Skip to content

Now Just Get Him to Straighten His Cap

The Mariners wore their navy alternates last night. But closer Fernando Rodney accidentally wore his BP jersey, which, as you can see above, became apparent when he began warming up during the top of the 9th.

This could have made for a fun situation on the mound. Unfortunately, Mariners PR guy Jeff Evans spotted the looming snafu (either on TV or on Twitter, where it was being discussed — not sure which) and called the Seattle clubhouse to have them get Rodney into a proper jersey, much to team marketing VP Kevin Martinez’s relief. The top of the 9th was delayed while Rodney changed jerseys, and then he promptly closed out the game, prompting Evans to suggest that the whole team wear BP tops for today’s game. Further info on the whole situation here.

Some other MLB developments from last night:

• Last week I noted that the Braves had changed the logo on their road helmet. Last night was their first home game since then and, sure enough, they changed the home helmet logo too.

• The Brewers and Twins both wore 1980s throwbacks. (I initially wrote that this game took place in Minnesota, with the Twins wearing road throwbacks at home, but that was wrong — the game was in Milwaukee. The teams will be wearing these same uniforms in Minnesota on Thursday, however.)

• Much-hyped Astros prospect Jon Singleton made his MLB debut last night, so the Astros posted a photo of his jersey. Just one problem: The “N”s were upside-down (they should look like this). At first I thought, “Eh, maybe that isn’t the jersey he actually wore.” But it was.

• Ryan Zimmerman of the Nats, recovering from a broken thumb, was wearing something like a mitten, or an oven mitt, while running the bases.

(Big thanks to Phil for his multiple contributions to his section, and also to Kevin Gee for the Singleton item.)

+ + + + +


Click to enlarge

Banner Day: This was the scene yesterday afternoon at Uni Watch Gardens (aka my backyard), as I picked up our new 15th-anniversary banner from the printer and took it out for a test drive. Looks good, right? It’s four feet square and was manufactured by Rolling Press, the eco-friendly printer that also prints our membership cards.

The banner will be prominently displayed at our Uni Watch 15th-anniversary party, which will be taking place next Tuesday, June 10, 7:30pm, in the back room at Sheep Station.

And as long as we’re talking about anniversary stuff, reader Conn Nugent picked up a Uni Watch 15th anniversary T-shirt and had his daughters Molly and Isabel model it (click to enlarge):

I’m assuming it will fit a bit better on Conn. If you want a shirt like this for yourself, they’re available here.

Also, one last call: If you’re interested in having that anniversary logo rendered as an embroidered patch, please shoot me a note. Thanks.

+ + + + +

Drop the puck: With the Stanley Cup Finals beginning tonight, my latest ESPN column takes a close look at the Rangers, whose uniforms are quirkier than they seem at first glance. Check it out here.

+ + + + +

’Skins Watch: Latest celebrity to check in on the ’Skins issue: Dan Rather thinks they should keep the name (thanks, Phil). … People on the pro-’Skins side of the debate often say, “They’ve had this name for 80 years and now all of a sudden it’s a problem?!” That’s a flawed argument, because it falsely assumes that societal norms never change and that the status quo is somehow self-validating. But even if that argument were intellectually sound, it turns out that the ’Skins name was a hot topic at least as far back as 1972. Lots of great stuff there — recommended (from Robert Silverman). … A Canadian high school is changing its team name from Redmen to Redhawks (thanks, Phil).

Baseball News: Kudos to painted glove artist Sean Kane, who’s having five of his gloves (including these two) exhibited this summer at the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum. … The White Sox front office told pitcher Chris Sale to shave his beard because it was “too raggedy” (from James Poisso). … “I was shooting some documentary footage in the Durham Bulls’ front office a few days ago,” says Jay Jennings. “When I stopped in GM Mike Birling’s office, he was going through massive piles of jersey nameplates. He thinks he has one for every Bull in recent memory. By the way, he said he’s also a Uni Watch fan.” … The Reds’ 1961 yearbook included a cool uniform ad from McGregor (from David Goodfriend, who also photographed a bunch of his old yearbooks, programs and caps). … Fun piece about how old baseball cards showed players wearing windbreakers under their jerseys (from Robert Silverman. … Who’s the tyke in the mismatched Little League uni? None other than Johnny Football Baseball. Yup, that’s Johnny Manziel (or at least that’s what Dave Elbrecht told me). … Love the endearingly clunky typography on this old plumbing and heating union baseball jersey. ”¦ Not sure what these mini-jerseys were for, but they’re pretty cool (Phil again). ”¦ Phillies closer Jonathan Papelbon was wearing the wrong pants during pregame warm-ups on Saturday (from Harrison Tishler).

