This real money site caters to all players, with reviews on mobile games you can play, including slots, blackjack, and roulette.

A New Twist on Lists - Ranking the Leagues by Color Schemes, Part I

League Colors - 550 Hed
By Phil Hecken

I’m back today with reader David Firestone, with whom both Paul and I have worked before — but usually on items in the auto racing field. When I put out the call for reader pitches for articles, Dave responded to me with this:

I’ve had this project that I have been working on for some time, and I think you might use it for Uni-Watch. I take the color schemes of all 122 major league teams and rank them in order from best to worst.

Dave

Intrigued, I said “absolutely” — not knowing exactly how he’d go about this. What you’re about to see below is just half of what turned out to be a very ambitious project (I’ll have Part II of this down the road a ways), and it’s a basic way of looking at teams and their colors. I’m not sure too many of us ever thought of boiling teams down to just their color palette. Until now.

Click on each of the bolded names to see that specific team’s colors in full size.

As Dave explains below, much of his ranking is based on subjectivity — so if you disagree, that’s fine. Here’s Dave:

. . . . .

Ranking the Leagues by Color Schemes
By David G. Firestone

We’ve had ranking lists on uniforms, and logos, but I think we should try something new. Let’s rank each major league in terms of color schemes. Now like most other rankings, this is subjective, so let me explain how I chose what I did for each league. I used SSUR as my reference point for this project.

I will take each team and take the primary uniform colors they use, and put them on a graph, such as this Pittsburgh Pirates example. I will then give a brief explanation on why they were ranked. I will take in to consideration how the colors work together, how they clash with each other, how many colors in total, and the overall appearance. There are a number of teams that use very similar color schemes, as such there will be ties during the rankings. Team color names such as Dodger Blue are acceptable. Goofy color names will have rank taken away from them.

Major League Baseball:

_____________________

1. Pittsburgh Pirates:

Pittsburgh

A bold color scheme, the colors work very well together, the yellow looks really good when compared to the black and the white.

_____________________

2. Kansas City Royals / Los Angeles Dodgers:

Royals
Royals

Dodgers
Dodgers

Blue and white is a simple, yet very elegant and very attractive color scheme.

_____________________

3. Philadelphia Phillies:

Phillies

It’s a darker shade of red than most, but it works very well and is very attractive.

_____________________

4. New York Yankees:

Yankees

The blue is a bit dark for my taste, but it is still a great look.

_____________________

5. Toronto Blue Jays:

Blue Jays

The blue is a bit too bright for my taste, but it is still a great look.

_____________________

6. Boston Red Sox / Atlanta Braves / Cleveland Indians / Minnesota Twins / St. Louis Cardinals / Texas Rangers / Washington Nationals / Chicago Cubs:

Red Sox
Red Sox

Indians
Indians

Twins
Twins

Cardinals
Cardinals

Rangers
Rangers

Nationals
Nationals

Cubs
Cubs

Red, white and blue is a bit cliche for American sports teams, but the colors work well, and it is a great color scheme.

_____________________

7. Baltimore Orioles / San Francisco Giants:

Orioles
Orioles

Giants
Giants

Orange and black is a bit tough to work with, but when the orange is the perfect shade it is very attractive. The Orioles have a great shade, but the Giants is a bit dark.

_____________________

8. New York Mets / Houston Astros / Detroit Tigers:

Mets
Mets

Astros
Astros

Tigers
Tigers

Not a great color scheme. The Mets have the best, The Astros are much too dark, and the Tigers blue is a bit too dark for the shade of orange they chose.

_____________________

9. Cincinnati Reds:

Reds

An otherwise great color scheme ruined by the needless addition of black.

_____________________

10. Milwaukee Brewers:

Brewers

Metallic gold and blue is not a good look, though if the gold was lighter it might work better.

_____________________

11. Chicago White Sox:

White Sox

In a word, bland.

_____________________

12. Tampa Bay Rays:

Rays

Two contrasting shades of blue is not a good look at all.

_____________________

13. Oakland Athletics:

Athletics

Green and gold don’t mix very well as it is, but the green is too dark for the shade of gold they chose.

