Uni Watch Exclusive: New MLB BP Caps

Screen shot 2012-12-26 at 11.05.58 AM.png

All 30 MLB teams will have new BP caps in 2013. The caps haven’t been officially unveiled yet (kinda surprising that they didn’t rush them into the retail pipeline in time for Xmas, no?), but my ESPN column today provides an exclusive first look at all the new designs, two of the more notable of which are shown above. ”” Paul

+ + + + +

Screen shot 2012-08-28 at 4.11.39 PM.png

Show & Tell update: The next installment of my Show & Tell storytelling series will take place on Jan. 9. Full details here.

PermaRec update: Another old West Point cadet’s jacket has been traced back to its original owner. Details here.

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: Did you know Frank Robinson briefly served as the Brewers’ hitting coach toward the end of the 1984 season? I didn’t. But sure enough, here he is in a Brewers uni (great find by Bruce Menard). … Here’s a cleaner version of that possible new Dolphins logo, and here’s a Photoshop of how it might look on a helmet. It doesn’t look bad, but there’s a major flaw: In the old design, the dolphin is doing that thing where they jump out of the water, so the sunburst background makes sense — the dolphin is in the air, exposed to sunlight. But in the new design, the dolphin is clearly swimming. You can’t have a sunburst under water! Anyway, we still don’t know if this new logo is legit, but team CEO Mike Dee says he’ll be addressing the issue shortly (from Preston Feiler and Jon Siechert). … Missouri and Illinois maintained a recent chromatic tradition by once again going went color-vs.-color in the Bragging Rights Game (from Lucas Ravenscraft). … Blake Griffin changed sneakers at some point during the Clippers’ Xmas Day game (good spot by Clifford Baxter). … CMU got new jerseys with TNOB last night’s bowl game. And in case you weren’t sure which “food” company sponsored the game, they put subtle hints in the end zones (from Rob Holecko). … Meanwhile, TCU has two new helmet options to choose from for the sports bar bowl this Saturday (from Leo Strawn). … If the NHL lockout is somehow making you miss the single worst uniform in all of professional sports, don’t worry — the Islanders’ AHL farm team has its own version of that design (from Alan Kreit). ”¦ Love the striped sweaters being worn by these Buffalo Braves cheerleaders (big thanks to Bill Kellick).

204 comments to Uni Watch Exclusive: New MLB BP Caps

  • BurghFan | December 27, 2012 at 7:19 am |

    Isn’t the Nationals’ BP cap a nod to the Expos’ tricolor?

    • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 8:07 am |

      Only if they have the full pinwheel effect, with two red panels at the back to contrast with the blue panels on either side of the white front. Which would be pretty awesome. Otherwise, it’s just a white-front contrast cap, and white-front contrast caps look good when worn by nobody, ever.

      • WFY | December 27, 2012 at 8:43 am |

        I’m really hoping we don’t ever see pinwheel caps in DC. I can’t think of a white panel cap that I ever liked either.

        I guess we know what the Opening Day giveaway is now.

  • Kenny Ocker | December 27, 2012 at 7:22 am |

    The Mariners’ old BP caps had a teal patch above the MLB logo and also came with a teal bill. I think the new one is kind of a downgrade, once that’s considered (along with the gray squatchee on the new one — why?!).

  • The Jeff | December 27, 2012 at 7:36 am |

    I think the gray caps look great. If baseball is going to insist on gray road pants, then gray caps make sense. Now they just get those onto the field during the real games and not just spring training.

    • BurghFan | December 27, 2012 at 7:47 am |

      The Pirates and Orioles experimented with gray caps in the ’80s.

      • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 7:58 am |

        Royals, too.

      • Steve Naismith | December 27, 2012 at 9:17 am |

        Or, mid-90s.

        • BurghFan | December 27, 2012 at 1:20 pm |

          Typo on my part. Sorry. (And my quick look at the Royals in DTTN didn’t find the gray caps, so I either had the wrong year or it’s their error.)

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 1:26 pm |

          royals definitely had gray road caps in the 1990s

      • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 10:47 am |

        Pretty sure I’ve got one of those Pirates grey caps somewhere.

      • Joseph Gerard | December 27, 2012 at 12:29 pm |

        I remember those gray Buccos caps. I actually had one of those. They were wise to ditch them.

    • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 8:22 am |

      Illogical, captain. The gray uniform serves as a blank canvass; the jersey lettering and cap identify the team. Gray (or white) on the cap forfeits one of the two main places where color can establish a team’s identity and turns the cap into just another blank canvass.

      Which various teams proved with their failed gray and white cap experiments a generation ago.

      • The Jeff | December 27, 2012 at 8:29 am |

        Get back to engineering, Scotty, you’re not a Vulcan.

        Besides, they’ll be worn with colored jerseys, so while the hat may become a canvas, the jersey is now used to identify the team colors instead.

        • walter | December 27, 2012 at 9:14 am |

          Sorry, TJ, got to agree with Scooter on this one. The grey caps looked good on the drawing board, but they came up lacking on the field.

    • Dumb Guy | December 27, 2012 at 8:47 am |

      They’d look great on any 1970’s gas station attendant.

    • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 8:50 am |

      i like the grey ones as well

    • Jason M (DC) | December 27, 2012 at 9:39 am |

      I’m a fan of the color gray. I think it’s underrated. But it has to be used correctly. And I oppose the Gray-for-gray’s-sake trend. Gray (or silver) has to be one of the team’s colors.

      For some reason, I feel like it works for the Dodgers cap based on what we can see there. But the other gray caps are failures.

    • ClubMedSux | December 27, 2012 at 10:56 am |

      I had a very similar response. I completely agree with Paul that the grey movement in general is stupid (I’ll never forget the horror of getting to watch my beloved Valpo Crusaders in HD for the first time only to have them trudge out in grey and gold (???) jerseys). However, baseball is the one sport where I think grey works precisely because it’s an integral part of the game’s palette. I understand Arr Scott’s point about establishing your colors, but when the hat is colored EXCEPT for the front panel being grey, I don’t think that argument applies. Obviously it all comes down to personal taste, but I don’t think it’s fair in this case to equate it to BFBS.

  • JonathanL | December 27, 2012 at 7:54 am |

    That Braves cap is an embarrassment to all of baseball. Atlanta needs to jettison it post-haste. Why don’t they work with local Native American groups to work in more appropriate imagery? I like the Angels (a nice reversal of the old BP cap design, and I’ve got two of those), A’s, Astros, Brewers alt, and Reds. I would’ve liked the Pirates, too, but now all I can think about is that black squatchee on top.

    • ATL fan | December 27, 2012 at 8:05 am |

      Oh, relax. The hat looks great.

      • possum | December 27, 2012 at 9:37 am |

        The hat looks AWESOME and I love it. More than one team is going to that era with the new BP cap this year. Too bad there’s not an equine-related team so you all could beat this dead horse. Do you know what the word “brave” means?

