…And Then There Were Ten

Washington Contest Finalists Splash

By Phil Hecken

And now we’re down to 10. Ten finalists in the Rename/Redesign the Washington Football Club contest. The voters have spoken, and now it’s time for you to pick the best.

Before the final poll, I’ll give you the rundown of the final 10 designs one last time. Take a good look-see, read the description, then cast your vote.

I’ll announce the winner next weekend.

Designs will be listed in order from the most votes to the least. Thanks to all who participated and good luck to the ten finalists.

Ready? Here we go…


Brittain Peck:

Peck, Brittain - Warriors helmet.Peck, Brittain - Warriors logo.Peck, Brittain - Warriors logoDev

Peck, Britain - Warriors inspiration

Peck, Brittain - Warriors uniform

Description: The United States of America, with it’s headquarters in Washington D.C., is home to the most lethal ass-kicking machine of a military that human history has ever known. When our nation’s capital is the battleground to the sport most analogous to warfare, it is only fitting that the team that takes the field consist of nothing less than Warriors. Calling upon generation’s of US military aesthetics, as well as years of uniform tradtiion in the Redskins organization, the uniforms worn by the Washington Warriors serve as both an any-given-Sunday tribute to the few and the proud as well as a present day battle armor to bring the outdated “Redskins” into the play of modern warfare. COLORS: deep red, charcoal gray, tan, and gold based on a combination of the current Redskins burgundy and gold and the drab fatigues of combat. LOGO: primary derived from a combination of a capital letter “W”, for both “Washington” and “Warriors”, the District of Columbia’s flag, and the eagle and trident emblem of the Navy Seals, the fiercest of our nation’s real-life warriors
secondary a solitary “W” formed from two parallel stripes and a single star, based on the design of the Bronze Star Medal and intended to be worn as a badge of honor. SHOES: tan. reminiscent of the combat boot style worn by Army in the 2011 Army / Navy game HOME: charcoal jersey & tan pants based on the present combat uniform consisting of tan pants and a dark body armor vest, also reminiscent of the tan pants worn in in the early to mid 1900’s by the Redskins. SHOULDER STRIPES: red -white-red based on the ribbon associated military medals awarded for acts of valor and bravery in combat as well as the double stripe in the District’s flag. HELMET: slightly metalic tan with deep red center stripe bordered by thinner charcoal gray stripes; logo in transparent gray on sides the side logos resemble the subdued color palette used in combat military patches and insignia. ALTERNATE UNIFORMS using a color palette based upon that of the Redskins, yellow is used as an accent / trim color to accompany red over an otherwise entirely charcoal, Seal Team Six style uniform.


Elliot Schunke:

Schunke, Elliot - Dragons

Description: First off, I feel the NFL is greatly lacking in the reptilian department. What better scaled beast to choose than the Dragon? Besides, a lot of fire-hot air gets blown outta that town, so it’s fitting. I kept the colors the same because it’s a classic combo. Two logos are used on the uni: the “DC Dragon” to be used as a breast patch, and a blown-up version of the dragon’s head, which adorns the helmet. The shoulder stripes branch from a single stripe giving an effect of the framework of a dragon wing. Enjoy!


Bruce Genther:

Genther, Bruce - Warriors -  1

Genther, Bruce - Warriors - 2

Description: Here is my proposed Washington Redskins, oops!, Washington Warriors uniforms.


Chris Giorgio:

Giorgio, Chris - Wild Hogs

Description: Inspired by the lovable nickname for the offensive line of the ’80’s “The Hogs”, I decided to rebrand the team as the Washington Wild Hogs. I kept the classic burgundy & gold identity that fits Washington football. The uniform is classic with a slightly updated feel yet honors tradition. I stuck with the Patriots’ theme of no white pants and never mixing and matching the two (i.e. unitard look).


James MacNeil:

MacNeil, James - Federals Helmet

MacNeil, James - Federals

Description: I love their colours already, so I stuck with a general refresh to go along with a DC flag/map inspired logo. Used Tim E’s 2-D template.


Ed McVey:

McVey, Ed - Warriors Logo

McVey, Ed - Warriors

Description: This re-branding concept is based on Washington Football history and tradition. The warrior here is not a Native American or modern soldior, but the warrior of Washington’s proud football past. The logo uses Sammy Baugh and familiar Washington imagery, to make a connection to the team’s history, without using the Native American theme. The helmet graphics recall the design made memorable by the team’s 1st Super Bowl appearance and fondly remembered coaches – Lombardi and George Allen. The colors and uniform would easily enable fans to identify the Warriors as a Washington team, and help to make the switch to the new name.


Dan Taylor:

Taylor, Dan - Frogs

Descripton: I created this because I thought it looks sweet!


Matt Egeler:

Egeler, Matt - Federals Logo__Egeler, Matt - Federals Away

Egeler, Matt - Federals AwayAlt__Egeler, Matt - Federals

Egeler, Matt - Federals Alt__Egeler, Matt - Federals Alt2

Description: I decided just to base my design of of the name that got the most votes, rather than create a new name. That being said, I still think that “Washington Federals” was the most fitting choice. I tried to create a uniform that sort of captured what the city represents, and I think I did a pretty god job.The colors came naturally with the name, and so did much of the design. I like the idea of keeping the helmet simple, especially since the jersey is a little busy. It ended up turning out a little Capitals-y, but I don’t necessarily see that as a bad thing; I can live with some cross-sport branding, especially in a city like D.C.


Anthony Losada:

Losada, Anthony - Stemps

Description: Let’s see the Washington Football proposal. As you mentioned in the web, the current Redskins’ colors are sweet and hard to erase from their image. Here I come with some tweaks about this. The team will be renamed to avoid the concerns about the team’s identity, and they’ll be the Washington Stemps. Both the logo (cow skull) and the wordmark are closely related to the far wild west. The name, actually, is an old west slang term which can be translated as legs, which can be related to the speed and explosiveness that you need to play in the NFL. By the way of the logo, I chose it because it fixes with the whole new identity and have some wild connotations, as many of the NFL logos.


Lee Traylor:

Traylor, Lee - Federals 2

Description: Attached my entry for the Redskins re-name game. Took inspiration from Michigan’s legacy jerseys and Pat Patriot. Red, white, and blue make sense in our nation’s capitol, but I tried to use a different enough spin on it to make it both stand out and pay homage to the area’s history. Hope you like it!


And now…the poll. Thanks again to our pollster, James T. Huening for all his assistance with this…

For this, you may only VOTE FOR ONE:

Good luck again to all the finalsts — we’ll have our winner next weekend.


lunapic_133805006471536_27Another Tequila Sunrise

Deep down in the heart of Texas, those Astros continued their throwbacking for their 50th anniversary season. Last night they threw back to what is arguably both the best or worst uniform in the history of ever. Intermittently referred to as the the rainbows or the tequila sunrise (and sometimes worse), the Astros yet again pretty faithfully recreated one of the most garish uniforms in baseball history.