_____________________

14. Arizona Diamondbacks:

DBacks

In addition to an odd mix of colors, they lost points for the ridiculous names they gave the colors. “Sedona Red?” “Sonoran Sand?” Really?

_____________________

15. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim:

Angels

Two different shades of red, and silver do not make for a good look.

_____________________

16. Seattle Mariners:

Mariners

There are too many dark colors here, and they don’t mix well. The green and silver would work by themselves, but not when paired up with each other.

_____________________

17. San Diego Padres:

Padres

No. Redeeming. Qualities. Whatsoever.

_____________________

. . . . . . . . . .

National Basketball Association:

1. Chicago Bulls / Miami Heat:

Bulls
Bulls

Heat
Heat

Red and black is a great color scheme and it works very well. My big problem with the Miami Heat is that the red is too dark.

_____________________

2. Portland Trailblazers / Toronto Raptors:

Blazers
Blazers

Raptors
Raptors

Red and black is a great color scheme, but the addition of silver to the mix takes it down a notch. It adds nothing and subtracts from the overall scheme.

_____________________

3. Boston Celtics:

Celtics

I’m not a fan of green, but this shade works very well.

_____________________

4. Houston Rockets:

Rockets

A good shade of red works very well.

_____________________

5. Philadelphia 76’ers / Detroit Pistons / Los Angeles Clippers:

Sixers
Sixers

Pistons
Pistons

Clippers
Clippers

Royal Blue and red is a decent scheme, but the blue is a bit too bright. The reds are a bit too bright also.

_____________________

6. Washington Wizards / Atlanta Hawks:

Wizards
Wizards

Hawks
Hawks

Red and Navy is a good color scheme but the needless addition of silver ruins it.

_____________________

7. Los Angeles Lakers / Golden State Warriors / Indiana Pacers / Denver Nuggets:

Lakers
Lakers

Warriors
Warriors

Pacers
Pacers

Nuggets
Nuggets

A good color scheme. The Lakers got it right, the Warriors lost points for “California Golden Yellow,” the Pacers needlessly added silver, and the Nuggets use two contrasting shades of blue which would work well by themselves, but are awful together.

_____________________

8. San Antonio Spurs / Brooklyn Nets:

Nets
Nets

Spurs
Spurs

In a word, bland.

_____________________

9. Charlotte Hornets:

Hornets

It worked well in the 1990’s but this is 2014, and the color scheme is dated.

_____________________

10. Dallas Mavericks / Minnesota Timberwolves / Orlando Magic / Sacramento Kings:

Mavericks
Mavericks

Timberwolves
Timberwolves

Magic
Magic

Kings
Kings

Blue, black, and silver, another color scheme that was cutting edge in the 1990’s, but now just looks dated and a bit cliche.

_____________________

11. Cleveland Cavaliers:

Cavalliers

Red and yellow is a good color scheme, but the red and yellow used here is much too dark.

_____________________

12. Phoenix Suns / New York Knickerbockers:

Suns
Suns

Knicks
Knicks

Orange and blue is difficult enough to work with, but the Knicks have an orange and a blue that is too bright, and a needless addition of silver. The Suns have two somewhat contrasting shades of orange, as well as too dark of a purple and the needless addition of black.

_____________________

13. Milwaukee Bucks:

Bucks

The only time Red and green work is at Christmas, and the silver does not help at all.

_____________________

14. New Orleans Pelicans:

Pelicans

Dark blue and gold don’t work, red and gold works well, the trifecta just looks awful.

_____________________

15. Memphis Grizzlies

Grizzlies

Three unattractive and contrasting shades of blue-check. Stupid color names-check. Dead last in the NBA-check.

. . . . .

Thanks, Dave — that’s certainly a unique (and very interesting!) way of looking at the teams in the various leagues. I’m sure it will generate a fair amount of discussion (and hopefully not too much controversy) in the comments — I’m glad Paul’s not “around” to see #13 in your MLB rankings.

Readers — now it’s your turn…what say YOU?

Line

all sport uni tweaksUni Tweaks Concepts

We have another new set of tweaks, er…concepts today — a rare weekday appearance!.

So if you’ve concept for any sport, or just a tweak or wholesale revision, send them my way. The number of concept submissions has been way down recently — so readers — if you do have a concept you’d like featured, please begin (again) sending them in!