NFL News: Here’s why Cardinals QBs were wearing those black helmet stripes the other day (thanks, Phil). … Mako Mameli has spotted lots of players wearing the SpeedFlex helmet, including Raiders rookie CB Keith McGill, second-year LB Sio Moore, and third-year LB Kaelin Burnett, Cardinals fourth-year LB Keenan Clayton; Broncos fouth-year DT Marvin Austin, third-year DE Derek Wolfe, fourth-year LB Von Miller, rookie LB Corey Nelson, and oft-concussed WR Wes Welker. “So it appears to be catching on with relatively young defensive players and at one veteran offensive player,” says Mako. “So far I haven’t spotted a single player wearing a SpeedFlex at Chiefs, Chargers, Seahawks, or Jaguars OTAs.” ”¦ The Bucs will be giving away a Derrick Brooks bobblehead on Sept. 14 (from Kyle Speicher). ”¦ Paul Deaver was watching the 1963 AFL championship game and noticed that the goal line had a “0” marker, instead of a “G.” ”¦ Hmmm, why would a Czech roller hockey goalie be wearing the Ravens’ alternate logo on his pads? That’s Jozef Ondrejka, who plays for the team Piestany SHK 37.

Hockey News: The NHL’s online shop was accidentally selling overpriced polyester shirts for a less outrageous price the other day and then cancelled most of the orders when they realized the error. Alan Kreit was one of the lucky few whose orders will be honored. … “Looks like the Canadiens alumni (with some invited Expos) have a softball team,” says Mike Engle. “Looks like this year, the jerseys are fake-sleeveless, with a Habs logo on the right sleeve and the Canadian Tire (sponsor) logo on the left sleeve. Also in the same article, a really cool shot of ex-Hab Patrice Brisebois playing softball in what appears to be the mid-1990s.” … “I was watching a replay of Game 6 of the 1994 Stanley cup Finals and noticed that 90% of the crowd was wearing white shirts,” says John M. “Do you know how far back color-outs go for big playoff games?” Nope. Anyone? ”¦ What if NHL team logos included Simpsons characters? (From Seth Moorman.)

Pro and College Basketball News: Here’s an updated schematic of the Hornets’ new practice court design. And while we’re at it, here’s their draft cap (thanks, Phil). ”¦ New court design for East Carolina (thanks, Phil).

Soccer News: Fake jersey unveiling, followed by a real one, for Ajax (from Mark Coale). … New ball design for the German Bundesliga. ” It’s basically a souped-up variant of the World Cup ‘Brazuca’ ball,” says Bernd Wilms. … Speaking of the World Cup balls, here’s a look at the factory that makes them (thanks, Brinke). … Here’s Chris Creamer’s look at the Group A World Cup uniforms. … New kits for AC Milan (thanks, Phil). … New away kit for Benfica and new kits for Brentford and Walsall. … Chelsea midfielder Eden Hazard recently changed his uni number from 17 to 10, so the team is offering a free exchange to fans who bought his jersey. “I haven’t seen this for an active player with the same team before,” says Jason Christie. ”¦ A British soccer player has been reunited with his long-lost jersey after 36 years (from John Hollomon). ”¦ Hmmm, is a keeper allowed to wear the same color as the opposing team? (Thanks, Phil.)

Grab Bag: Here’s a poster showing notable golf holes in the USA. … Reprinted from yesterday’s comments: Interesting article on why the U.S. military has so many different camouflage patterns. … How old are the world’s oldest pants? This old (from David Firestone). … New font in the works for the Apple operating system (thanks, Brinke). … Oooh, check out these neato pro cyclist figurines (from Sean Clancy).

+ + + + +

Comments (164)

    I think it’s because this site has mentioned that the Twins will be wearing that uni at home on Thursday against the Brewers. I’ve been looking forward to it and wish I could make it to the game, so I was quite surprised to see them wearing them two days early on the road against the same team. Easy mistake to make when it was hyped by the team to be worn at home and not mentioned that they planned to break them out early.

    I so desperately wish I could go to tomorrow’s game. Ugh. Work commitments really suck sometimes.

    Probably because they’re playing in Minnesota Thursday and wearing the same unis there. The Twins have been plugging that game but the throwbacks for last evening (at least to my knowledge) were unannounced.

    I initially thought the game was in Minnie too!

    Not Czech. The goalie is from Slovakia. They look to be playing the Czechs though.

    Somebody please start another uni sight with no articles about the author, political agendas and accurate info

    Will that uni “sight” have commenters who aren’t overly sensitive, whiners, and appreciate little things like grammar? Or at least punctuation?

    Funny that you use your second amendment rights to suggest perhaps someone shouldn’t be using their second amendment rights.

    I think what is now marketed as “3/4 sleeve” isn’t actually 3/4 sleeve as worn in the 80s/90s (sleeve ending mid-forearm, link).

    Today’s “3/4 sleeve” are in-between a traditional short-sleeve and the old-school 3/4 sleeves: link These sleeves end just past the elbow and similar undershirts are worn by tons of MLB players (or crafted by cutting long-sleeved shirts).

    I wear those Badger shirts all the time and think they are the ideal sleeve length, both for playing and for casual wear. Just my 2 cents; perhaps Paul would find them to be overpriced polyester shirts.

    I know it’s a passionate exchange, but do we really have to bring guns into this?

    First Amendment.