Amazingly, they wore this uniform for twelve seasons, from 1975 through 1986. Unfortunately, I did not see this game, since I was occupied with watching another game involving a team that got its start in professional baseball 50 years ago as well. But the guys on the Creamer board did a pretty good synopsis of the game.

From the game photos I saw, once again, it appeared that lower leg stylings were few and far between. Fortunately, at least Wesley Wright attempted to recreate the look properly (almost, but not quite perfect — click to enlarge):

Wesley Wright properly styled

Good stuff. Now, just go back to the “Shooting Star” for 2013 and all will be right in the American League West…


all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks Concepts

We have another new one 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.

Like the colorizations, I’m going to run these as inline pics — click on each one to enlarge.

And so, lets begin:


We start off today with David Firestone, who has some concepts for the Seabirds:

seahawk tweak - David Firestone seahawk tweak - David Firestone

seahawk tweak  - David Firestone

Hey Guys,
Been working with some more of the Seahawks redesigns, just trying some different colors and designs, since the only things I like about them are the basic helmet logo, and number shapes.

David G. Firestone


Next up is John Turney (he of colorization fame), with some Rammage…

kurt-warner-super-bowl - John Turney kurt-warner-super-bowl - John Turney

rams-faulk - John Turney rams-faulk - John Turney

The 1995-99 St. Louis Rams with the Navy and Old Gold colors.

John Turney


Our final concept today comes from Lee Traylor, with a purplish-black bird gone brown-wine(ish)…

Ravens Unis Wine Concept - Lee Traylor

My brother has always maintained that the Ravens should replace the purple in their uniform with a dark wine color. Makes some hazy sense with Poe’s alcohol and drug abuse. Anyway, here’s my attempt to conceptualize what they’d look like.

Lee Traylor


And that’s it for today. Back with more tomorrow.


Benchies HeaderBenchies

by Rick Pearson


They didn’t even ask if it had anchovies…

6-2-12 d-pizza

Click to enlarge


And that’s going to do it for today. This afternoon, the Cubs & Giants will be throwing back 100 years. Needless to say, I’m looking forward to this one — here’s hoping the unis don’t disappoint.

Nothing else to see here. Nothing at all…


“Only about 100 kids a year are the victims of the kind of kidnapping-by-stranger that is the nightmare of every parent. Meanwhile, more than one-third of kids encounter unwanted sexual advances or content online. So unless you live in State College PA, kids are much safer on the sandlot than online at home.” — R. Scott Rogers


Oh yeah…just one thing to see here



193 comments to …And Then There Were Ten

  • Memal | June 2, 2012 at 7:27 am |

    Great Benchies! I’ve been there sooooo many times!

    Congrats Mets fans!

  • Chris | June 2, 2012 at 7:46 am |

    I think I understand a little of what Red Sox fans felt like in 2004. I saw the last outs of that game and woke up in the middle of the night to check and make sure I hadn’t dreamed it.

  • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 8:19 am |

    Ah, yes, shaving cream in the face during the post-game interview.

    That’s at least as cool as the wave.

    And about as original.

    • Steve D | June 2, 2012 at 10:24 am |

      Johan said it was whipped cream…he was glad it wasn’t shaving cream, which probably burns. I actually thought they didn’t need to do this for once…it took away from the moment a bit…do it in the locker room if you have to.

      • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 10:43 am |

        I’m pretty sure shaving cream also doesn’t taste very good.

        Either way, the practice is a dopey cliche that needs to be retired.

  • Tom | June 2, 2012 at 8:20 am |

    Just two notes on R. Scott Rogers’ undocumented quote: “Only about 100 kids a year” – you can say “only” only as long as it’s not your kid.
    Perhaps so few kids get kidnapped from sandlots, etc. because they aren’t on the sandlots and parents keep them out of harm’s way. Next time, give us a statistic about how many kids are kidnapped from bank offices – oh, they aren’t there either?

    • Arr Scott | June 2, 2012 at 9:52 am |

      “Only” is perhaps a poor choice of words, as to some it will imply that 100 abducted kids is an acceptable level. What I meant was that for two generations of children now, since at least the early 1980s, parents have radically altered the way children can play in large part in response to fears of stranger abduction, when the effective odds of it actually happening are zero. And not only are the odds effectively zero, that 100 or so stranger abductions a year happen from the home, from schools, and from other public environments where kids are supervised by responsible guardians as well as from unsupervised play environments. Your child is something like seven times more likely to be killed by the bathtub in your home than to be abducted by a stranger when playing outside. Yet parents routinely prevent their kids from playing outside like my generation did, but you never hear of parents forbidding their children from bathing.

      The point isn’t that 100 is an appropriate number of kidnappings, it’s that our reaction to that number is irrational. I fear that the word “only” made this point unclear, and so I do apologize for the poor word choice.

      • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 11:59 am |

        Nobody under the age of 18 has any business being online anyway. What could possibly be gained by allowing minors on to a dangerous place like the web?

        If anything, minors are just as annoying online as they are on my lawn & in the street.

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 12:02 pm |

        “Your child is something like seven times more likely to be killed by the bathtub in your home”


        my money was always on the barcalounger

  • Matt E. | June 2, 2012 at 8:55 am |

    Don’t know how I missed it, but the away jerseys I created for the Federals seem to be lacking the script “Washington” across the front, like on the others. Just a minor detail, so try to imagine it there in red.

  • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 8:58 am |

    First thing I thought of with the Ravens in wine was “Rhein Fire”. Not a criticism, just an observation…

    • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 8:59 am |
      • Lee Traylor | June 2, 2012 at 10:25 am |

        Well. Crap.

    • 1vox | June 2, 2012 at 12:55 pm |

      my thought was redskins, a team which might have some bellyaching to do about a team in baltimore being so close to the ‘skins and wearing colors so close to their basic color combo over the years (color tweaks aside)…but, it’s definitely a nice look…

  • Bernard | June 2, 2012 at 9:07 am |

    Car-los Bel-tran (clap-clap, clap-clap-clap)

    • StLMarty | June 2, 2012 at 10:24 am |

      0 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0?
      Just kidding.
      Tis better to see a guilty man go free than an innocent man imprisoned.
      Just ask Armando Galarraga.

      • Bernard | June 2, 2012 at 10:36 am |

        Yeah, I’m just bustin Phil’s balls. NO*HAN

        BTW: Drop some Knowledge tonight homey.

  • scott | June 2, 2012 at 9:17 am |

    Perhaps in the case of both the Astros and the Pirates, the garish uniforms were a necessity from playing in such cold, ugly stadiums? The Astros abandoned most of the tequila sunrise on the road uniforms a lot sooner than they did for the home uniforms.

    • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 9:31 am |

      Also, the mid to late ’70s was about the time most homes finally had a color TV. That and the bright colors in everyday clothing for both men and women of the era were two contributing factors.

      The world today isn’t the world that’s always been.

      • Gusto44 | June 2, 2012 at 10:58 am |

        No, actually, the multicolored uniforms of teams like the Astros, Pirates, and Indians were a product of the age, not any kind of statement about stadiums. In reality, you didn’t start hearing a groundswell about domes and cookiecutter stadiums until later in the 1980s. And when Camden Yards opened, the momentum for retro stadiums really picked up steam. Both the Astros and Pirates toned down their looks in the mid 80s, but again, that was the more conservative trend of the day. This topic has everything to do with living in that time and having the context of the era.

        In terms of the opinion of the aesthetics of the stadiums or uniforms, that again, depends on if you were around or happened to be a fan of those teams. My own personal memory was six World Championships in baseball and football.

        Speaking of cookiecutter stadiums in general, for me, they still beat the crap out of Tropicana Field.

        • Jim Vilk | June 2, 2012 at 11:47 am |

          Cookiecutters were alright…they just needed grass.

          As my two esteemed predecessors said, it was a product of both color TV and the fashions of the time. It explains the powder blue unis, too. After all, what was the hottest new look back then?

        • Tyson | June 3, 2012 at 3:20 am |

          While The Trop is no palace, it’s quite functional for the area it serves, even if the location is less than ideal. It’s air conditioned and there are no rainouts, virtually two NECESSITIES needed for a Florida ballpark. The owners a few years back did quite a bit to spruce up the Trop, and while nobody will confuse it with PNC Park or Target Field, I say it’s still better than Oakland’s ballpark in it’s current shape…or _______insert cookie cutter stadium here

    • Winter | June 2, 2012 at 9:49 am |

      Problem I always had with the Astros uniforms of the Mike Scott era were that the difference between the home and road uniforms wasn’t that distinct. They were white and what looked like off-white…really it just looked like dingier versions of the home uniform.


      • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 9:55 am |

        They called that road cream color “adobe” or something (don’t remember for sure).

      • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 9:57 am |

        That’s what makes them great. Who needs different home & road uniforms when your look is that unique?

        • Gusto44 | June 2, 2012 at 11:04 am |

          I always felt the Astros could have used a road uniform, and it would have been a stark contrast with the home.

          Keep the orange hat, but insert black where white had been on the pants and the top of the jersey. In white lettering, have the word “Houston” above the rainbow colors on the jersey. This concept would have been the third alternate, not suitable for summer outdoor games.

          For the regular road uni, just a gray version of the above, with “Houston” in black lettering.

      • Mike Brown | June 2, 2012 at 1:02 pm |

        Or as they were often described at the time, “urine stained” Astro road unis.

    • 1vox | June 2, 2012 at 12:58 pm |

      i think a lot of the bright colors were used simply because they could be in the double-knit age…something that wasn’t possible at any point prior to that in baseball history…

      • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 3:55 pm |

        That’s myth. Well, mostly myth.

        Among the chief reasons doubleknit become so popular was that it didn’t retain heat like many of its synthetic predecessors, it HELD color better through laundering and exposure to the sun (not that colors could be that much brighter) and, mostly, it stretched without losing its shape, without bagging out at the knees, butt, etc., which greatly accommodated the ever-tightening style pants players favored.

  • brian e | June 2, 2012 at 9:20 am |

    HI57ORY! thanks for the congrats, memal! amazin’ night at citi last night. ditch the black, then throw a no no…coincidence? i think not!

  • JTH | June 2, 2012 at 9:44 am |

    Congrats to the Mets.

    Too bad their first no-no was thrown by a guy wearing a spring training number.

    • umplou | June 2, 2012 at 2:01 pm |

      The days of 57 being a ‘spring training number’ are long gone.

      • JTH | June 2, 2012 at 2:33 pm |

        True enough.

        It’s just not in my nature to give the Mets a straight-up compliment.

  • HHH | June 2, 2012 at 9:54 am |

    Below are my thoughts on the top 10 finalists’ designs. Keep in mind I am criticizing the DESIGNS and not the person who designed them, so please don’t take anything I say personally:

    1) Peck’s Warriors: Every Uni Watcher knows I am obsessed with flags so I can really appreciate how the DC flag inspired the logo. However, I don’t really like the design. Maybe I’d like it more if the bottom stripe was taken away and the top “W” stripe had pieces in the middle removed so the “W” had 2 levels and you could still see a “W” despite the negative space. Hard to explain what I mean. Anyway, the way the logo looks now reminds me more of something from old Communist Russia, especially how it is all-red with an over-sized red star in the top-center. Obviously a Washington DC team’s logo shouldn’t bring the USSR to mind! As far as the uniforms go, it seems like the only thing taken from the army uniform was the charcoal gray color. So when that’s combined with red and old gold, these uniforms look like a 1998-2008 BFBS 49ers team. Maybe a digital camouflage pattern would’ve made these uni’s more interesting to me.

    2) Genther’s Warriors: Um… I thought we weren’t supposed to include any Native American imagery in our designs? Calling your team the “Warriors” and having a feather for your logo is really pushing it, especially when the Redskins have feathers as part of their logo. I think fans would still show up to games in full headdresses so therefore this design pretty much ignores the whole point of this competition. Moreover, strictly from an aesthetic point of view, the feather looks really awkward the way it is currently positioned. Why is the top/tip pointing forward? It looks backwards to me. One interesting way to use a feather without having it refer to Native Americans and at the same time have it refer to our nation’s founding fathers would’ve been to use a quill as a logo.

    3) Taylor’s Frogs: I really need to know how old Dan is before I make any criticism.

    4) Giorgio’s Wild Hogs: I think the nickname would look and read better if it was “Wildhogs”, but I really like the uniforms and overall this design is one of my favorites out of all the entries. It’s the nice subtle modernization that the Redskins uni’s have desperately needed for years. I especially like the alternating pant stripes and how they look like they are different colors from the front. However, I think there isn’t enough contrast between the hog head logo and the helmet since they are both the same color. This problem can be solved by making the yellow outline on the logo thicker, or by changing the color of the helmet to yellow. I think it would look fine because then the helmet would match the pants in the home uniform set.

    5) Schunke’s Dragons: To me, this is just the new Seahawks uniforms in burgundy and gold. I like the idea of a dragon’s body in flight made out of the DC letterforms but shouldn’t the dragon have arms and legs? The dragon head logo needs improvement and I think the font in the “DRAGONS” wordmark is too intricate and therefore illegible.

    6) Egeler’s Federals: The uniforms look WAY too similar to the Pat the Patriot era New England uni’s. The capitol logo looks either like clip art that your secretary added text to in Microsoft Word or a decoration on made-in-China dollar store paper plates you’d buy for your 4th of July backyard barbeque. Also, the NFL only allows one alternate jersey.