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

Click on any to enlarge:

~~~

First up today is Oliver Kodner, who has a concept for the old ABA team, the Spirits of St. Louis (what a great name!):

Spirits of St. Louis Logo - Oliver Kodner
Spirits of St. Louis original logo

Spirits of St. Louis home - Oliver Kodner

Spirits of St. Louis Road - Oliver Kodner

Dear Donald Sterling, or, Steve Balmer? Adam Silver…. kidding, Hey Phil.

With some of that LA Clippers talk, I was thinking of a relocation to St. Louis, and a nice rebrand of the Spirits, so I decided to upgrade the old Spirits logo into something good looking.

Oliver Kodner

. . .

And we close today with Douglas Eidsmore with some tweaks to the 49ers:

49er38 - Douglas Eidsmore

KaepTweetUni - Douglas Eidsmore

Hello Phil.

Here are a couple of photos of my Niner redesign.

I replaced the truncated white stripes with a single gold band at the bottom of the sleeve for two reasons; the white stripes were hardly visible and I wanted gold on the jersey since the teams colors are red an gold.

I widened the red stripes on the helmet and pants so that red is the dominant triple stripe color not white.

And I made the face mask a flat gold color instead of gray so the mask and helmet present a unified image.

I welcome your and your readers comments and feed back.

Thanks

Douglas Eidsmore

. . .

And that’s it for today. Let’s get back on the concept wagon, folks, ok? OK!

Line

Too Good For the Ticker
Too Good…

for the Ticker

Some neato Baltimore Orioles history/mystery(?) today from Dave Holland, who sent me the following e-mail:

Phil-

Sorry this is too late for the flocked helmet section, but it might make a good sleuth project.

Attached are photos of the Orioles 1955 helmets with an old style “B”. These are taken at Griffith Stadium in DC and at Yankee Stadium.

I’ve never seen any pictures of these worn in a game. The only ones I could find are helmets, not hats. Why is manager Paul Richards wearing a helmet, anyway?

American Needle Wear touts these as being worn as a hat in 1955, but their picture doesn’t support that claim. New Era doesn’t carry this cap.

Also attached are Buck Showalter wearing one and a rare photo of their full 1955 road uniform with “Orioles” in orange (with their 1955 home uni thrown in for good measure.). The previous inaugural year uniform had a different script in black and starting in 1956, the road jersey would have “Baltimore” on the front.

I’ve done all the research I can, hopefully another Uni Watcher can provide more info.

Thanks for filling in for Paul,

Dave Holland

Here flocked helmet images, with the “Old Style B” he sent to accompany the e-mail (click to enlarge):

1955 (5) 1955 (4)

1955 (3)

1955 (2) 1955 (1)

Here’s Buck Showalter sporting the same Old Style B on a cap:

1955 hat Buck

And finally, here are some nice looks at some early Orioles uniforms:

1956-57 Road
1956-1957 Road Uniform

1954 Road 1955 Road (1)
1954 Road Uniform — 1955 Road Uniform

1955-57 Home(1) 1955-57 Home
1955 – 1957 Home Uniform

Sweet pictures, and a bit of a mystery to boot!

Thanks to Dave for bringing this to our attention!

. . .

Great stuff. OK, now onto the ticker…

Line

[Today’s ticker was mostly complied by Garret McGrath]

Baseball News: Does it get any prettier than this? Reader JediJeff sent in this post of pictures of all the Chicago Cubs programs from 1948 to the present. … The Atlanta Braves and Oakland Athletics will both wear throwbacks from 1914 this weekend (thanks, Phil). … The Norfolk Tides are going to be in gnome uniforms on Friday (thanks, Phil). … Cute story: Yesterday’s lede mentioned the Nolan Ryan bobblehead giveaway the Mets had. Kenny Kaplan is very good friends with Nolan Ryan’s son Reid. “When I got the bobblehead I sent it to Reid who gave it to his son Jackson.” So here is a picture of Nolan’s grandson with the bobblehead, Jackson Ryan. … You don’t think proper hosiery instantly makes a uniform look better? Well, here’s Matt Carpenter on Monday and here’s Matt Carpenter last night (thanks to Matt Larsen). Very odd that he’d wear red sanis though (h/t to Trent Knaphus for the screenshot). … The Phillies and Angels both wore Jim Fregosi patches last night (thanks to Harrison Tishler). Here’s how they looked on the jerseys (thanks, Paul)