    Unless you were accusing them of shooting off their mouths…

    I realize “agendas” is accepted use in American English, but it still bugs me when I see it. It’s already a plural, like “data” and “media”. We don’t say “criterias” or “alumnis” or “pancakeses”. So why is “agendas” acceptable.

    “Somebody please start another uni sight with no articles about the author, political agendas and accurate info”


    There’s already a uni site with:

    * No articles about the author
    * No political agendas
    * No accurate info

    It’s called “Bleacher Report”

    Yep, the Twins were the visiting team at Miller Park last night. The series switches to Target Field today, and the Twins are doing a promotional giveaway of those same 1984 jerseys with Kirby Puckett’s #34 on the back. As a Brewer fan, I’m hoping we see another throwback game so the Brewers can trot out their unparalleled baby blue and yellow road unis.

    Sadly, the Twins will be wearing last night’s road uniforms again, meaning that the Brewers will wear home uniforms in Minneapolis.

    Not the updated pinstriped button-ups they wore last night, but link. Blah.

    If Milwaukee would break out ’84 yellow front panel caps for that game in Minnesota, would that be an improvement or just look weird?

    “Nats 3B Ryan Zimmerman, recovering from a broken thumb…” should read “Nats LF Ryan Zimmerman, recovering from a broken thumb…” as Zimmerman started in left field for the first time in his MLB career.

    Actually the Cubs will wear road throwbacks three times later this season when they reach the 70s, 80s and 90s in their decade by decade anniversary celebration. The 70s and 90 unis are grey, so the road team will have to wear white or dark.

    The 70s and 90 unis are grey…

    Actually, the ’70s throwbacks are powder blue, not gray, but your point is well taken.

    The ’90s throwback is the “Cuba” blue alternate. My understanding was that it would be worn with home pants, not road pants. Am I wrong about that?

    Just to repeat the other posts, the Twins were promoting the powder blue throwback game at home on Thursday, so when both teams wore the throwbacks in Milwaukee on Tuesday, I think it caught a lot of people off guard.

    This is especially surprising since the Twins plan last year was to wear their St. Paul Saints 1950’s throwbacks in first Milwaukee and then again at home a few days later. That’s why they wore grey road unis, only to have Milwaukee decline to go along with wearing the throwbacks in Milwaukee since they felt they had enough turn back the clock jerseys on their 2013 schedule already, leaving the Twins to wear their grey Saints jerseys at home only.

    Yeah, the Brewers were a little burned out on TBTCs last year. I pitched some ideas for 2014 and they essentially said “we’re going to take the next season off”.

    Actually I believe they wore the gray road unis last year so they said Saint Paul on them instead of Saints. Joe Mauer and Glen Perkins are both from Saint Paul and it let them wear their home town name instead of just the team name.

    Going to be starting my internship with the Westerners today. I’ll be taking photos for the team blog. Expect a lot of uni photos because the team debuted some red accented home unis at orientation.

    The Mets and Rockies did the home/road throwback juxtaposition thing last year at Coors Field. The Rockies were celebrating the 20th anniversary of their first-ever game, which was at Shea Stadium in 1993, so the Rox wore the gray pinstripeless “ROCKIES” uniforms with the purple piping and lettering, and the Mets wore the infamous home white pinstripes with the “swoosh” script.

    That’s the only other example I can remember of an MLB game where the home team wore a road uni and vice-versa.

    While not a throwback game and not done on a whim, the Philadelphia MLB team wore their road uniforms at home against the visiting Toronto MLB team (designated as the home team)some years ago because SkyDome was unavailable(?).

    Earliest one I’m aware of was when the Brewers and Rangers played link in 1993, when TBTC games were in their infancy.

    The teams wore the same sets of 1920-ish uniforms for both games, meaning that at County Stadium Texas wore homes and Milwaukee roads.

    Here is the ESPN page that announced when the Mets at Rockies would be wearing reverse home and away uniforms.

    link “…to commemorate the Rockies’ debut in the majors…”

    I think it’s SOP at English clubs for players or clubs to buy back printed jerseys. Steven Gerrard did the same after he changed numbers well into the summer.

    Back in the 80 s (I believe it was 1985) the Calgary Flames began the “C” of Red tradition. They were playing the Winnipeg Jets who responded with The White Out. I was. A part of the White out which was pretty cool because you actually had to show up wearing white. There was no T-shirt waiting for you on your seat.

    Actually now that I think about it the “White Out” didn’t officially start until 1987 when the Jets played the Flames again in the playoffs. But the C of Red was firmly in place at that point.

    I was at the game when they beat the Flames to clinch the series. It was an amazing night….

    The C of Red started in 1986 with the Flames-Oilers Smythe Divisional Final. The Oilers were promoting a three-peat and the Flames responded with the C of Red. The next year the Jets came out with the Ocean of White as white was then the primary colour of the home team, and with Winnipeg best known for its cold and snowy winters ;)

    The 86 Smythe final was of course the one where Steve Smith bounced the winning goal into his own net off of Grant Fuhr’s pads leading Flames fans to henceforth call on Smith to shoot whenever near his own goal!