      • boxcarvibe | December 27, 2012 at 9:53 am |

        Eh, the Braves cap looks OK. On design alone, I grade it a C. Interesting that that the face is white, not “skin tone” like the sleeve patch was. But I am surprised to even see this, and thought it a joke when this site loaded. Not a tomahawk? Not a rendition of the faux-back sleeve patch? Me thinks this will be short-lived.

    • Chris Holder | December 27, 2012 at 9:10 am |

      As a Braves fan, I like it – I had a cap similar to that as a kid in the 80s. The funny thing is, I didn’t even realize that WAS the Braves’ cap when I saw it up top. It’s been so long since the organization used that logo, my mind just immediately saw it and thought “Cleveland”. It wasn’t until I clicked on Paul’s ESPN link that I saw it under Atlanta and realized what it is.

      Interesting that in these times they would reuse the “Chief Nockahoma” image. I wonder if it was a decision by the Braves organization, or MLB?

      • boxcarvibe | December 27, 2012 at 10:00 am |

        Maybe we’ll get a surprise when we enter Turner Field this year, and Chief Noc-A-Homa’s tee-pee will be erected in center field and he’ll come out and dance again.

        • ATL fan | December 27, 2012 at 10:04 am |

          That’d be better than winning the world series! hahaha

        • Chris Holder | December 27, 2012 at 10:25 am |

          I can’t even imagine the shitstorm that would cause.

      • Jerry | December 27, 2012 at 3:20 pm |

        I’m with you. I like the Braves BP cap. Reminds of the 1970s or 80s. We’ve got bigger fish to fry than worrying about a baseball teams logo offending someone.

    • walter | December 27, 2012 at 9:16 am |

      The 1970’s Indians’ cap had red bill/black button.

    • Jason M (DC) | December 27, 2012 at 9:42 am |

      As someone who grew up a Braves fan (had to switch to the Nationals), I liked the Chief Nockahoma logo back in the 80s. But as an adult now, I understand the reasoning and think it should be retired. I was surprised to see them go this route with the BP cap.

      • hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 12:50 pm |

        I honestly have no problem with the Braves cap at all. In fact, i think it’s actually interesting. What I do have a problem with, and I do not mean any of you specifically, is white people who try to make it look like they care a lot and deem this type of thing as offensive. Come on people, this is ancient history. Sure your ancestors did horrible things to Native Americans, but honestly, to punish yourself for something your ancestors did shows that you feel that you are capable of the same thing. I have friends who are American Indian, and they have no problem with the Braves, Indians, Redskins, Seminoles, etc. Get off your high horses and stop self flagellating yourselves.

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 1:39 pm |

          if you can’t self-flagellate yourself, who can you self-flagellate?

        • hugh.c.mcbride | December 27, 2012 at 2:20 pm |

          If you can’t self-flagellate yourself, who can you self-flagellate?

          Late entry for Quote o’ the Year right here.

        • hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 5:12 pm |

          Ok, that was redundant, but you do get the point. We need to stop self-flagellating. Let it go. It’s ancient history. I’m pretty sure my great grandfather, when he came to the US from Italy was given a hard time because he was an immigrant. Do we harbor a grudge against the people who gave my great grandfather crap? No, in fact, I have friends of Irish heritage and we cooperate with our town government. Just let it go.

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 5:17 pm |

          “Do we harbor a grudge against the people who gave my great grandfather crap?”


          did your great grandfather come to this land and try to kill all the inhabitants and steal their land?

        • hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 5:48 pm |

          Wait a sec, that doesn’t make any sense at all. You’re twisting it around here, Phil. What I’m trying to say is that the past is the past, and most, if not all people have let it go. There were some people who commented on PL’s cap piece who were American Indian, and from what I heard, they didn’t find the Nocahoma Indian or the team name to be offensive at all. An example:

          “Im Cherokee and have absolutely zero problems with Native Imaging in sports. We would be totally forgotten if we didn’t have a little reminder here and there. People are too sensitive these days, just go cry yourself to sleep please and leave my sports alone. Poons, btw the braves hat is the best looking one of all of em.”

          Is he offended by Native American imagery in sports? No. Does he like the white man complaining about the Native American imagery in sports? No. Does he hate the Braves logo? No.

          So there you have it. At least one person who is American Indian is okay with the use of Native American imagery in sports. Before you get all holier-than-thou, maybe you should ask the American Indians about their opinion on the use of Native American imagery in sports. Then you can stop acting like the voice of the people and let the non-issue die.

        • Jerry | December 27, 2012 at 6:55 pm |

          I was born in the United States of America. I am descended from Immigrants. I am a native American.

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 7:11 pm |

          i’m not trying to twist your words, alex, i’m saying there is a difference between saying “well, if one native person is OK with a racist caricature, then all of them must be” and “well, i didn’t kill indians and steal their land so don’t be mad at me” and “lets forget all history”

          the original inhabitants of this land were systematically exterminated, moved or otherwise treated extremely unfairly by those who came here after them…does that mean every *white* person needs to feel white guilt? no…not what i’m saying…anymore than every white person needs to apologize for, say, slavery existing when the USA was founded

          but “letting it go” is different than “ignoring it ever happened”

          on another note, you might be able to find a jewish person, (or a gypsy or a gay person) who is “OK” with using a swastika for a baseball team logo (you might have a hard time, but it’s possible to find one), so if he/she is OK with it, then we should all be? of course not…extreme? of course (when isn’t godwin’s law?), but still valid

          i’m NOT (nor is paul, though i won’t speak for him) trying to “(act) like the voice of the people and let the non-issue die” because for some, it’s not a non-issue

          and i’m certainly not trying to act “holier-than-thou” — we can disagree and that’s fine…but the argument that “some indians are OK with the imagery” doesn’t mean it’s OK

          we can agree to disagree and that’s fine, but it seems you’re the one who doesn’t even want what is a very sound and logical point even brought up because you personally didn’t have anything to do with the treatment of native peoples by the white man many many years ago

        • hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 8:16 pm |

          Don’t get me wrong, Phil, I don’t think any less of you and Paul because of your stance on NA imagery in sports, in fact, I enjoy the website a lot, but in my opinion, this is not a major controversy. If say, the Braves decided to change the name to something that makes it sound like a major stereotype (imagine a team calling themselves the Gooks or the Guidos or the Niggers, the Greedy Jews or the Spicks), that is a completely difference.

          I get it, I listened to the same history story every year in grade school, middle school, high school, and college. We’ve made our apologies and acknowledged the American Indian history. Sure, American Indians live on reservations still, but from the stories I’ve heard, there doesn’t seem to be much general animosity towards the white man anymore. There maybe are some who are still bitter, and they are human beings, and we should respect our fellow man, but should we entirely rebrand a sports team just because someone isn’t happy with it?

