriously hard stain-wise according to team dry cleaners.

    • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 7:52 pm |

      Another two seasons and it won’t matter. hello new stadium in SC.

  • Paul Lukas | January 14, 2012 at 8:04 pm |

    Wow — first the Niners scored too quickly, leaving the Saints too much time, and now the Saints have scored too quickly, leaving the Niners too much time!

    • Paul Lukas | January 14, 2012 at 8:10 pm |

      As I was saying!

      • SoCalDrew | January 14, 2012 at 8:29 pm |

        I suspected the 2010 Super Bowl win was gonna be a one-off. Oh well, I’ll have to be content with my memories (just like the 2002 World Series).

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 8:06 pm |

    AND…………….I think we’re done here.

    • Tim E. O'B | January 14, 2012 at 8:25 pm |

      HA! 9ERS!

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 8:12 pm |


    • Paul Lukas | January 14, 2012 at 8:13 pm |

      Dude — first you’re late for the start of the game, then you’re in the crapper for the winning drive? Unacceptable!

      Please turn in your Niners fan credentials on the way out.

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 8:20 pm |

    well, I was at work!

    now if the Giants can PLEASE beat the Pack tomorrow so we don’t have to go to the Frozen Tundra….

  • Wheels | January 14, 2012 at 8:24 pm |

    Seems like the audio on CBS is always much better than Fox.

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 8:29 pm |

    As Kruk & Kuip (SF Giants announcers) might say:


  • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 8:36 pm |

    so…now all my niner friends are turning into giants fans for “the next 24 hours”

    be careful what you wish for boys…be careful what you wish for

    • Ricko | January 14, 2012 at 9:06 pm |

      Lest anyone doubt that Tight Ends are the new force in the NFL…

      Nice that a few power forwards decided to give up basketball and give football a try.

      Way back when Raymond Berry was coaching the Patriots, someone asked him on why there were so few quality tight ends. “They’re all in the NBA,” he responded.

      Stayed that way for a long, long time. Sure does seem to be changing now, though, doesn’t it.

  • =bg= | January 14, 2012 at 9:04 pm |

    The Giants are peaking at the right time, it appears. And they’re a good team.


    No doubt would I rather take my chances here with the Giants than up north with the Pack. Common sense.

    • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 9:34 pm |

      oh absolutely, brinke, but remember a few short years ago…when all my packer friends were “giants fans for 24 hours” as they beat the cowboys

      just one more stop on the way to SB XLII and the greatest super bowl victory (since) 1969, knocking off the perfect pats

      hey, the G-men could very easily lose tomorrow and it’s all for naught…just be careful what you wish for, das all

      • Paul Lukas | January 14, 2012 at 9:52 pm |

        Hey, having my two favorite teams meeting in the NFL conference championship game — if that’s what ends up happening — would take me back. I believe it’s happened three times before, with the Giants winning twice. It’s always an agonizing experience for me, but it’s also a no-lose situation, since either way I end up with a team I love making it to the Stupor Bowl. Bring it!

        • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 10:24 pm |

          and if the g-men lose, you’ll still have the team with the best uni and that whole sconnie thing going too

          /good to be an nfc fan in 2012 paul?

        • Phil Hecken | January 14, 2012 at 10:34 pm |

          oh and that NFC champeenship thing?

          i think it was only once they met in the penultimate game, with the g-men winning on 5 field goals


          if memory serves, they’ve met three or four times in the playoffs — the first was 86-87, when the g-men won their first super bowl, and (although i was in england at the time), i think the giants won something like 49-3, but that wasn’t the NFC championship game

          the third time was, i believe 1993(?) — wasn’t it either LT’s or phil simms’ last game — and the 49ers absolutely kicked the giants’ ass in that one…

          i think the giants also lost a wild card game to the niners after holding a huge lead in the third

          …man my memory is like a sieve these days

        • Paul Lukas | January 14, 2012 at 10:39 pm |

          Good call, Phil. I mistakenly thought the ’87 game and LT’s final game were conference title matches, but they weren’t. Thanks for setting me straight.

  • Mike D | January 15, 2012 at 9:03 pm |

    Sweet, I got a shot out on the main page!

    Great job on the hockey jerseys Tim. The Whalers jerseys are perfect. The heritage classic could be used as a 3rd jersey as well.

  • Jeremy Schneider | January 15, 2012 at 11:31 pm |

    I love the Giants road unis, almost more than their homes. Don’t ask me why.

    • Mike D | January 16, 2012 at 9:18 am |

      I second that.