NFL/CFL News: Tennessee Titan Justin Hunter’s NOB has been changed to JAG: Just Another Guy after failing to convert a route in last Saturday’s preseason game against the Packers (from Andrew Costentino). … Program from the Baltimore Colts NFL intrasquad game on August 12th, 1957. … Buccaneers coach Lovie Smith was wearing some sort of access pass on his belt prior to last Friday’s preseason game, (thanks, Paul), which reminded Paul of John Madden’s old look. … The Toronto Argonauts have revealed their alt uni (via Ed Zelaski. More here (thanks to Seth Moorman).

College/High School Football News: LSU has updated their jersey numbers for this coming season. … The Rutgers Scarlet Knight has had a Big Ten Conference makeover which means he went BFBS (from Justin Lesko). … Stephen F. Austin State University in Nachogdoches, TX has posted pictures of their new uniform (from Chris Mycoskie). … The University at Buffalo will wear alternate black helmets for their game on September 12th against the Baylor Bears (thanks, Phil). … College Spun ranked the top 10 most iconic college football unis of all time (thanks, Phil). … Uni Watch friend Andrew Lind has documented the evolution of Nike college football uniforms. … Diamond Ranch Academy in Utah has a bizarre football field design and uniforms. The numbers have a snake skin design on them to go along with a diamondback logo on the back of the helmet. Says submitter Dom Lewis, “The font used in the word “DBACKS” on the back of the uniform is clearly from the MLB’s Arizona Diamondbacks.” Paul & I both think we’ve seen that field before, but those unis are a new one. Yowsa. … The Kansas Jayhawks are getting new red, er crimson chrome unis (there’s a video link in that tweet), with a hat tip to Chris Boykin. Cuz, you know, KU didn’t have enough unis and combos already. Here’s another look (via Cyclone Uniforms).

NBA News: New NBA city Charlotte is a All-Star game candidate city and has a prospective logo. … Possible leak alert: “Is the Team USA basketball leaking their 2014 roster early by selling these jerseys?” asks Matt Nelson. … The Sacremento Kings have officially unveiled uniform updates for 2014-15 season (via Tony MacLopez).

Grab Bag: An article about the never used Wichita State University Shockers logo (from Gavin Shank). … Uni Watch reader Tim Cross flew in a Steelers plane on his Bermuda trip. … Paul sends in this Gawker article entitled “Army Workout Clothes Get More Fly–Still Stank, Though.” … “I was browsing reddit earlier tonight and found this link for quite the unusual St Louis Blues jersey,” writes Jason Tierney. “Additionally the comments section some high quality links to some of the uglier jerseys known in existence.” … Here’s a first look at the Notre Dame Hockey practice jersey (from Warren Junium.

. . . . . . . . . .

winooski_plantsale_raffle_2007_logo_1Raffle reminder: Remember, we’re currently raffling off three copies of this visual compendium of baseball uniform history.

Full details here.

Line

And that going to do it for this fine Wednesday. Hope everyone has a good one and I’ll catch you all tomorrow!

Follow me on Twitter @PhilHecken.

Peace.

.. … ..

“Steve Ballmer has been confirmed as the new owner of the LA Clippers. The transaction has closed. Since the Clippers name is overwhelmingly mired in memories of losing and Donald Sterling, I wonder if the Clippers will use the fresh start as a catalyst for a re-brand. Can/should we launch a design contest?”
–Mike Engle

Line

152 comments to A New Twist on Lists – Ranking the Leagues by Color Schemes, Part I

  • The Jeff | August 13, 2014 at 7:11 am |

    I feel I should point out that the Mets don’t wear navy & orange, they wear royal blue and orange. I also think there should be a distinction between teams that wear navy with red trim and those who wear red with navy trim.

    • Gregg G. | August 13, 2014 at 7:25 am |

      Yeah, you beat me to it. Mets blue is not even close to navy.

      I always thought the Dodgers wore “Dodger Blue.”

    • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 7:40 am |

      If you click on the bold team name, you’ll see the Mets colors are there (same for every team when multiple teams are listed).

      It would have been too cumbersome to fit graphics for all of the teams listed in a single section.

      You can blame me for this, since I thought including a visual inline would be helpful. But Dave did include a graphic for each team — they’re just hyperlinked in the bold.

      • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 8:00 am |