          Going back to the point about the commenter on the ESPN article: Yes, that was one man, and one man isn’t the voice of reason. Still, before you propose a rebranding because you find the image offensive, you should ask those people what they think. The Seminole tribe in Florida was happy with having Florida State use their tribe as the mascot for their sports teams. The Ute nation gave the University of Utah explicit permission to use their tribe name for their sports teams. The Sioux nation did not say anything about having their name removed from the University of North Dakota’s athletic teams. Instead of jumping to the conclusion that “It’s offensive just because it shows imagery of the American Indian”, you should ask what the minority group thinks about it. If the majority of the minority group dislikes the use of Native American imagery, then it’s an issue. If the majority of the minority says that it’s inoffensive, then let it be.

          Both of your points about having imagery removed seem to suggest that people against the imagery issue aren’t happy with this until native american imagery in sports is gone. Isn’t that some form of censorship? And isn’t censorship illegal under the first amendment? You (the people) may think that you are doing a favor by calling for the rebrand of the native american themed teams, but in actuality, you’re making it worse. It’s almost like you’re saying that “if we remove the names, then it’s like nothing ever happened.”

          To boil it down to one point, before you say “this is wrong”, ask around. Ask those who are American Indian about their opinion on the Braves, or the Indians, or the other sports teams with Native American imagery. That would be a good idea for a Uni-watch post, and it will certainly help narrow the wedge between those who are for Native American imagery in sports, and those who are against it.

      • Vincente | December 28, 2012 at 9:08 pm |

        Wait, the name of the logo is Chief Nockahoma? That’s awesome.

        Paul, you started a firestorm in which needs to be put out fast. That logo is kick ass and I wish they never retired it. It’s about as offensive as a trojan or spartan logo. I can’t honestly understand why people are so upset.

        A sick native american wrapped in a small pox blanket getting the boot off his land would be an offensive logo. This is a representation of a Native Warrior screaming his head off while entering into battle…and probably right before he used his tomahawk to take the scalp off some English immigrant asshole riding across on the Oregon trail.

        I hope this hat gets released because I’m buying the shit out of it.

    • Le Cracquere | December 27, 2012 at 9:46 pm |

      Multitudinous kudea* to the Braves for bringing back the logo by which so many of its fans (including yours truly) came to know them. And if it brings pain to the odd self-impressed nit who worships at the altar of his own cultural faux-sensitivity, so much the better (no slur to present company intended, of course).

      *Plural of “kudos”: the moar you know, etc.

      • hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 10:00 pm |

        Who are you? Felix Unger?

  • Hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 8:00 am |

    Great. Now I feel outdated again. As if I needed ANOTHER BP cap. Worse yet, I was going to get my friend a new BP Reds hat, but now I feel like a dick if I get the old one.

    • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 8:06 am |

      Really simple solution: Stop buying BP caps. Solved!

      • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 8:12 am |

        Are the new Hitting Rehearsal caps stretch-fit like the current ones, or fitted in eighth-inch sizes like a 5950 cap, like they were the last time they didn’t have rococo geegaws and panels and piping? And will there be new hitting rehearsal smocks to accompany the new caps?

        • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 8:17 am |

          No new smocks for 2013. (The caps and smocks are on staggered design cycles, so a new set of one generally doesn’t coincide with a new set of the other.)

          Sizing: Not sure.

        • Steve Naismith | December 27, 2012 at 9:20 am |

          There was at least one year where the BP caps were sans “geegaws” and stretch-fit… it was the last year I purchased one. If these are stretch-fit, then I’ll buy a new one.

      • boxcarvibe | December 27, 2012 at 9:54 am |


        • boxcarvibe | December 27, 2012 at 9:56 am |

          “Exactly” to what Paul said. Stop buying the BP caps.

      • hodges14 | December 27, 2012 at 10:16 am |

        You make it sound so simple, Paul, the only problem is my noggin is larger than the average noggin and so if I wear a cap, it either has to have a velcro adjusta-strap or be a stretchfit else i get a headache. Same goes for the Reds fan. Ah well, my hat has been outdated since 2011, I guess I’ll just go and get the old one. And I’ll be damned if I buy another snapback. 32 bucks. Come on!

        • JR | December 30, 2012 at 1:18 am |

          I have a larger than average noggin, so I must NOT have a stretch fit. 7 3/4 fitted or nothing, for me. Even the XL stretchfits seem like about a 7 3/8. I can’t imagine that headache-inducing elastic clench all day long.

    • JR | December 30, 2012 at 1:15 am |

      Hodges14, I’d like to discuss more of your take on the Braves imagery, could you email me? jrfrancis@gmail.com Thanks!

  • Dumb Guy | December 27, 2012 at 8:01 am |

    Is Miami changing the team name to “Blind Dolphins”? That fish ain’t got no eyes!!

    Also, maybe the sunburst thing is really the gleem off of sunken treasure gold!! No? Yeah, you’re right.

    • Kyle Schroeck | December 27, 2012 at 8:51 am |

      “That thing where they jump out of the water” That is called a Breach. The Dolphin breaches the surface of the ocean.

    • walter | December 27, 2012 at 9:20 am |

      Trying to impart logic to an NFL insignia is not unlike trying to explain why actors burst into song in a musical.

  • Dumb Guy | December 27, 2012 at 8:03 am |

    Also regarding “leaked” logos like the potential new Dolphin….

    If a team “accidentally leaked” a proposed new logo they could get a whole lot of free feedback (like we are delivering) before fully committing to something that fans might really hate. Seems smart to some degree.

  • ATL fan | December 27, 2012 at 8:03 am |

    I freakin love the Braves new hat.

    Chief nocahoma is one of the coolest logos in my opinion.

    Can’t wait to see them on the field.

    • Kenny Ocker | December 27, 2012 at 8:06 am |

      Cool <<< racist

      • Guy | December 27, 2012 at 8:45 am |

        racist <<< less racist than you

        • Kyle Schroeck | December 27, 2012 at 8:55 am |

          Racist is the wrong term. Racism insinuates that my race is better than yours. If you do not appreciate the imagery, it is bigoted, not racist.

        • TA | December 27, 2012 at 4:08 pm |

          When just one race is considered fair game for this kind of screaming savage caricature, I can’t think of any word for it but “racist”.

  • MEMAL | December 27, 2012 at 8:06 am |

    Just another reason I hate the Pirates….so everyone is using some older or secondary logos on these caps and instead of using their cartoon pirate logo or a throwback one they just went with the P…..they just don’t get it.

    • Kyle Schroeck | December 27, 2012 at 8:53 am |

      Right, I would like to see the early 90’s moustachioed pirate. The one that drives the train, and kinda looks like a cross between Sid Bream and Doug Drabek.