    7) MacNeil’s Federals: This is another one of my favorites, because even a casual fan would instantly recognize that this team used to be the Redskins. Once again I like the use of the DC flag in the logo. However, the way it appears on the helmet could be improved because right now there isn’t enough contrast between the yellow map shape and the white stars and stripes. Perhaps make the map shape white with a yellow outline and make the stars and stripes burgundy? This change would actually make the helmet logo more similar to the Redskins logo and would help ease the transition from Redskins to Federals.

    8) Traylor’s Federals: Like Egeler’s team, Traylor’s team looks way too similar to the Pat the Patriot era Patriots. The giant “W” on the jerseys is fun and an uncommon style for modern football uniforms, but the NFL would probably want the number on the front to be much bigger. Moving it to the other side would allow for enlargement and at the same time would be balanced by the swoosh on the opposite side. Also, I like the alternating colors of the logo, stripes, and number on the helmet.

    9) Losada’s Stemps: I really don’t understand why a team from Washington DC would have an old west theme/logo. Makes no sense. The white helmet alts look way too similar to the creamsicle era Buccaneers, and the horns on the helmet need to be bigger/thicker.

    10) McVey’s Warriors: The primary logo looks way too similar to a Giants logo, and hasn’t the whole “update our image by muting our colors” trend passed? If anything the colors should be brightened to neon levels.


    I’d be interested to know what submissions the UW panel of judges would’ve picked as finalists. I know FOR SURE they never would’ve picked Egeler, Traylor, or Taylor, and probably wouldn’t have picked Schunke because it looks too much like the new Seahawks uniforms. When it comes to competitions where finalists are determined by judges, entrants really need to make their submissions appeal to the judges’ tastes if they want to be a finalist. That’s why with my Warthogs entry I strayed away from my unorthodox flag designs. I stayed somewhat traditional in hopes that it would appeal to the judges. Ironically the finalists were determined by reader voting for this contest.

    I would say for future contests, reader voting is the way to go for determining finalists, because it gives every contest participant an idea of how their designs appeal to the masses, not just a panel of judges. This allows entrants to stay true to their personal styles without feeling they need to tone anything down in hopes of appealing to a handful of people with mostly traditional tastes.

    One more thing: for the next contest I think it would be fun to pick a name and design uniforms for a Los Angeles NFL expansion team.

    • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 10:03 am |

      One more thing: for the next contest I think it would be fun to pick a name and design uniforms for a Los Angeles NFL expansion team.

      Ugh, no. The last thing we need is for the NFL to fuck up its perfect league format to put a team in a city that doesn’t even care. If the NFL is going to expand, it needs to be up to either 36 (re-aligning with six 6-team divisions) or 40 (adding 2 additional 4 team divisions), and that just isn’t going to happen. A 33 or 34 team league would be wrong. If Los Angeles simply MUST have a team, then move either the Raiders, Rams or Chargers back and be done with it.

      • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 11:49 am |

        You act like divisions of 4 teams are perfect. If anything, it’s a fallacy.

        Expansion, I don’t think so. The league can’t even take care of the teams they have right now. An odd number of teams is not that big of a deal. Get rid of divisions & go to conference splits. That way the playoff bullshit will end.

        • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 12:16 pm |

          Ah yes, the fluke 7-9 playoff team. So what? It doesn’t mean the system is broken. Shit, my damn Raiders swept their division and failed to win it. It happens. Isn’t that same argument that we get at the college level where the 10-3 *major* team is “better” than the 13-0 team because of playing a tougher schedule? The SEC teams are all fucking awesome so they beat up on each other and that MAC team going undefeated doesn’t mean anything, right?

          How do you determine a fair schedule with a conference split and no divisions? Assuming we stay at 16 games, how do you determine opponents? The 15 other teams in the conference and one random from the other side? How do home & away games get decided? Seems like it’d be a bit of a mess and you’d still have fans complaining because their team missed the playoffs because they had to play the previous year’s champion while another team that they’d beaten ended up with a better record because their non-conference opponent was a creampuff.

          An odd numbered amount of teams isn’t a problem, yet you freak out over the MLB going to 15 team leagues? Really?

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 12:28 pm |

          Jeff doesn’t understand. Shocking.

          The 11-5 Patriots didn’t make the playoffs in 2008, yet the 8-8 Chargers did – where’s the justice?

          Comparing a sport whom seasons are 162 v 16. Apples & oranges.

          I don’t give a shit about College football.

        • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 12:39 pm |

          The Patriots should have won their division. But they didn’t. Wahhhhhh.

          The one time the NFL dropped divisions, in 1982 because of the player strike and shortened season, the 2 teams with the best records still didn’t play each other *and* a team with a losing record was in the playoffs.

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 12:51 pm |

          Jeff, you dick. Oh just because it’s the Patriots it’s okay to screw them over?

          The league makes a complete mockery of its regular season when 8-wins is somehow more important than 11-wins in a 16-game schedule thanks to random grouping. It is beyond ponderous. And don’t think it won’t happen to your own or anyone else’s team. Nobody is immune from it.

        • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 12:59 pm |

          The rules are the rules. My Raiders went 6-0 against the rest of the AFC West and still didn’t win the division because they lost too many games outside of it. I’m not whining about it. It happens. It’s part of the game. Unless you want to have the championship decided by nothing but the record, you’re going to have teams that get “cheated” in one way or another. C’mon, the Patriots went 16-0 and then LOST the championship to a 9-7 wild card team. If you play a championship game, then it’s possible that the “best” team isn’t going to win. Shit happens. It’s what professional sports are all about. Without that factor, you might as well just simulate it all on a computer and not even play the game.

        • Jerry | June 2, 2012 at 2:18 pm |

          That 7-9 team, defeated the defending Super Bowl Champions in the Wild Card playoffs.

        • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 4:09 pm |

          “The league can’t even take care of the teams they have right now.”

          Yes, and where is there a waiting room full of cities with either an unused appropriate stadium or with the billion dollars to build one?

          Because, y’know, there are all KINDS of the ownership groups clamoring to pony up maybe a billion each for all these expansion franchises. (eyeroll)

          How ’bout just bit of reality in these discussions?

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 6:45 pm |

          Specifically I was referencing the moving all these home games on foreign soil, no team in Los Angeles, tarps on seats to reduce capacity, blackouts in Jacksonville, Tampa, Cincinnati, Buffalo, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_on_television#Teams_and_year_of_last_blackout.2Fnon-sell_out

          The NFL has a very high opinion of itself & any talk of expansion is highly exasperated. Things are getting really ridiculous .

        • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 9:05 pm |

          I think we’re harmonizing.

          Hard to find lots of people eager to throw humongous money at you to join your league when you have such issues.

          Despite the NFL’s largely self-congratulatory attitude and spin, it is NOT peddling expansion franchises in a seller’s market right now.