        I updated the main article to note that each team is represented, and to click on that team to see the color palette. I also noted that when multiple teams are listed, the graphic represents only one of the teams in the group. Hope this makes things more clear.

        Apologies for any confusion caused.

        • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 9:23 am |

          That makes sense, although I wouldn’t have lumped the Lakers in with the Warriors, Pacers and Nuggets. “Royal Purple” is not blue.

        • Kevin Zdancewicz | August 13, 2014 at 9:43 am |

          If you weren’t going to include a picture of every team’s colors, I would have just listed the teams with links to the colors. Uni Watch is all about attention to detail and the way some of these are grouped lacks this quality. In addition to some of the other examples already mentioned, the Mavs/Wolves/Magic/Kings one is a pretty lazy grouping.

        • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 9:52 am |

          “If you weren’t going to include a picture of every team’s colors, I would have just listed the teams with links to the colors.”

          ~~~

          The article as laid out originally WAS just a list with links, and visually it looked lacking. I actually took about two hours “creating” the individual team palette boxes you see beneath the teams, because I needed to put a border around them because almost every team ends with “white” in the palette and if a border isn’t around it, it blends right into the page.

          I thought putting each teams image below the team, but when Dave grouped them together, that got unwieldy, so I just left one image to “represent” the group. A mistake, in retrospect, since, for example, the Lakers’ purple/gold is grouped with the Pacers/Warriors/Nuggets blue/gold (I can’t speak for Dave as to why these are grouped together – I would not have put the Lakers with those other teams).

          Again, I apologize for the confusion. But had the article appeared with “just” text and bolded links, it would not have had the visual pop.

  • Matt | August 13, 2014 at 7:13 am |

    It’s the University AT Buffalo not the University of Buffalo.

    • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 7:41 am |

      Fixed, thanks.

  • Frank | August 13, 2014 at 7:28 am |

    Nitpicky maybe, but shouldn’t the T’Wolves have forest green as a secondary or tertiary color?

  • DenverGregg | August 13, 2014 at 7:31 am |

    No Rockies or Marlins? Why the giant discrepancy between the Brewers and Padres for their similar schemes?

    • Brian | August 13, 2014 at 8:27 am |

      And only that, under the Brewers he said “though if the gold was lighter it might work better” and when it comes to the Padres, the color “sand” looks like a lighter shade of gold in comparison to the Brewers, but the Padres are on the bottom with “no redeeming qualities”.

      • Straw | August 13, 2014 at 12:26 pm |

        Couldn’t agree with you more. The list makes very little sense.

    • DenverGregg | August 13, 2014 at 10:23 am |

      A slightly more granular take (I split up the blue/orange and red/white/blue to account for shades and relative emphases of red vs. blue – also I penalize a bit for use of too many colors YMMV):

      1 A’s
      2 Rays
      3 Pirates
      4 Mets
      5 Astros
      6 Tigers
      7 White Sox
      8 Rockies
      t9 Giants Orioles
      11 Brewers
      12 Padres
      13 Yankees
      14 Mariners
      15 Dodgers
      16 Blue Jays
      17 Royals
      t18 Cubs Rangers
      t20 Twins Braves Indians Red Sox
      24 Angels
      t25 Cardinals Nationals
      27 Reds
      28 Phillies
      29 Marlins
      30 D’baacks

      • Straw | August 13, 2014 at 12:24 pm |

        Thanks for putting the Padres where they should have been.

  • The Jeff | August 13, 2014 at 7:41 am |

    Green and gold don’t mix very well

    Wait, what? You’re just asking for the city of Green Bay to hunt you down now.

    Now that I’ve read the whole list a couple times… there’s some bad inconsistencies. The Bulls red/black/white is on top of the NBA, but the Reds red/black/white is “ruined by the addition of black”. That seems like you’re not judging color schemes, but the uniform – which is exactly what you said you aren’t doing. Same thing for the Brewers vs Padres that DenverGregg mentioned above me. Also, the Lakers under the royal blue & gold (and the earlier mentioned Mets as navy)? What the hell, man? I think someone got a bit lazy or was trying to save too much page space or something.