      • Joseph Gerard | December 27, 2012 at 1:09 pm |

        You mean this train?

        Brings back a lot of memories at Three Rivers. They still play it once in a while at PNC Park, as well as other old rally videos. The problem here is that in-game promotions between innings and the Pierogi Races have taken up a lot of time that was used for such videos.

        Oh, and Sid Bream is still a jagoff.

        • Kyle Schroeck | December 27, 2012 at 3:01 pm |

          Sid Bream will always be a Jagoff. Sorry to invoke memories of the 92 NLCS, and Barry Bones throwing the wiffle ball from left field.

        • Joseph Gerard | December 27, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
    • bill | December 27, 2012 at 11:10 am |

      At least they had the decency not to include any red, which never should be part of any Pirate uniform.

  • CWac19 | December 27, 2012 at 8:13 am |

    Some beauts in there. Wish I could get get them in a “Franchise” style, rather than high crown/flat brim…

    • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 9:16 am |

      i don’t think a mesh style hat would look good in a “franchise” design.

      • CWac19 | December 27, 2012 at 6:06 pm |

        Agreed. Meant the design, not the materials.

  • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 8:33 am |

    the new BP hats remind me of the old BP hats from the late 90s

    • Hank-SJ | December 27, 2012 at 8:54 am |

      Meet the new hat. Same as the old hat. (Sorry, Pete.)

    • boxcarvibe | December 27, 2012 at 10:03 am |

      Now I know I’m old when “old BP hats” are from the 90’s.

      • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 10:28 am |

        well it’s been at least 13 years.

        at least i didn’t say retro

  • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 9:00 am |

    think the Mets hat score had a little bit of home cooking. it’s got to be a sold B at best

    • DenverGregg | December 27, 2012 at 9:04 am |

      Nah, only two possible demerits for it: (a) the orange brim as mentioned by Mr. L and (2) the lack of a recursive logo on Mr. Met’s hat.

      • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 9:32 am |

        i just don’t think Mr. Met really translate well to the front of a cap. maybe the head would be cool, but the full character just doesn’t look that great

  • MJE | December 27, 2012 at 9:09 am |

    Things Paul has ruined for me over the years…
    1) The FedEx logo (the arrow)
    2) The Whalers logo (the “H”)
    3) The Bears’ wishbone C (lack of balance)
    4) and now the Pirates’ P…

    Thanks Paul!!

    Have a good day everyone…

  • Steve D | December 27, 2012 at 9:12 am |

    Never a fan of Mr. Met on team worn apparel…and him having a blue brim, as Paul points out, is pure maddening. For years he wears an orange brim and the Mets never do…the minute the Mets try an orange brim, he goes to blue. Perhaps he is a contrarian who will always wear the opposite brim.

    Serious question though…who designs these caps? Since all teams change at once and there are always similar design elements, that tells me MLB has a design team that is in charge. How mush input do the teams have? Can they veto a design? Can they request a design?

    • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 9:22 am |

      MLB Properties oversees all of this, but the final design choices rest with the individual teams. Just five minutes ago, for example, I was emailing with an employee from one team who was explaining to me how they arrived at the design they ended up with.

      • Steve D | December 27, 2012 at 9:30 am |

        Thanks Paul…I assume then that MLB gives the teams general concepts and some prototypes, within the framework of the overall design template. I would be interested in a longer piece by you that details the process.

        • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 9:34 am |

          MLB works with New Era to come up with a new template every three or four years, yes.

          I agree that this would be a good subject for an in-depth piece. MLB and New Era tend not to be very receptive to my overtures, however….

    • FormerDirtDart | December 27, 2012 at 9:28 am |

      Mr. Met has been wearing a blue brimmed cap for 17 years.

      • Steve D | December 27, 2012 at 9:44 am |

        Now that you mention it, that is true…the on-field Mr. Met also wore a black cap at times…it was the print version that for many years was contrarian and wore an orange brim. His wife was even more contrarian with an orange brim and Mets in script vs. the NY.

        • FormerDirtDart | December 27, 2012 at 10:13 am |

          I of course meant that the Mr. Met logo has been wearing a blue brimmed cap for 17 years.

  • rod | December 27, 2012 at 9:15 am |

    As a BIG Braves fan..LOVE the hat:)
    Secondly the Dolphins logo does look odd I believe some slight changes could be made though. It just doesn’t CATCH my attention :/

    • Chris Holder | December 27, 2012 at 9:22 am |

      Re: the Dolphins logo, I like it, but it seems to be almost too minor of a change to even be worth doing. A casual fan will probably not even recognize the different right away.

      • Chris Holder | December 27, 2012 at 9:23 am |

        The *difference*, jeez. Wish we could edit our comments.

  • Mike Hersh | December 27, 2012 at 9:20 am |

    The Mariners cap should have the old trident logo.

    The new Dolphins logo looks like a tourist airline logo.

    • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 9:38 am |

      i was thinking it would be a logo Seaworld would use to promote a new dolphin show or to get you to buy one of their overpriced dolphine necklaces

      • The Jeff | December 27, 2012 at 9:44 am |

        Overpriced dolphin necklace… overpriced Dolphins t-shirt… same thing, really.

    • Name Redacted | December 27, 2012 at 11:51 am |

      As a kid, i loved the Mariners trident in the star logo.

      • walter | December 27, 2012 at 5:12 pm |

        I agree. The M’s didn’t get nearly enough mileage out of that sucker. It seems someone whispered in their ear a downward-pointing trident would be unlucky… but then, they’d be the “Wariners”.

  • FormerDirtDart | December 27, 2012 at 9:36 am |

    Maybe the Dolphins’ management has been perusing my old Flickr pics. Dolphins tweak I did over two years ago. http://www.flickr.com/photos/young_walt/4236585845/lightbox/ Was a take off of the Dolphins Stadium logo

  • Jet | December 27, 2012 at 9:36 am |

    Great job on the BP cap article Paul, your analyses were spot-on.


  • tom | December 27, 2012 at 9:45 am |

    while i dont like how some schools go week to week with new uniforms, i think bowl season should be the time when college teams should experiment with alternate uniforms.

    i loved how WKU broke out the grey unis yesterday. i loved how arizona broke out the alternates last week.

    • Gil Neumann | December 27, 2012 at 11:24 am |
      • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 12:25 pm |

        there aren’t enough ads on that site

      • Carolingian Steamroller | December 27, 2012 at 1:47 pm |

        Saw this photo too: http://cbschicago.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/708661054.png

        It looks like the uniform was supposed to include crotch stripes.

      • tom | December 27, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

        wow. those look really good

    • Kevin W. | December 28, 2012 at 3:55 am |

      There was nothing new about Arizona’s uniforms, unlike those which NIU will be wearing. It was just a combination we’d never done before.