    • StLMarty | June 2, 2012 at 10:16 am |

      3) Taylor’s Frogs: I really need to know how old Dan is before I make any criticism.

      Too late.

    • Jim Vilk | June 2, 2012 at 11:31 am |

      I’d be interested to know what submissions the UW panel of judges would’ve picked as finalists. I know FOR SURE they never would’ve picked Egeler, Traylor, or Taylor

      I picked Taylor’s Frogs.

      • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 11:37 am |

        I picked Taylor’s Frogs.

        You don’t expect any of us to actually be surprised by that, do you?

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 11:44 am |

      Yeah definitely not bitter.

  • Shane | June 2, 2012 at 9:57 am |

    “This afternoon, the Cubs & Giants will be throwing back 100 years. Needless to say, most of us won’t get to see it”

    Fixed. Grumble.

    • Mike Brown | June 2, 2012 at 1:13 pm |

      Discussed on the Giants radio broadcast last night, the giants approached Bruce Bochy about wearing a suit for the game and he had agreed until they discovered John McGraw wore a uniform in 1912.

    • umplou | June 2, 2012 at 1:56 pm |

      least I’ll get to see the archive on MLB.tv…

      Who’s idea was it anyways to make the Fox Saturday game a nighttime thing anyways?

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 2:12 pm |

        probably fox

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 6:26 pm |

          It was Fox. Apparently the trend in network programming is expanding Friday & Saturday nights and I read something specific about it on Fox from a sports business website.

        • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 9:15 pm |

          Not a surprise, I think when the broadcast networks go with typical programming on Saturday nights (especially Summer reruns and replacement series) they are losing a lot of viewers to, say, popular movies on AMC or TNT and the like.

          Relatively speaking, sports is a pretty competitive alternative.

          Right now, for example, Stanley Cup on NBC, MLB on Fox and rest is…meh. INDEPENDENCE DAY is on AMC and might be doing better (certainly among males) than a CBS’ “CSI: Miami” rerun and ABC’s “Secret Millionaire”.

  • Arr Scott | June 2, 2012 at 9:59 am |

    These are mostly not the Redskins redesigns I voted for to get into the finals. Which apparently shows that I am a terrible judge, because I really like this final bunch. Things I love about almost all of them, and many of them are great enough uni designs that they’d make a Washington football fan of me after a lifetime of hating on the Redskins.

    Particularly liked McVey, Losada, and Traylor, but in the end Peck’s Warriors was the closest to the complete package for me. I just wish the simpler \\* logo was the helmet logo. (How awesome is it that it’d be the only NFL logo that’s also a textable emoticon?)

    Anyway, congrats to all.

    • Arr Scott | June 2, 2012 at 10:03 am |

      Oh, I should have mentioned Schunke. In terms of raw design, I loved this one, and it may have been my favorite. I just don’t see the name or iconography working for Washington, which is already weary of team names that imply THAC0 rolls. If this were a “design a new NFL team” contest, I’d probably have voted Schunke. For a Washington, DC, NFL team, though, I just couldn’t quite pull the trigger. But that’s about context, not Schunke’s work itself, which I really enjoyed.

    • Brittain Peck | June 4, 2012 at 10:59 am |

      Thanks for the support and thanks especially for “emoticonizing” the simpler of the two Washington Warrior logos that I proposed.



  • willie | June 2, 2012 at 10:08 am |

    Hey Rams, heck with the gold. Go back to the simple blue and white uniforms of the Fearsome Foursome days! Those were awesome.

    • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 10:13 am |

      Eww, no.

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 12:09 pm |

        gotta agree with THE here (did i just say that?)

        actually — the perfect solution is the one the NFL won’t allow, and that would be for the rams to return to athletic gold TOPS (for home/road) and royal blue for road when the home team wears white…but no white tops at all

        but we all know that would be wrong in the NFL’s eyes, because there are probably still 2 people in the country who own 13″ b&w tv’s with rabbit ears

        (and this comes from a guy who likes white unis — the rams should be gold/blue or blue/gold always)

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 12:32 pm |

          “gotta agree with THE here (did i just say that?)”

          Nobody bats 1.000

          I wouldn’t want to see Athletic Gold tops in football. Hideous. Gold tops are just one step away from gold monochrome.

        • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm |

          i’ll give you that this looks better than this, but i could stand to see that once per season

          but what would be wrong with one nfl team looking like this and this?

          even if they wore the blue tops at home (with gold pants) and gold tops on the road (with blue pants) that would rock

      • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 12:31 pm |

        Thank you, Phil.

        They don’t even have to go back to athletic gold. They could just wear these: http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2012/05/01/li-bombers-jerseys-120501.jpg

        • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 12:44 pm |


          metallic gold is horrific (the saints and the saints alone should wear that color, because it pairs with black much better than with royal/navy)

        • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 12:49 pm |


          metallic gold is horrific (the saints and the saints alone should wear that color, because it pairs with black much better than with royal/navy)

          Um… then what should the 49ers be wearing?

        • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 12:53 pm |

          tan (no metallic — except maybe for the helmets)

          yes, i get that 49ers implies the “gold” rush of 1849, but if everything were literal, then the bears would be wearing brown or black…not blue and orange

          this is fine and dandy (and i wouldn’t call those pants ‘gold’ by any means)

        • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 1:09 pm |

          Fair enough. I’m ok with letting the Saints wear black or metallic gold and the Rams wear blue or athletic gold. That works, so long as we never see athletic gold vs metallic gold.

        • NinerEd | June 2, 2012 at 3:09 pm |

          The only reason the 49ers wore “tan” in the ’70s was because no one could faithfully reproduce metallic anything in fabrics. Actually, “49ers Gold” as worn by the team until 1995 was a metallic greenish-gold – if you were to take a game-worn Niners helmet from, say, 1980 and compare it with today’s version you’d see the difference.

          Besides, “Tan Rush” is a lousy name for a cheerleading squad.

        • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 3:14 pm |

          if we can agree that the color they’re wearing now (whatever you want to call it) is OK, then im fine with it

          i just hate *shiny* pants…you want to call those gold, as long as they’re a matte finish, we’re good

    • StLMarty | June 2, 2012 at 10:26 am |

      That’s the first thing they should do when they move back to LA.

      • pushbutton | June 2, 2012 at 11:18 am |


        • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 11:19 am |


        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 11:51 am |

          And permanent solid-white uniforms for home & road!

  • AnthonyTX | June 2, 2012 at 10:12 am |

    While watching the Astros game last night (in the A/C, of course–it’s getting HOT in Houston!), I noticed one problem with the numbers on the back of the jerseys: they were REALLY low! Unfortunately, this was the best shot I could get.

    Carlos Lee’s number in particular was super low. There was a lot of white real estate on the back of his jersey (more than usual!).