    The Milan unis have been out for a good month now. The yellow 3rd has already been worn in a league match.

    As a USSF licensed referee, I was shocked that the Mexican keeper was allowed to wear his blue kit. I guess they let it go because it was “only” a friendly.

    I can guarantee that will not be allowed come June 12 in Brazil. FIFA is very specific; the keepers, players and referees can not be even close to matching. In fact, referees can be penalized on their assessments for that.

    Most English-language sources use “Finals”, so it’s not really right or wrong either way. From what I’ve heard, “Final” is Canadian English and “Finals” is American English.

    Even if you don’t care about the Final(s), the LA Kings twitter feed is the most interesting in sport(s).

    It does, but that makes me wonder why the NHL adopted the link. Is it short for “final series”? They also use the plural link. Could that have been because the playoffs involve multiple simultaneous series, and the final series is held all by its lonesome? Interesting.

    The NBA, the only other league I can think of with the word “final” in its championships, uses the link.

    Anybody know where I can get a “I’m Still Calling it The Finals” t-shirt?

    Anybody know where I can get AN “I’m Still Calling it The Finals” t-shirt?

    Stanley Cup Championship

    That’s how the Finals patches read from 1989-1995; they dropped the “Championship” part in 1996 (the second year of the orange sunburst/black background logo).

    Of course, we just called it the Stanley Cup Finals back then. It wasn’t until after 2005 that the NHL decided to codify it as a “Final”.

    Thing is, to me, “Final” is singular, and would be fitting for a single-game format. But for a series, “Finals” plural makes more sense to me.

    And it doesn’t make much sense if they’re trying to appease the Francophones, because they’d almost certainly do what they’ve always done in the past – use separate French logos that say “Coupe Stanley” instead of “Stanley Cup” and “LNH” instead of “NHL”.

    Incidentally, “The Finals” is a registered trademark for swimwear. And as far as I can tell, the NBA does not use a trademark symbol on their “The Finals” logo, not even with NBA-specific symbols like the league logo or the Larry O’Brien Trophy.

    Ehh, just blame Bettman. :P

    “… New font in the works for the Apple operating system (thanks, Brinke). …”

    Adios, Lucida Grande, amiga querida.

    Helvetica is a great font, and it’s timeless, but it was designed for print, not screens, and there Lucida Grande is much easier to read at small sizes. Apple already forced Helvetica on us with the latest iTunes update; now the entire OS?

    “People on the pro-’Skins side of the debate often say, “They’ve had this name for 80 years and now all of a sudden it’s a problem?!” That’s a flawed argument, because it falsely assumes that societal norms never change and that the status quo is somehow self-validating.”

    My only objection to this argument (not with the name issue, just the statement in general) is that it seems to imply that media coverage doesn’t or can’t play a role in changing societal norms. We’re taught from a young age that the purpose of media is to simply report, not influence, but there’s no denying the power of written word to sway public opinion…”the pen is mightier…”, Ben Franklin, teams changing logos after bloggers notice differences, that type of thing. With the Redskins, a pro-change person could make an argument that media are simply being Fourth Estate watchdogs concerned with the reflecting the changed societal norms, but an anti-change person is going to see the same coverage as old-fashioned muckraking designed to change those norms for everyone else. Regardless, it’s impossible to deny the coverage has influenced public opinion, and thus, societal norms already.

    My God, this sounds like an essay answer from an intro-to-Journalism class. I apologize, it’s way too early for anything academic. I probably misinterpreted the passage, anyway.

    “Honestly, all this Redskins talk is getting out of hand.”


    So if we ignore it, it just goes away?

    Phil, I think his point is that it’s been discussed to death on here. This site doesn’t have *that* huge of a following and all of the regular commenters have already made pretty much every argument for both sides… minds aren’t exactly being changed at this point. Is one more celebrity giving an opinion really worth mentioning? A Jehova Witness isn’t going to have any luck converting people by walking around the same block every day, the guy that slammed the door in his face yesterday is just going to do it again today. You want your message to be seen by more people, and that really isn’t happening on here.

    “I think his point is that it’s been discussed to death on here.”


    Rarely is it anything other than a “‘skins Watch” item. If readers choose to discuss it, that’s their prerogative, just as is any item in the ticker, or a couple years ago, when we had a “#NoUniAds” section. It’s all germane to Uni Watch.

    And honestly, most of the items coming from the Washington football camp have been of the team shooting themselves in the foot with this whole issue — if anything, you can blame the ‘skins for keeping this entire issue ‘in the news’.

    The issue won’t go away if we ignore it, but maybe ignoring it would be good advice for the Washington football club.

    1) I don’t keep bringing up ’Skins issues on my own. I link to them because they’re in the news. If you don’t like what’s in the news, well, that’s like complaining that the rain is wet.

    2) Stirrups are “discussed to death” here too, but somehow nobody complains about that. Hmmmmmm.