  • The Dude | December 27, 2012 at 9:50 am |

    As a Dolphins fan, I would be thoroughly disappointed if that’s the new logo. Take off the tail or make it much shorter would be a start. Downgrade in my opinion.

  • James Smyth | December 27, 2012 at 9:58 am |

    As always, the comments here on Uni-Watch are a much more pleasant read than the ones on the ESPN page.

    • Skycat | December 27, 2012 at 11:38 am |

      Every time I even sneak a peak at the ESPN comments I feel a need to take a shower.

      • Mainspark | December 27, 2012 at 3:53 pm |

        Hmmm. I don’t know. You can’t get away with calling someone a “fucking pest” on any ESPN board. Here, it’s just another insult. See below.

  • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 10:08 am |

    “Kind of surprised they’re not using the hanging Sox logo for this cap. Surprised, but not disappointed”

    Meh. That stupid alternate cap was the worst thing the Sox have ever done. I like this new one. Used to have a Sox BP cap in the same style (I think it was around 2003-2005?).

    Also, re: the Sound Tigers black alternates, it sort of strikes me as embarrassing that they’re using those for their Newtown tributes. I guess I understand using a black jersey as a sign of mourning (streeeetch), but it’s just such an ugly, ugly uniform.

  • JAH | December 27, 2012 at 10:12 am |

    Funny, I always thought that the Miami Dolphins logo depicted a marine mammal jumping through a ring of fire, as was a common spectacle at 1960s-era maritime parks:

    Never crossed my mind that the orange ring was a stylized sunburst.

    • iLO | December 27, 2012 at 4:11 pm |

      “Never crossed my mind that the orange ring was a stylized sunburst.”

      You’re kidding, right? :/

  • David | December 27, 2012 at 10:20 am |

    This is a comment on the article you linked to in this one, regarding the appropriation of Native American imagery in sports. I agree with your conclusion wholeheartedly, but the “copyright/iconography” angle is kind of silly (if a team did not have a slur nickname, no, I don’t think Jewish people would care if they used a Star of David or a Menorah) I think you suffer a massive credibility drop with this comment:

    “Unless a local tribe gives permission, that is. Florida State, for example, has worked out an arrangement with the Seminole Tribe of Florida, so the school’s use of Seminole imagery is fully sanctioned.””

    You either have a problem with the behavior or you don’t — excusing it due to a financial arrangement between the aggressors and the aggrieved does not excuse the behavior — in fact, I think it makes it worse.

    Try to apply the “but they worked out an arrangement” excuse to any other action that you find inappropriate or wrong and I think you’ll see what I mean.

    Although I agree that the SI poll is not necessarily relevant, for you to think that 75% of a population isn’t representative, but a financial deal with a handful of tribal leaders speaks for an entire people???

    • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 11:22 am |

      You either have a problem with the behavior or you don’t…

      You’re defining “this behavior” differently than I am. You don’t get to impose your definition of it onto my argument.

      My argument is rooted in intellectual property, and misappropriation of same. Once permission is given, the imagery is no longer being misappropriated. If you want to propose a completely different standard, that’s fine, but it doesn’t invalidate my standard.

      • The Jeff | December 27, 2012 at 11:47 am |

        If historical Native imagery “belongs” to the current Natives, does historical Greek imagery belong to the modern Greeks? Should Michigan State need permission to be the Spartans?

        • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 11:50 am |

          Jeff, stop it. We’ve been through this, and you know the answers to those questions.

          Honestly, you can be such a fucking pest. It seriously undermines your other contributions to the site.

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 12:23 pm |


        • rcj | December 27, 2012 at 3:26 pm |

          I’m with you. I absolutely love this site and discussing most things uniform. But the native american issue I think is where Paul goes off the rails.

          He makes his argument and thats fine. But when his points or “standards” are questioned he throws a hissyfit about it.

          And i get it, it is his site. But, theres a point where you go from making your case and being diplomatic about it to just plain off putting and superior. All over an opinion.

      • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 12:00 pm |

        But doesn’t your standard of misappropriation fail in the face of names like Braves and Indians that do not refer to particular Indian nations? Why would the local native peoples closest to Cleveland or Atlanta have special privilege in granting permission for the Indians or Braves to use generic names and imagery that can equally apply to almost all native peoples in North America? And even granting the primacy of “local” tribes in the particular case of the Braves, wouldn’t the “local” tribal governments actually be mainly in Oklahoma, thanks to President Jackson’s program or “removal”? I agree when team names are drawn from particular Indian nations, but those are the easy cases.

        This is why I’ve personally tried to stick a standard of “respect.” Redskins is clearly, obviously, and inarguably a term of disrespect, so it should go. Indians and Braves are not inherently disrespectful, so they can provisionally stay, provided that the rest of the team’s identity is respectful. Chief Wahoo is clearly, obviously, and inarguably not a respectful depiction of American Indians, so not only should it go, but it throws into doubt the team’s ability to use the name Indians in a respectful manner. Chief Nakahoma is a gray area. The logo itself is laughable as a design element – it’s dated and feels like a cheap artifact of a cheap era in the team’s history. Chief Nakahoma is the Milwaukee’s Best beer of MLB logos; it’s impossible to respect the taste of anyone who gushes over it. But the logo itself is less problematic than the way the team has enacted Chief Nakahoma as a mascot over the years. The logo itself is not dissimilar to depictions of Indians used by many tribal institutions.

        A test for the “respect” standard would be, Imagine if a team in France or Russia used an equivalent name or image referring to Americans, or to one’s own ethnic group. Would you assume that you were being respected? If a team in Paris called itself the “Rednecks”, it’s hard to imagine any American assuming that it was well-intentioned. If a team in Moscow called itself the Americans or the Yankees, we’d likely be leery but willing to give the benefit of the doubt. Unless the team’s logo was of a bucktoothed hayseed with drooping overalls. And why the standard of “respect” with regard to Indians? Because they are American citizens, and patriotic Americans do not tolerate anyone showing disrespect to any class or group of their fellow citizens.

        • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 12:08 pm |

          Fair points. Asking permission is, of course, a form of respect, so our arguments ultimately come from very similar places.

        • CWac19 | December 27, 2012 at 6:15 pm |

          Very well-reasoned post, Arr.

  • Luke | December 27, 2012 at 10:22 am |

    So what is the structure and material like on these new BP caps?

    Are they just standard 59fifties or what?

    • Coach King | December 27, 2012 at 11:22 am |

      They will likely be a mesh material but be a fitted cap in the 5950 style.

  • Keith | December 27, 2012 at 10:22 am |

    Using the maple leaf on the Jays hat is just marketing, they’ll get Canadians buying the hat who aren’t strictly Jays fans.

    • Tony C. | December 27, 2012 at 10:43 am |

      so it’s the Canadian version of “America F&*K Yeah!”