    • walter | June 2, 2012 at 10:28 pm |

      Agreed. What seems to be correct is just about enough white to squeeze the line of “Astros” type between the collar and the first orange stripe. The player’s name should not hover in a huge white space.

  • Steve D | June 2, 2012 at 10:14 am |

    If one of the WARRIOR designs win and is actually implemented, I will be offended by a team glorifying war. Years from now, that might be more widely seen as offensive…I hope.

    • The Jeff | June 2, 2012 at 10:30 am |

      So… Patriots?

    • Winter | June 2, 2012 at 12:21 pm |

      Difficult, in a violent game, not to have a mascot that is aggressive. After all, there’s an inherent threat in Lions and Bears right? Not to mention Raiders and Vikings.

      So Browns it is.

    • Mesheke | June 2, 2012 at 6:31 pm |

      GUYS, I think the Packers need to change their name because it promotes unfair work labor in a meat packing plant and I will be offended if I do not get my way.

      That’s what I thought of when I read that.

      None of these teams are GLORIFYING war. They are paying homage to those who have fought for your right to sit on your ass and read uni-watch. Coming from a guy who has seen 2 cousins go to Iraq, 2 of his uncles serve in Vietnam with one getting a purple heart, I know I Would want to show them the utmost respect, especially after what most of the Soldiers got as a welcoming home present from serving in Vietnam.

      If you hate war, hate the President; don’t hate on the guys busting their ass for you and me.

      • Steve D | June 2, 2012 at 10:44 pm |

        Wow…how you took what I said and totally turned it into something else. I love our soldiers who fought for our freedoms…that’s why I want them home and not in harms way. We fight wars, hopefully, to try and make sure there are no future wars. Glorify soldiers…not the fact that they have to fight wars. I think we all agree we would rather have no wars.

  • Connie | June 2, 2012 at 10:16 am |

    Rock on, Lee Traylor. The Feds look great, and the great big W on the jersey is genius. Dark wine Ravens are a revelation.

    • Lee Traylor | June 2, 2012 at 10:41 am |

      Well thanks, Connie.

  • CK | June 2, 2012 at 10:36 am |

    Who are the people voting on this site that voted for these final 10 designs? I think 2 of my 5 made it to the final 10. I’m pretty disappointed personally. Peck’s and MacNeil’s Federals are the only ones even worth considering for me.

    • George N. | June 2, 2012 at 12:17 pm |

      You have a REALLY inflated opinion of yourself and your tastes.

      • CK | June 3, 2012 at 11:22 am |

        That doesn’t mean I’m not right.

  • Morgan | June 2, 2012 at 10:38 am |

    Congrats for your Mets Paul and Phil! I attended the game last night as part if a fundraiser for my son’s little league. We got to parade around the field before the game and then got to witness history. Left after five ’cause the little guy can’t get through a whole game just yet, but we knew that coming into it and it was just a thrill to have been there for half of it. The kicker was that my guy’s little league team is the Cardinals, so we were all dressed in the wrong unis!

    • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 12:12 pm |

      at least you weren’t wearing a gary carter jersey

  • Jon | June 2, 2012 at 11:01 am |

    Also of note with the Astros last night: they wore orange batting helmets faithful to the era: http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/photos?gameId=320601118&photoId=2107289

    • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 11:11 am |

      Could have used white shoes, though.
      If, y’know, they really wanted to get deep into it.
      Black cleats were worn only during the first season of those unis. For the 11 years that followed, they wore white.

      • pushbutton | June 2, 2012 at 11:23 am |

        The black cleats would have been cool if they had also done the ‘number in a white circle’ thing they did in ’75. I think they even used a fancier, kind of ‘circusy’ number font that year; I wonder why they went away from that so soon.

        Rainbow stirrups would’ve been cool, too.

      • quiet seattle | June 2, 2012 at 11:28 am |

        Yup. 11 years in whites.

        It’s always the shoes and socks (or stirrups, lack of) that distract from these throwback uniforms.

        Shoe fashion at any moment in time is as vital to a look as are the caps and jerseys.

  • ScottyM | June 2, 2012 at 11:06 am |

    Dan Taylor’s Frogs uniform idea is the most creative idea shared in any the design contests. And, frankly, it’s not even close. If someone would do a digital layout to showcase the concept … it would be plain to see, his idea absolutely blows away the competition.

    Thumbs up to Dan.

    • Neeko | June 2, 2012 at 12:10 pm |


    • Dan Taylor | June 2, 2012 at 1:19 pm |

      Thanks brother, and thanks to Uni watch for running a fun contest!

  • Josh | June 2, 2012 at 1:24 pm |

    I thought that Hecken, Lukas and Co. were also offended by the “warriors” name or other names glorifying war. I voted for the frog uniform partially because it is hilarious and unique and partially as a protest to this entire contest. Sports should be free of the p.c. police.

    • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 1:31 pm |

      Fortunately for you, these comments aren’t patrolled by the stupid police, otherwise you’d already be in trouble.

    • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 1:48 pm |

      i shouldn’t deign to reply to this, but since it appears not to be clear, i will clarify

      i’m opposed to the racist name “redskins” and the offensive caricatures employed by some teams — i do not have a problem with the name “warriors” per se, so long as the imagery doesn’t make derogatory use of native american caricatures

      “redskins” is a vile and racist monicker, period — that’s not “PC” (which i am as opposed to as anyone), a point i thought i made clear in umpteen posts on this subject

      opposing and wanting to change the name “redskins” isn’t being “PC” as you and others who really can’t defend its use like to throw about

      i agree sports should be free of the “pc” police — but wanting to change the washington football club’s name is FAR from being ‘politically correct’

      • J.R. Clark | June 2, 2012 at 2:02 pm |

        Just to spite the PC crowd, I hope Dan Snyder changes the mascot to a potato so the name stays.

        • Robert | June 2, 2012 at 9:01 pm |

          I hope they change the name to the Washington Buttercups just to spite people who think a racial epithet is an acceptable nickname.

  • Johnny O | June 2, 2012 at 2:46 pm |

    It is Cervecervos Day at Miller Park. The Crew are wearing “Lager” colored Cerveceros uniforms.


    Unfortunately, the game isn’t televised here in Wisconsin. Stupid FS Wisconsin.

  • Andrew Seagraves | June 2, 2012 at 3:16 pm |

    I will always have a place in my heart for the Tequilla Sunrise since that was my first little league uniform.

  • cam | June 2, 2012 at 3:42 pm |

    Is it a nitpick that the Redskins don’t actually play or solely represent DC?

    I feel like (living here but not a Redskins fan by any means) that both Marylanders and Virginians would be upset over a DC name. Maryland actually houses the team and paid for a portion of the stadium, Virginia houses their headquarters and practice facility. Both contribute a significant percentage of the fan base.

    Hard for me to get behind any DC-centric design for those reasons if realism is what we’re after. If it’s just best design, then it is certainly a different case.