    3) link

    “A Jehova Witness isn’t going to have any luck converting people by walking around the same block every day, the guy that slammed the door in his face yesterday is just going to do it again today. You want your message to be seen by more people, and that really isn’t happening on here.”

    That presumes that the only purpose behind linking to news stories about Native American team names is to “convert” people to a particular point of view. Considering that ‘Skins Watch covers stories from both sides of the debate (and fact-based, non-advocacy reporting on the issue), the presumption is faulty.

    “I think his point is that it’s been discussed to death on here.”

    Here’s one way to keep the issue from being “discussed to death” here – don’t bring it up! The only time when the issue “hijacks” the comments section is when someone opposed to changing Native American team names says something about the issue (usually snarky or complaining about Paul linking to the latest round of ‘Skins Watch stories) and those who favor changing the names. This inevitably sparks a debate of the pro-mascot crowd breaking out the same tried tropes, including the on about the issue being “discussed to death.”

    Seriously, I don’t remember the last time someone in the pro-name change camp is the one who sparked the debate in the comments section. They’re just responding to the arguments of the anti-name change crowd. There have been plenty of days when ‘Skins Watch ran and no one said anything in the comments section.

    Your Jehovah’s Witnesses analogy works both ways. The anti-name changers aren’t going to convince anyone in the comments section, either. Especially with flame-throwing and expressions of fatigue over the issue. At least the Jehovah’s Witnesses are nice and polite when they try to drop off their copy of the Watchtower.

    And now that I think about it, your Jehovah’s Witness argument actually doesn’t work all that well in the first instance. Let’s not forget whose “front door” this is. Uni Watch is not your home. We’re the guests here. If we don’t like what the host has to say, we’re free to leave. Paul isn’t knocking on your front door demanding you read the “‘Skin Watchtower” everyday.

    And who, pray tell, on the Washington roster deserves to be getting attention these days? Dan Snyder should be grateful for the nickname controversy, since it’s not like the quality of the team on the field would keep the Skins in the headlines and on people’s minds at the moment.

    Really, the whole nickname thing is the only thing that’s keeping the #HTTR brigade on Snyder’s side. Common enemies and whatnot.

    We’re taught from a young age that the purpose of media is to simply report, not influence…

    This is a false premise. This country has a long, proud history of advocacy journalism, dating all the way back to Thomas Paine. And there’s nothing wrong with media expressing a point of view, as long as it doesn’t lie or distort. Opinion journalism is a perfectly valid form of journalism, just like straight reporting.

    Also, there’s a chicken/egg issue here. You’re asserting that journalism positions affect societal norms. That can be true, but so can the reverse.

    Also-also, you’re assuming that people (except you, perhaps?) are powerless to assess and evaluate messages they receive from the media, and are therefore unable to make decisions on their own. That is false.

    In no way did I insinuate that I’m immune to media manipulation, good or bad. When I wrote this, I was specifically thinking about the kid mentioned on this site a few weeks ago with the Redskins blanket that loved everything about the team until he was told it was offensive. As for defining what is journalism and what is commentary, I’ll leave that to greater minds than my own. And I believe I addressed the chicken/egg situation with the watchdog vs muckraker argument.

    As for defining what is journalism and what is commentary, I’ll leave that to greater minds than my own.

    Wait — your whole comment was premised on the notion that advocacy journalism is problematic by definition. And now you’re just going to punt on that issue?

    He wasn’t told by the media that it was offensive, but by his older brother.

    Surely moral and historical education of the young is the proper role of family members?

    How are you getting problematic from that argument? I was just pointing out that media coverage can change norms, the norms aren’t always clearly changed before an issue is covered. I think you might be getting a problematic or negative vibe from my comments because of the Redskins issue, but as I pointed out in my first comment, I was speaking in broad terms (yes, I used the Redskins later to make arguments, perhaps a new paragraph would’ve cleared things up a bit.) I also mentioned Ben Franklin, you mentioned Adam Smith, I think we both agree that advocacy journalism can be used for good. That’s not the issue I was addressing with the journalism/commentary comment. Let me put it this was, are Rush Limbaugh or Al Sharpton journalist? Or is that simply commentary? I think our society, especially my generation, struggle with the distinction. But, let’s not fool ourselves, there are plenty of people who make their decisions based only on the opinions of the people the hear or read reporting or commenting on issues. Plenty of people are going to have opinions about an issue before it’s reported, but plenty more will form their opinion based only on how an issue is reported.

    I mentioned Tom Paine, not Adam Smith.

    Limbaugh is an entertainer; Sharpton is an activist who has morphed into an entertainer. There’s nothing wrong with that. They’re part of the public dialogue, and there’s nothing wrong with that either.

    I suppose we could ban the press/media/etc. altogether, and then public opinion and societal norms would be “pure.” Would that be preferable?

    I don’t mean to be snarky — I honestly don’t understand what your complaint is. Yes, the press/media are part of what goes into estbalishing societal norms. But why is that a problem? Isn’t that part of a healthy society?

    Paine, my apologies. As the many grammatical and typing errors prove, I wrote that in a rush.