    • Carolingian Steamroller | December 27, 2012 at 1:51 pm |

      Yes, but Canadians don’t have to buy a hat to show they’re Canadian. Especially in Canada.

  • Jason M (DC) | December 27, 2012 at 10:29 am |

    I was watching National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation over Christmas. Clark Griswold wears a Chicago Blackhawks jersey with Griswold and #00.

    Has the topic of jerseys (and other such items) in movies been touched on in a column? There could be two sub-topics for this category. One for player characters and one for non-player characters wearing jerseys/hats.

    Some other obvious jerseys/items in movies off the top of my head are:
    Cameron Frye in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off wears a Gordie
    Howe Detroit Red Wings jersey

    In Wayne’s World, Garth wears a Tony Esposito #35 jersey and Wayne wears a Campbell #22 (as far as I know, it’s customized).

    Billy Crystal’s character in City Slickers wears a Mets hat.

    • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 10:43 am |

      Of course, Howe never wore NOB in Detroit, so Cameron’s jersey is incorrect, anyway.

  • Mainspark | December 27, 2012 at 10:34 am |

    I wish the Reds would ditch Mr. Redlegs and return to “running man” Mr. Red. Yes, I know that Mr. Redlegs was first in time but Mr. Red with his clenched fists, spikes and his own number (27) represents the glory days of baseball’s oldest professional franchise. He would look better on The ST cap as well.

    • walter | December 27, 2012 at 2:23 pm |

      Perhaps the Mets’ lawyers have something to do with the Reds’ soft-peddling (pedaling?) of the clean-shaven Mr. Red.

      • Mainspark | December 27, 2012 at 2:50 pm |

        Walter – You’re right inasmuch as Mr. Red was created after Mr. Met and that he was likely created as part of the Reds’ former no-facial-hair policy which would have been belied by going back to Mr. Redleg who was the team’s mascot of the late 50’s. http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/56/Cincinnati_Reds/

  • Jeff | December 27, 2012 at 10:42 am |

    Mr. Met, Mr. Redlegs, the A’s elephant, even the Braves logo, and we can’t get the Brewers barrel man? Bummer.

    • Steve D | December 27, 2012 at 10:59 am |

      How about the Twins guys too?

    • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 11:39 am |

      Agreed. The Brewers go so far as to have two caps, and they give us the Miller M and their Myrtle Beach logo, but not Beer Barrel Man? Failure.

      As for the Twins, I don’t see Minnie and Paul translating well to a cap logo. But the Twins do appear to be using an alternate, outlined TC logo on the new Hitting Rehearsal caps. But the outline is the same color as the backing fabric. What’s the point of that? The outline would be useful if both the T and the C were the same color, and the outline was a third color to contrast with both the letters and the cap. But with a two-color TC, the outline just serves to create random breaks in the logo. Makes it look like pirated merchandise or something.

      • quiet seattle | December 27, 2012 at 1:11 pm |

        The Twins TC belongs only on the all navy cap. Period. That is perfection.

        These fellas should be be on the new merchandi– er, batting practice, caps:


        • walter | December 27, 2012 at 2:21 pm |

          Since most of us seem to get behind the interlocking TC as the Twins’ monogram, it might be a good idea to use the stylish “M” with the swash on their batting practice caps.

      • concealed78 | December 27, 2012 at 4:08 pm |

        I wouldn’t knock the MB-glove logo cap at all. It’s one of the best MLB logos there is. Their Miller-M cap on the other hand is boring.

      • concealed78 | December 27, 2012 at 4:38 pm |

        Also I think the “Myrtle Beach logo” is a failed analogy because no beach would have a glove & a baseball as a symbol nor is it that plainly generic of just a M & B. The fact that two pieces of sporting equipment are used while incorporating the team initials while holding up the cartoon standard of 3 fingers & a thumb makes it pure genius.

        • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 5:15 pm |

          Ball-in-glove is one of the most generic logos in sports. It’s a fun logo! I like it just fine! But that doesn’t change the fact that it’s the very definition of generic. It communicates nothing about the city of Milwaukee or the team called the Brewers. The letters making the glove are terrific, but the ball hardly looks like a baseball at all. If you don’t already know what team the logo stands for, you would never in a thousand guesses say “Milwaukee.” A rational person’s first guess would more than likely be “Um, Myrtle Beach? Do they have a minor-league team?” And the same rational person’s second guess would likely be, “Are you sure? It’s gotta be Myrtle Beach. Monterey Bay?”

        • TA | December 27, 2012 at 6:03 pm |

          It’s clearly a baseball logo, and it has the initials MB. If a person knows the names of baseball teams, it would not take 1000 guesses to connect the logo with the only major league team having the initials MB. If a person doesn’t know baseball, they won’t connect the logo to the Brewers, but they also won’t know what team is represented by Boston’s B or Texas’ T or any other logo that consists simply of one or more letters.

        • concealed78 | December 28, 2012 at 11:13 am |

          A rational person’s first guess would more than likely

          Nobody would guess “Myrtle Beach” or “Monterey Bay” for the MB-glove. Nobody. How many times do you see either of those cities on a national weather map or hear the city name in the news unless you actually live there?

          If you don’t already know what team the logo stands for, you would never in a thousand guesses say “Milwaukee.”

          How many logos blatantly state a team’s city? Yankees? Packers? Bears? Cowboys? Dodgers? Giants? Cardinals? Blackhawks? Bulls? Canadians? Red Wings? None of them. Some of the most storied franchises there is.

          but the ball hardly looks like a baseball at all.

          Yeah, it’s round and it has a baseball seam, very confusing. The fact that most people first see it as a glove first and not two letters immediately points to baseball.

          If the MB-glove logo is generic, then McDonald’s M is generic, Yankee’s NY is generic, the Nike Swoosh is generic. I’m surprised I haven’t seen any bashing of the Phillies 1970-91 P-logo which is basically the MB-glove logo without a 2nd letter or 2nd piece of sporting equipment.

    • BSmile | December 27, 2012 at 12:37 pm |

      “…and we can’t get the Brewers barrel man? Bummer.”

      I agree 1000%
      Love that logo!

  • DolfanInTexas | December 27, 2012 at 11:18 am |
  • Josh | December 27, 2012 at 11:29 am |

    Love the Cardinals BP cap. A nod to the 50’s-early 60’s Stan Musial era. When they released the new alternate jersey, I had said that I wanted to see that particular cap with the red bill paired with the Saturday alternate. I’m glad that they are bringing it back at least in SOME form, even if it’s not going with the jersey that would look best.

    • concealed78 | December 27, 2012 at 3:53 pm |

      The very beginning of the Musial era 1940-55 with no white outline, at least that’s what came to my mind. It fits with the retro theme.