    • stlmarty | June 2, 2012 at 4:53 pm |

      They could be the Virgin Mary’s. That should make both states happy.

      • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 5:04 pm |

        Where was your concept?!?!

        • cam | June 2, 2012 at 5:11 pm |

          ah. Didn’t realize that the voting/opinions were only open to those who entered a concept. My mistake.

        • cam | June 2, 2012 at 5:13 pm |

          I’m not a designer, tweaker, colorizer, or concept creator. Simply an enthusiast. I was under the impression that those of us who fit that bill were welcome on this site. But thank you for tossing on your sheriff’s badge and contributing nothing to what was a valid observation.

        • cam | June 2, 2012 at 5:18 pm |

          and I just realized that you weren’t responding to me. Very sorry to respond to you like that, Tim.

          Virgin Marys would have been the best by far.

        • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 5:44 pm |

          “Virgin Marys would have been the best by far.”

          That’s what I’m sayin’! hahahahaha

          Funny misunderstanding, I was all like, WTF did I do? Then I read that last comment. Funny stuff.

          No hard feelings.

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 5:28 pm |


        you just know someone is itching to say this…

        the supreme court ruled there cannot be a “virgin marys” football team in the nation’s capital…this isn’t for any religious or constitutional reason, they simply have not been able to find a virgin in washington

        with apologies to the “nativity scene” joke from which i adapted this

  • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 3:43 pm |

    Hmmm. Found a “I still call it Comiskey” T-shirt that looks like it came out pre-November 2005 from rival & the old globe AT&T logo. I can’t remember when Uni Watch & No Mas started selling theirs.

    ebay link

  • Wheels | June 2, 2012 at 4:37 pm |

    In Dan Taylor’s Frogs entry, I think it’s funny that the player in the white jersey is throwing a shaka sign.

  • Douglas King | June 2, 2012 at 5:06 pm |

    I really don’t get how Peck’s design is running away with this right now. In fact when I saw the voting after last week I was convinced he had contact his friends to vote for his or cleared his history to vote multiple times. Now I see he’s running away with it again which seems to mean that it is indeed the favorite, but I still have no idea how that is the case.

    I mean Dark Red, Gold and Black can be a great color scheme, but the absence of gold on both of the regular uniforms really hurts the design. It’s like the gold pants and helmet don’t belong with the jerseys. Then there is the alternate; could have gone with a Dark Red jersey (a color that I feel should have been used for the main home jersey), and used that athletic gold for a different look instead we get another black jersey, complete with a pair of black pants and a black helmet.

    The logos look great, but the uniforms leave so much to be desired. How does it have over a quarter of the votes!?

    • Douglas King | June 2, 2012 at 5:12 pm |

      Whoops, just read the entry and saw its Tan rather than Gold…. What is the fascination with Tan? The Astros and the Diamonbacks uniforms would be so much better if they opted for Gold over Tan, same goes with the Padres back when they were rocking tan. Tan is so bland yet it is being used more and more.

    • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 5:27 pm |

      “I really don’t get how Peck’s design is running away with this right now.”

      Because kids dig BFBS?

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 5:33 pm |

        i’ll be honest…

        i don’t normally *editorialize* about these contests, since i don’t want to influence the voting (and obviously that didn’t happen), but brittain’s design was not one of my top 5

        but maybe, just maybe, people appreciate his well thought-out and executed design…it certainly looks like a lot of effort went into it

        and maybe it’s also not a *joke* or maybe it’s that people aren’t all that keen on the burgundy/gold (which i happen to think is great)

        but it could be bfbs

    • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 6:01 pm |

      His logos are pretty great, but boy are the unis uncreative. Just boring. UCLA stripes and BFBS? What is this 1998?

      But the peeps have Spokane.

      • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 6:22 pm |

        By far the most drab, dark & boring. None of the 3 unis are consistent, either.

        Call it a symptom of the Video Game Age.

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 6:17 pm |

      Anybody can vote on these things. Uni Watch does not have a required forum membership & while the people running this place are old school, however not everyone’s taste is old school & even those are, there is a differing variety & range. If it were up to UW, the Padres would be wearing brown. But yet, they’re rotting on their 4th incarnation of the shitty-ass navy unis.

      This site gets a ton of hits in the 10,000+ range every day. Even more if some other sites pick up a UW story.

      • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 6:44 pm |

        The most plausible real world design (because changes to the actual uni are minimal) is James MacNeil’s.

        Here, of course, that dooms it to finishing in a 38-way tie for 21st place.

        (Shoulda been Washington Klingons, anyway, cuz all most officials in D.C. do is figure out to cling onto their elected or appointed positions. Then we could have had a “Design Football Uniforms for the Klingons” contest.)

  • Shane | June 2, 2012 at 7:08 pm |

    The Giants look great on the radio.

    God dammit, Fox.

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 7:20 pm |

      Ew, N.L. Chicago in monochrome navy. Giants in blank navy caps, pinstripes. Great striped stirrups on Cain, tho.

      Not a single name on the back of any uniform to offend the eye.

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 7:25 pm |

        Ew fuckin-A awesome, N.L. Chicago in monochrome navy”



        and mark, what the hell did you think they were gonna wear?

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 7:29 pm |

          North side of Chicago has a baseball team?

          I’m just not a fan of dark monochrome. It looks totally leotard with solid navy socks.

          Nobody wearing the faux-retro batting helmet.

          NICE! Fox with the NYG logo!

  • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 7:31 pm |

    sometimes…there is a god…fox going to throw the yanks/tigers (in a rain delay) to the cubs/giants

    fuckin a awesome

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 7:58 pm |

      Too bad he’s wearing one of the worst softball tops in baseball.

      Navy letters & numbers on a navy jersey. SMH.

  • Brinke | June 2, 2012 at 7:57 pm |

    looks great from here.

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 9:02 pm |

      Cubs have like 20 defensive miscues in this game – how are they winning 1-0??

  • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 8:12 pm |

    hells yes

    i’ll have this for my lede tomorrow, so i’ll save the commentary till then, but lets just say i’m a fan (wish the socks were contrasting, but they’re being as authentic as possible)

  • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 8:38 pm |

    I went through Okkonen about a year ago and posted the results of the quick “resarch” results here. A few teams went mono dark for a few seasons, but it was was never, absolutely NEVER, “typical” or “common”.

    It’s just that some of the teams that went mono dark happened to be in the larger cities, so there are more surviving photographs. This creates the illusion that the look was widespread and popular because, “Gee, there are so many PHOTOS.”

    • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 8:46 pm |

      i did a six-part series on monochrome in baseball, but the first part (here — used some photos from the ricko files) was a look back at historical uniforms — took me forever to make make this chart…as you can see — in the early years — dark mono WAS, while maybe not “common”, certainly prevalent

      • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 8:52 pm |

        Yeah, but not enough to be called typical.