    I’m not advocating the elimination of the press…I’m kind of attached to my paycheck. But, would a more honest, pure, unadulterated press (one not owned by major corporations with an invested interest in presenting news from a certain perspective) be a bad thing? I know that’s like asking if free education, crime-free cities and Georgia-based sports teams that don’t break my heart each season would be bad. It’s a dream world with dream views, but, thanks to the advocacy work of men like Paine, Henry and Franklin, at least we’re free to express them. Again, the whole point of my initial post was just to address my perception of that one comment. I’m quite fond on my uhh…second(sic) amendment rights, and wouldn’t dare deprive anyone of his or her own.

    would a more honest, pure, unadulterated press (one not owned by major corporations with an invested interest in presenting news from a certain perspective) be a bad thing?

    Nope. But what you’re suggesting — a truly “pure” press — has never existed, nor will it ever.

    If I report a simple factual story, with no expression of my own opinion, it still carries the bias of my perspective. That bias comes from who I choose to interview and who I don’t, which quotes from those interviewees I choose to use and which ones I leave out, and so on. There’s nothing nefarious about this (or there needn’t be) — it could simply be my professional expertise on the best way to present the story. But those choices nonetheless reflect my bias. Someone else might report the story very differently (but just as accurately).

    All reporting is biased. Some reporting is just more honest about it.

    Thanks. Despite, some thought provoking digression, I voiced my opinion and you addressed it civilly. Let’s hope the same will happen soon with the name, itself. Also, the bias of my perspective would make a great book title.

    “We’re taught from a young age that the purpose of media is to simply report, not influence…”

    Tell that to Richard Nixon.

    There are the perfectly acceptable legal defenses known as “statutes of limitations” and “laches” which fully protect against resurrecting old and failed claims, such as the ones now being made against the Redskins and Chief Wahoo.

    I also again point out that such things are only representations of particular sports teams and are not meant to be taken as mocking any Native American or the Native American people as a whole. Certainly no one is foolish enough to think that the team name “Diamondbacks” mocks snakes or people who’ve been bitten by snakes, or that the name “Giants” mocks either big people or little people, or that the name “Padres” mocks Catholics or priests, or that the name Yankees either mocks, or supports, the winners of the US Civil War. Those are just names of sports teams, just as Redskins and Indians are just names of sports teams.

    Classic straw man argument. Nobody’s making a legal claim against Wahoo (at least not that I’m aware of). And the only legal claim against the ’Skins involves trademark protection.

    But you do understand where Patrick is coming from, right? I mean, no matter how disjointed the idea is that the terms and imagery these teams use is not associated with actual native Americans, I think it is still a reason so many people don’t understand the argument.

    For me, before I realized that the terms and imagery were racist or insulting, to me they were just team names. I myself never put two and two together that they were wrong, simply because I just never really thought about it. Then someone said to me “hey look a little deeper at these things” and I realized hey, perhaps we do need to question these things.

    So when someone says they’re just names and images associated with a team, to me I don’t think they’re wrong or right, I just don’t think they’ve made the connection yet.

    Right, but that’s a separate argument. His first argument was about the statute of limitations. And his mention of that implies the existence of some harm. If no harm had occurred, then why invoke the statute of limitations?

    Then he claimed there was no harm.

    As I’ve said all along, the bigger issue for me is about misappropriation of something that belongs to someone else. That’s why I’m as opposed to, say, the Chiefs’ logo as I am to the ’Skins name. The fact that the ’Skins name is a slur just adds weight to the argument, but it’s not the key thing for me (although I realize it is for many other people).

    Paul, fyi, you are incorrect in your statement that mention of a legal defense impliedly admits the existence of a valid claim. It merely means, should on the off-chance X’s had a valid claim, it is moot anyway as having been made far too late. A straw main, it ain’t. QED.

    Back as to my main point, I was at last night’s Cleveland Indians game and observed many fans happily wearing Chief Wahoo. They were not mocking any Native Americans, they were just baseball fans happy to be cheering their team on a beautiful warm night. The only people they were mocking were in Red Sox garb, and they were asking for it. :-)

    It seems obvious to me that one who perceives there to be mocking insult when plainly none was intended is the one in the wrong, not the ones wearing the shirt with the smiling cartoon face on it.

    Sure, the USA took the Native American people’s land from them. The US had more people, more and better armaments, and immunity to diseases that the Indians didn’t have. The US took their land, broke treaties, enforced vicious cruelties (Trail of Tears and story of Chief Joseph, anyone?) and swindled them out of Manhattan Island in exchange for mere trinkets. Of the great harms done to the Indian peoples, the Washington Football and Cleveland baseball teams were not the instigators or the culprits. The American nation beat the Native Americans in war for the continent, and that’s the fact. Making the sports teams some sort of proxy stand-ins for the Native Americans’ psychological complaints is just silly and pointless. IMHO. YMMV.

    It seems obvious to me that one who perceives there to be mocking insult when plainly none was intended is the one in the wrong, not the ones wearing the shirt with the smiling cartoon face on it.