  • James A | December 27, 2012 at 11:32 am |

    The Bridgeport Sound Tigers have had some good looking jerseys over the years, and then there was that…

  • Adam w | December 27, 2012 at 11:41 am |

    Looks like the black “islander” jerseys are being used for rememberance. Not sure if it was coincidence or because they were black.


  • Arthur | December 27, 2012 at 11:59 am |

    Is there contrasting stitching on all of the BP caps? It appears that way in all of the renderings but there’s no mention of it in the article?

    Related: do any MLB game caps have contrasting stitching?

    • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 12:05 pm |

      The current Orioles home cap has contrasting stitching on the white panel. Black stitching. Because New Era is cheap and lazy, and the Orioles don’t respect themselves enough to insist that New Era use white stitching on the white panels. Go to any Lids store and you’ll see plenty of New Era fashion caps that use matching stitching on both sides of a seam with contrasting color panels, so the company is perfectly capable of doing so when it cares about the quality of the product.

    • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 12:06 pm |

      Don’t know. All I have to work with are the renderings.

      Also: It looks like the Mariners cap has contrasting grommets. No other cap does. But I don’t know how seriously to take that — could just be a glitch or whatever.

  • Ry | December 27, 2012 at 12:07 pm |

    The White Sox should have used this logo: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d3/White_Sox_Alt_Logo.svg

    Never seems to be used anymore.

    • Paul Lukas | December 27, 2012 at 12:10 pm |


    • Ry | December 27, 2012 at 12:11 pm |

      Sorry for the huge image.

    • Arr Scott | December 27, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

      That on a gray cap with a black brim, would pretty much justify the whole gray cap thing.

    • MEANS | December 27, 2012 at 1:56 pm |

      Please no, that logo is horrible.

    • concealed78 | December 27, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

      I was about to say the same thing. Why not use the whole diamond logo, or that sock with silver wings on it or something. They just brought back the original BP cap used from 1999-06.

      They could have used the current full block wordmark in the old 1976-86 style, or thrown back:


      • Ry | December 27, 2012 at 3:04 pm |

        These are excellent, nice work!

        • concealed78 | December 27, 2012 at 3:19 pm |


      • DJ | December 27, 2012 at 5:25 pm |

        Decent ideas. I don’t think the Sox would want to use the 76-85 wordmark with the black and silver colors. Considering the mid-game mascot race this season will see mascots wearing 83 uniforms, some here are wondering if the Sox will wear those on Sundays this year.

        As to your winged sock idea, I think the concept is great. The only suggestion I’d make is to make the wing more sleek or “modern” looking. Consider the modern font the Sox use for their full wordmark as a complementary element:


    • Christopher F. | December 27, 2012 at 2:27 pm |

      As a White Sox fan who participates on many forums… I can tell you most of us agree. And a BP hat would have been a perfect usage.

      • Ry | December 27, 2012 at 3:03 pm |

        I think this logo would be interesting to see on the black alt, even though they barely wore it last season. Which was nice.

  • Brinke | December 27, 2012 at 12:18 pm |

    Curious, all the white front panels.

    Giants look not really anything special- tho I think the black/orange would be a good fulltime cap for all home games.

    And I must have been asleep when the Rangers wore that flag variant on the front- that’s a new one for me.

    • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 1:25 pm |

      The Giants hat is their current alternate hat, which has been worn on Sundays.

  • Joseph Gerard | December 27, 2012 at 12:23 pm |

    The Twins road BP hat looks a lot like their regular hat from the 1970’s. Speaking of the Twins, that magazine cover that you linked? Says on the cover “Ironmen Pitchers: A Vanishing Breed?” If they only knew nearly 40 years later…

    With that said, the Pirates BP hat isn’t bad, think I’ve seen that design before in a game, too. I just wonder if they are distancing themselves from the Bumblebee era with the 1971 throwbacks now their Sunday home jersey. Besides the mustard gold caps and the fact that they were baseball’s first pullover uniform, there’s nothing special about them. This would’ve been a perfect opportunity to bring back the pillbox hats as a BP hat.

  • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 1:26 pm |
  • alex35332 | December 27, 2012 at 2:30 pm |

    Are we going to see new BP jerseys too? I mean the two tend to go hand and hand

    • FormerDirtDart | December 27, 2012 at 2:55 pm |

      No, as Paul noted to a similar question further up the thread, the introduction of new BP gear is offset. My observation: recent pattern seems to be caps, then jerseys the next year. With model duration of about three years.

  • SenorMas | December 27, 2012 at 2:57 pm |

    I have a problem with the Texas Rangers’ use of the Texas flag… This is mainly a vexillogical problem, but since it’s on the uniform patch and the BP hat, I will mention it here. Have you ever noticed that the back of the flag is the wrong color? It is billowing in the wind, and the red bar should be what’s seen, but the patches have the blue hoist-field shown instead… If they’re trying to show the “shadow,” then they need to make it a different shade from the blue field.

    Here’s a close-up view of it…

  • Barvis | December 27, 2012 at 4:22 pm |

    I just cannot believe the comments on ESPN, and some of the comments on UW. How people who are presumably adults can still be so ignorant and racist is utterly beyond me. Keep up the good work, Paul.

  • mike 2 | December 27, 2012 at 4:27 pm |

    The problem I have with the Jays hat is that it looks like a cheap knockoff you’d see in a crappy souvenir shop at an airport. Just a stylized maple leaf.

    There’s nothing that would actually identify it as a Blue Jays hat once you take it out of the context of a graphic that shows it together with the other MLB hats.

    • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 4:38 pm |

      so don’t buy it

      like you said, if you take it oot of the context of it being an mlb cap, it’s not

      but it IS a spring training cap, and in that context, it’s pretty obvious it’s for the blue jays, no?

      like, take the nockahoma cap ‘out of context’ and you just get an inappropriate caricature

      anyone who sees that and doesn’t think “hmmm…that must be the atlanta secondary logo i thought was retired years ago” probably might think you’re a racist or something

    • mike 2 | December 27, 2012 at 5:37 pm |

      I agree with you on the Atlanta hat but didn’t want to go down that road.

      My issue is that for just about every other hat in the set, they’re instantly identifiable. The Toronto cap looks like a generic souvenir of Canada. That makes it (IMO)a bad design.

  • Bernard | December 27, 2012 at 4:34 pm |

    Bowling Green’s shoulder wings look embarrassingly low-rent. adidas is absolutely terrible at football uniforms.

    Actually, I’m struggling to find a single palatable design element on either team in the Military Bowl Presented by Northrop Grumman. I think maybe I like SJSU’s gold facemasks, but that’s about it.

    • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 4:43 pm |

      “adidas is absolutely terrible at football uniforms.”


      and shoes, lifestyle gear, clothing…

      • Bernard | December 27, 2012 at 4:51 pm |

        “and shoes, lifestyle gear, clothing…”

        … says the guy who walks around in public like this

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 4:53 pm |

          hey now…kearnsy made me wear that…

          told ryco he wanted a “2XL” shirt, so ryco sent him TWO x-try large shirts…

          you know what adidas does make great? wedding shoes

        • Bernard | December 27, 2012 at 4:56 pm |

          No argument on that one.

      • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 4:55 pm |

        Phil, I love you on this site and all, but I’ve never found a pair of shoes that is more comfortable or lasts longer on a big dude like me than Sambas.

        • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 4:58 pm |

          sorry shane…that was more of a dig at jason than the three stripes (inside joke n’at)

        • Shane | December 27, 2012 at 5:52 pm |

          I really need to make it down to NY for the next UW party. Bah!

  • Mike | December 27, 2012 at 5:18 pm |

    In my opinion the Braves cap should be graded on its athletic aesthetics, just as the site promises. Judge it on its aesthetics, not on your political notions. This site is in danger of dismissing so many design elements out of hand that anything that doesn’t fit a narrow criteria is treated with such vitriol. 95 percent of uniforms today are beautiful, but they are instantly forgettable. Yes, the tequila sunrise uniform, the Maryland state flag, the Bucs creamsicles were ugly, but they were memorable and not designed within an inch of their life.

    • TA | December 27, 2012 at 5:54 pm |

      Aesthetically, it looks like an ugly racist caricature.

  • Derek | December 27, 2012 at 5:29 pm |


    Thanks for the timely post! I completely agree that it’s a major improvement now that all the colored panels and piping have been omitted from the BP caps.

    As a Giants fan, I too prefer the all black with script G from a few years ago, that Willie Mays wore so much. In the pictures you showed of him, there are two frames of him wearing that cap without the side piping. Was that an unlicensed/custom cap, as I don’t recall it for sale.

    Ref: http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7201/6909983757_ed40a77a0f_o.png

    • DJ | December 27, 2012 at 9:03 pm |

      Wasn’t it the Giants’ BP cap in the early 2000s?

      • Derek | December 27, 2012 at 11:08 pm |


        Paul’s referenced four pictures of Willie, have two which show him wearing the official BP cap with the orange piping (mid 2000’s), and two pictures of a cap without it. Both types have the script “G”. I’ve never seen the latter until I saw these photos.

  • Ben D. | December 27, 2012 at 6:06 pm |

    Just an FYI: The Braves’ BP cap is now the #1 story on Yahoo!’s homepage.

  • Phil Hecken | December 27, 2012 at 6:48 pm |

    so…cincy’s got a new (and i know this term is verboten, but needs to be said) *craptacular* hat for tonight’s game…is that a new top too?

  • Chance Michaels | December 27, 2012 at 10:03 pm |

    Jeff, I’m with you. Not using the Barrel Man is a huge wasted opportunity.

    One other nitpick about the Brews’ alt cap – it really bugs me that the glove’s “webbing” is yellow.


    In the originals, it was always white:


    That’s something vendors have been very sloppy about in recent years (in which the webbing is treated as transparent, colored blue on blue t-shirts and gold on gold t-shirts), sad to see it’s finally infected New Era.

  • Mike D | December 27, 2012 at 10:42 pm |

    I’m not really feeling the Yankee BP cap. It may look better once we see it on players on the field, but I think they could have done better.

    For the road, they should have just gone with the throwback cap used for the 100th anniversary of Fenway. That is a good looking cap and wouldn’t mind seeing the Yankees use it, even if just for BP and spring training.


    For the home, they should have gone with a white, pinstriped cap with a navy bill and an interlocking NY in either navy or red.


  • Rex | December 27, 2012 at 11:56 pm |

    I really hope TCU avoids looking silly with the shiny helmets. The one on the left is solid.

  • jedi54 | December 28, 2012 at 12:40 am |

    Bear should have worn white hats tonight or green britches.

  • traxel | December 28, 2012 at 12:57 am |

    Welp, regardless of the uselessness of a BP hat, most of these actually look pretty good. I think I’ll buy the Braves because it may be a rare item in weeks. That is if it ever actually makes it to market. I put the over under of them caving at 4 days. I hate the cardinals not having a white outline and the pirates having one. Don’t mind most of the white front panels but not a fan of the gray. Too much boring gray on the unis as it is. Both sox need socks on the hat. Both baseball headed guys look good. Nats could use the pinwheel. Rockies just need more purple.

    • Phil Hecken | December 28, 2012 at 1:02 am |

      “I put the over under of them caving at 4 days.”


      if by “caving” you mean having the decency not to but a racist caricature on their product, then yes

      • traxel | December 28, 2012 at 1:14 am |

        Nope. Not what I meant.

  • Glenn Simpkins | December 28, 2012 at 3:17 am |

    On the Braves BP cap is not a “screaming Indian”, but a lauging one.

    I Agree that “Chief Nockahoma” belongs abandoned in the 80’s.

  • Levi | December 28, 2012 at 3:21 am |

    Might I suggest starting a fund or charity (mentioning your issues with the “racist” sports logos) to help take care of some of the more…pressing issues facing indian populations today?

    As someone who’s done quite a bit of work on a reservation, I can assure everyone that most of the average people have deeper troubles with things like alcoholism, abuse, houses in disrepair, etc. than they have time to be concerned that a team is using a screaming indian logo.

    If you started a fund, you could help solve problems, show real concern for their issues, spread your message, and look like you’re doing more than bitching about a logo on the internet.

  • Kevin W. | December 28, 2012 at 4:00 am |

    Paul, in no way am I attempting to draw a parallel between the two since Irish immigrants were not discriminated against to the same degree as Native Americans were, but what would you say to the (purely hypothetical) argument that Notre Dame’s nickname could be construed as offensive? The “Fighting Irish” name perpetuates a stereotype of the Irish as a violent people, as does the leprechaun logo, and Irish-Americans were one of the most discriminated against immigrant minorities in American history.

    • Kevin W. | December 28, 2012 at 4:03 am |

      I should clarify: the Irish were severely discriminated against but no minority faced outright attempts at extermination like Native Americans did.

    • walter | December 28, 2012 at 9:07 am |

      The main difference is the Irish, for the most part, have embraced this image, while the Indians have disparaged theirs.

  • Luke Vissering | December 28, 2012 at 8:57 pm |

    Let’s just say 25% of Native Americans like the Braves logo and teams displaying Indian logos and names as it’s a constant reminder of the importance they played in this country.

    Do we tell them to shut up, they don’t know what they’re talking about? I mean, if it’s racist wouldn’t all Native Americans agree? And if they don’t, how can it be racist?

    How about we run a poll and if 98% agree it’s racist, than we all can agree. But if it’s say 50-50 or 75-25, how can we silence those who support it? Isn’t that counter intuitive?

    Anyways, love the work Paul as always, even if we disagree with this issue.