        Can’t give you precise numbers, but it was may be on par with the number of teams that, in the last 100 years, have worn sanis in a color other than white, or worn white cleats.

        And nobody would say dark sanis or white cleats ever were “the common traditional look” of MLB.

        • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 8:58 pm |

          16 (total) clubs in 26 years (and 14 in 13 years)? no, certainly not “common” but not exactly a “one off” type of thing either

          not like the powder blue phenomenon, but definitely not unique either

          and there’s nothing wrong with dark mono, colored sanis, or white cleats either

      • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 9:00 pm |

        Of that list after 1931, only the 1976-81 White Sox wore dark monochrome on a consistent basis. Everything else besides the Pirates was pretty isolated or only once or twice, thrice, etc. That we know of, anyway.

        • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 9:03 pm |


          why can’t some team bring it back? if they’re going to wear those goddam softball tops, they could make it an actual uniform by wearing matching pants

          i’d like to see one or two teams per league try it, on a very limited (like maybe once a month) basis, as long as they’re going to wear the clown tops

        • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 9:13 pm |
        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 9:18 pm |

          I like white v gray, Phil. When I started really watching baseball (1987) there were basically no softball tops (at least I never saw any in a real game until 1991 on Sundays) & powder blues stuck out like a sore thumb.

          I just can’t warm up to dark monochrome. This just did never look right to me. Mostly home stuff on that one. Oh, and an infinite apologies for the shitty music.

        • Ricko | June 2, 2012 at 9:22 pm |

          I have no problem with dark mono in baseball if it’s done with some style. I’ll always love the all-navy ’76 White Sox. Even liked the all-red Frank Robinson Indians (but probably not every day).

          What I’m saying is that someone can’t point to it and say, “Oh, yeah, teams used to go with that look all the time back in the early days. It’s very traditional.” That would be bogus justification.

          It is, as were dark sanis and white cleats, an aberration.

  • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 8:55 pm |

    I love the all-blue cubs unis. Some team should bring back a solid navy set for a road alt. (CWS) Probably a no to solid blue sock too, though…

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 9:04 pm |

      “I love the all-blue cubs unis”

      You just sinned.

      • Phil Hecken | June 2, 2012 at 9:06 pm |

        so if i said “i loved the yanks 1912 throwbacks” did i sin?

        nothing wrong with liking the *other* clubs unis…you just can’t like the team

      • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 9:11 pm |

        I sin frequently. I think this is a fairly good sin to commit.

        And I meant for this to go here: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v232/Timmacane/Sox_MLB_PSDT_H_4.jpg

        I think the Sox would look great like that, and they’d actually wear white sox!

      • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 9:29 pm |

        “so if i said “i loved the yanks 1912 throwbacks” did i sin?”

        Maybe it’s a deep-seeded civil hatred Chicago thing, Phil.

        Then again, I should be against day baseball & excessive alcohol consumption at ballparks & in public, but I’m not.

        • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 9:32 pm |

          It’s like my opinion of where the Cubbies play:

          Wrigley Field is a great place to watch a ball game (so long as you don’t mind a lack of bathrooms yet an overpowering smell of urine), but that doesn’t mean I mean I ever root for the home team…

  • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 9:10 pm |

    Cubs pitching coach is only person I’ve seen in either uniform not high cuffed.

    Clearly he’s an asshole.

  • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 10:01 pm |


    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 10:05 pm |

      I see Hawk has infiltrated to you. That’s a shame.

      Man, I can’t believe this game is over. Retro unis, a pitching duel, the winning run walked in. It was almost perfect.

      • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 10:07 pm |

        Check that, tying run was walked in.

      • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 10:13 pm |

        If you don’t love Hawk’s catch phrases, you don’t love America.

        If you don’t love his rants, you’re sane.

        If you can’t stand his Yaz stories, you watch too many Sox games on TV, haha.

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 10:39 pm |

          “If you don’t love Hawk’s catch phrases, you don’t love America.”

          He shouts broken English. He’s also the biggest homer & corporate tool in the world. I’m surprised you like Hawk so much, Tim, given his politics.

          “If you can’t stand his Yaz stories, you watch too many Sox games on TV”

          I’ve had more than my fill of his random stories of Kansas City, golfing, Charlie O. Finley & love odes to Harmon Killebrew. How I long for the days when Wimpy & John Rooney were in the Sox TV booth.

        • Tim E. O'B | June 2, 2012 at 10:49 pm |

          I just like his catch phrase calls.

          Of course he’s a homer and yeah, the Yaz stories are just obnoxious now, but whatever, still better than Santo ever was.

          Plus Hawk has gotten better with Stoney keeping him in check and Stone is the best in the game hands down.

        • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 11:08 pm |

          Santo moaned like a lost plastic grocery bag forever caught on an old Midwestern farm’s wire fence in the wind (lots of traveling on IL highways conjured this image).

          However, I don’t think Steve Stone’s bonafide professionalism is rubbing off on Hawk; given his latest meltdown. Hawk is not getting better or mellowing with old age. Give me Wimpy with Stone in the booth. Or Russ Langer who did White Sox Spring Training games on MLB.com.

        • JenInChicago | June 4, 2012 at 10:58 am |

          Seriously? What is it about White Sox fans that makes them unable to discuss their team/announcers without bringing up the Cubs team/announcers? It’s ridiculous.

  • Johnny O | June 2, 2012 at 10:34 pm |

    Brewers beat writer Tom Haudricourt had this to say (on twitter) about the Crew’s Cerveceros uniforms…

    Tom ‏@Haudricourt
    #Brewers players really like the gold jerseys they are wearing on Cerveceros Night. Would like to wear that color more often

    …They also won in them today. I really don’t mind these “lager” colored uniforms, but only once in a while. Like a once a month type of thing.


  • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 10:38 pm |

    “If you don’t love Hawk’s catch phrases, you don’t love America.”

    He shouts broken English. He’s also the biggest homer & corporate tool in the world. I’m surprised you like Hawk so much, Tim, given his politics.

    “If you can’t stand his Yaz stories, you watch too many Sox games on TV”

    I’ve had more than my fill of his random stories of Kansas City, golfing, Charlie O. Finley & love odes to Harmon Killebrew. How I long for the days when Wimpy & John Rooney were in the Sox TV booth.

    • concealed78 | June 2, 2012 at 10:39 pm |

      Well crap. This wasn’t supposed to go here.

  • Jonathan Goupil | June 3, 2012 at 12:20 am |

    Awesome olympic gear for Jamaica launched yesterday in London. Created by Cedella Marley, daughter of Bob. Love the whole Bob Marley theme!!!


  • the other Bob Marshall | June 3, 2012 at 1:53 am |

    The Lancaster Jethawks the Astros Single A team has a tequila sunrise throwback on sale in the team store. couldnt sneak a picture. Is this a Jethawks thing or an orginization wide thing.