    So would you say that African-Americans who took exception to link were “the one(s) in the wrong”?

    IIRC, When Russell Means was the head of Cleveland AIM (American Indian Movement) in the early 1970’s he tried to sue the Cleveland Indians for millions of dollars over their use of Chief Wahoo.
    I thought the 20+ year litigation over the Redskins’ trademark(s) was over and can not be re-argued in court.

    I thought the 20+ year litigation over the Redskins’ trademark(s) was over and can not be re-argued in court.

    Not so. The Harjo case was dismissed on procedural grounds. While the USPTO body that did hear the merits of the case ruled against the NFL – and correctly so, since the grant of trademark protection to “Redskins” obviously violates the plain meaning of relevant federal law – on appeal to federal courts the plaintiffs were found to have waited too long to file their request with the USPTO, so the case was dismissed, with final appeals of that decision having been exhausted, if I recall, in 2009.

    A 2006 request to revoke the trademark was put on hold while the Harjo case was resolved; Blackhorse et al includes younger plaintiffs who are testing whether the time limits applied to the older plaintiffs in Harjo apply to them. The tricky thing is that if the federal courts rule for the NFL in Blackhorse, they may effectively put vast stretches of federal government actions beyond the ability of any citizen to challenge. This would be a catastrophe for a rising movement of conservative legal challenges to established regulatory decisions, so ultimately which side many people root for may come down to what they value more: Keeping a sports team nickname or challenging EPA rulings, endangered species regulations, campaign finance laws, labor rules, and so forth.

    “There are the perfectly acceptable legal defenses known as “statutes of limitations” and “laches” which fully protect against resurrecting old and failed claims, such as the ones now being made against the Redskins and Chief Wahoo.”

    Laches stop the clock in some cases and are not full protection. A major exception (relevant to the Redskins and Chief Wahoo) is where the plaintiff is a minor.

    Shit, my apologies for starting this thread. Apparently, the “not with the name issue” at the very beginning of my post should’ve been in bold since it obviously wasn’t clear enough.

    Examining the photo of the Twins’ blue road uniform the other day, I thought, “Oops, they goofed. The jersey has the sleeve stripes with the thin white center stripe, but on the sansabelt the stripes are all of equal width.” But I was reminded that was the way they really were. It was the Tigers who sweated the detail of the narrow center stripe. This site has gone over plenty of Twins arcana created by a cheap owner.

    It pains me to say it, but gosh the new Braves batting helmet logo looks sharp. With the red brim and home whites, that right there is a picture of baseball uniform perfection. Which I sort of already regarded the Braves home uni as, even with the old helmet logo, so I guess the new logo is even perfecter.

    I dont really like this years NBA draft hats

    2012 had the best draft hats.The script throwbacks


    I wasn’t super offended by a couple of the Ajax fake kits. The lion was awful. The tulips, windmills, and flannel pattern shirts weren’t horrendous. I also liked that the players were completely turned off by the tie die away kit but were relieved that a solid purple with neon green numbers was totally fine.

    Eden Hazard? That is a great name. I am stealing it for myself (or at least my next rotisserie baseball team) immediately.

    I like the Astros’ unis, but that link is awful. The orange outline is so thick that the individual lines of the “N” are obscured, turning the letter into just a dark rectangle.

    I absolutely love the Astros uni’s but you have a great point. However, I am not sure if plain blue (is that navy blue?) would look better?

    Am I completely wrong, or does the 15th Anniversary Uni Watch banner and logo have an error? Assuming the large “15” in the middle is the same font as the smaller numbers of the years on the side, it looks like the large “1” of the “15” is missing it’s lower block line below the magnifying glass. It looks pretty slender like it has the same font style as this >> 1 (no lower line). Again, maybe I’m totally wrong, or maybe it’s an error, or MAYBE it was a purposeful error in the spirit of this site…

    Well, my example slender “1” in the above post now looks different after publishing my post than it did when I was typing it in the text box… but I think you get my point.

    Assuming the large “15″ in the middle is the same font as the smaller numbers of the years on the side…

    Faulty assumption. In fact, the font of the numbers on the sides changed at least once during the design process. There was never any intent to link to the two (although maybe there should have been).

    I love the photo of Molly and Isabel modeling the 15th anniversary logo t-shirt. The tiara is an excellent added touch.

    Anyone else irritated with Singleton not buttoning his top button on the uni? It’s your first MLB game, look sharp!

    I’ve been away from Uni Watch for a few days, so apologies if this has been mentioned in the past, but the Florida Gators softball team has some really sweet striped stirrups.


    Also I noticed that a few of the players wear football-style masks on their batting helmets.


    I’ll almost forgive the swoosh since they actually have the two different stripe patterns on their stirrups.

    In seeing the “0” on the goal line in the 63 AFL Championship game it reminded me that the St. Louis Football Cardinals used to use a “00” at the goal line at Busch Stadium. I will look for proof.

    You are correct! Check out the 1:06 mark of this video highlighting a 1965 contest between the Cowboys and Cardinals in St. Louis: link

    There are a couple of places earlier in the video that also show the 00 marking on the field but those are fleeting glimpses or not well seen due to the lighting and filming technologies of the day. Another interesting thing that caught my eye at the 0:44 mark of the video is a shot of a runner going past the sideline marker as he crosses the goal line. The sideline marker has a G instead of a matching 00.

    I tried a Google search but I couldn’t find a giveaway at a game. After all, almost all NFL teams sell out their regular season games, so there’s no need to draw fans with a premium giveaway.

    Though I did find a link at an open practice, which makes sense.

    The Raven’s alternate logo on Jozef Ondrejka was used by his KHL team, HC Slovan Bratislava.


    I don’t think the Rangers are the only team with diagonal lettering on a jersey. The Colorado Avalanche have a blue alt that does that.

    Wait a minute — I misunderstood what you wrote.

    I didn’t say the Rangers were the only team with a diagonally lettered jersey. I said the Rangers and caps were the only NHL teams with nothing but lettering (no crest) on any of their jerseys. And that is true.

    And I, in turn, misunderstood your point as I read the article. Yes, the blue Avs sweater is very Rangers-esque, but the Avs’ sweater collection is not devoid of front crests the way the Rangers’ and Caps’ collections are. Very well then.

    To me, the Capitals logo is more of a crest than just lettering. It has the stars, the hockey stick t, and the puck. I would just say the Rangers are unique in being the only team with nothing but lettering on its jerseys and leave it at that.

    Another angle: If the Capitals’ jerseys are considered just lettering, why aren’t the Ducks’ jerseys? The D crest is just a stylized letter after all.

    I don’t know that I’d say the Capitals “(use) nothing but lettering on its jerseys”. The addition of the link push it from wordmark to logo in my mind.

    The Rangers don’t even have crest shoulder patches, do they? So that makes them totally unique in the sport, not to have any logos at all on any of their uniforms. Even the Caps have the W-Eagle on their shoulders.

    Well, I did make a point of saying (in the column, not in this comment thread) that the Caps’ lettering was more logo-like than the Rangers’.

    We’re basically in agreement. It’s just a matter of how to phrase it.

    Interesting find from the wikipedia wormhole.

    Why did the Boston Braves suddenly switched to blue and yellow in the late 1930s? Its because new ownership rebranded them as the Boston Bees.


    Well, there’s certainly a correlation between the color change and the name change. But can we infer causation?

    link and link, though. I’m surprised that it took until the advent of polyester for that gorgeous color scheme to really take root in the sport.

    What, did somebody copyright ‘L’ in the context of football games in advance?

    In response to Paul’s ESPN article mentioning Martin St Louis having two different city names on his uni (along with others)….would Ron Washington (he of the MLB Texas Texases – – ok, Rangers, but not according to their uniforms) be the only one with two STATE names?

    No it wouldn’t. A pair of guys with the last name “Maine” have played MLB this century.

    Also, one shouldn’t overlook Reggie Cleveland as a member of this select group.

    Washington was a coach in Oakland (including being featured in the Moneyball book/movie) so he counts.

    Paul, don’t know if this has been pointed out yet but Super Bowl L has been renamed Super Bowl 50: link

    Thing is, the story forgot to mention why the “L” was considered “upleasing to the eye.” link

    I assume there are a lot of Washingtons who have worntwo cities. My question is this.

    Is there ever a case of a player having the same name as the city. For example if Ron Washington were to coach the Nationals.

    Sort of: When Jerry West played for the Western Conference All-Stars, he had “West” on the front and back of his jerseys.

    Not the same thing, but related: Outfielder Curtis Pride played in the minors for the Nashua Pride.

    He was way underrated too. Quality linebacker and best player on the team in the mid-00s.

    Daryl Boston once had two-thirds of a different team’s full name on his jersey back when he had “WHITE SOX” on the front and “BOSTON” on the back.

    Glaring error (at least to detail-oriented golf nuts like myself) on the poster detailing golf holes — in the fifth row down, it has a diagram of what purports to be the 11th hole at Pacific Dunes at the Bandon Dunes Golf Resort in Oregon. The poster notes, correctly, that #11 is a par 3, however, the actual diagram does not depict the correct hole. The diagram appears to show a par 4 (possibly #2 on the same course). This is just something my discriminating eye caught.

    The Rangers are the only NHL team that I know of that permanently wear the logo of the team charity. They wear the Garden of Dreams sticker on the bottom left of the helmet opposite NHL logo sticker. They’ve been doing this several years and you mentioned the NYR sticker but failed to notice this as it is another unique thing in the Rangers apparel / equipment.

    The Winnipeg Jets 1.0 wore a “Goals for Kids” patch as part of their uniform for a number of years.

    The one thing that always struck me as weird about the Rangers is that they have a logo


    The logo is recognized as the brand of the club, its featured prominently on their website, advertising, everywhere, but the logo isn’t actually used anywhere on their uniforms. And hasn’t been for 35 years.


Comments are closed.