    • The Jeff | August 13, 2014 at 7:47 am |

      Ok, I’ll blame Phil for the Mets & Lakers, but my other issues stand.

    • Thomas J | August 13, 2014 at 10:48 am |

      There aren’t many things that are Uni-Watch blasphemy but saying green and gold don’t mix might be one of them.

      • Judy | August 13, 2014 at 3:57 pm |

        The only thing that reaches that same level of Uni-Watch blasphemy is to say that the Lakers got their colors right. Green / gold bad, purple / gold good? Paul would be so sad.

  • Dan | August 13, 2014 at 7:49 am |

    Well, this was easily one of the worst lead articles I’ve read on this site. On a site dedicated to nuances and details, to lump in similar schemes as “the same” (Tigers and Mets are waaaaaay more different than this would have you believe) and then to grade the same color schemes differently from league to league? I see what he was going for. He was not successful. As a teacher, if I were handed this I’d grade it an F and ask for a redo with more explanation and information.

    • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 8:41 am |

      It’s an interesting thought experiment, but the execution and presentation leave something to be desired.

    • random reader | August 13, 2014 at 9:29 am |

      I stopped reading when I saw the Mets were grouped with the Astros and Tigers for having a similar color scheme. The Mets’ shade of blue is nowhere close to what the Tigers and Astros use.

  • Ryan | August 13, 2014 at 8:04 am |

    In what world do Green and Gold not mix very well with each other? The A’s have one of, if not the best color scheme in all of baseball. Not to mention this site’s own logo uses that color scheme and looks quite good, if you ask me. I can’t wait for Paul to get back….

  • Bush League Bill | August 13, 2014 at 8:10 am |

    So to sum up, you hate almost every color scheme?

  • Jack | August 13, 2014 at 8:12 am |

    Wow I never knew that the lakers wore blue as well as the suns!!!! Get a clue already!

    • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 8:17 am |

      If you click on each team individually, you will see the individual color scheme (this was explained up above).

      I’m not sure why Dave grouped the teams in this way, but you can blame me for the image beneath the group — neverthelese, each team is represented and you can see the colors for the individual teams by clicking on each of them individually.

      For example if you click on Lakers, you see the purple/gold graphic.

      • Tim | August 13, 2014 at 8:47 am |

        It’s still missing two MLB teams though.

    • BvK1126 | August 13, 2014 at 11:20 am |

      “Wow I never knew that the lakers wore blue”

      For what it’s worth, the Lakers’ shade of purple is sometimes referred to as “Forum blue.” That said, I agree that equating the Lakers and Suns’ purple color schemes with teams that wear blue makes no sense. As I’m sure Paul would point out, there’s a big difference between purple and blue.

      • BvK1126 | August 13, 2014 at 11:24 am |

        I just noticed the Sacramento Kings and their purple color scheme are also lumped in with a bunch of teams that wear blue. My same objection still stands.

      • DJ | August 13, 2014 at 1:50 pm |

        Once Jerry Buss bought the Lakers from Jack Kent Cooke, they began calling it “royal purple.” The “Forum Blue” name was all Cooke — he loved the color purple, but hated the name “purple.”

  • Brady | August 13, 2014 at 8:13 am |

    The Spirits were the only Pro Basketball game I have ever been to, I was 6 or 7. Loved it-move to the STL!

  • Randy | August 13, 2014 at 8:29 am |

    The Brewers’ metallic gold doesn’t look like the actual color they use. It seems gray to me.

  • Steve | August 13, 2014 at 8:33 am |

    I would like to see a write up on those incredible sleeve patches on the Baltimore uniforms from the fifties.

  • MJ | August 13, 2014 at 8:34 am |

    I’m with The Jeff on this one. In addition to all the previously listed gripes, the Rays’ light/navy blue combo is stellar. That and the green/athletic gold combos are unique and top 5. Red +/- white +/- blue is so trite and ubiquitous that no iteration of them belong at the top of the list. It’s great to root for the red, white and blue, but they’re overdone.

    • walter | August 13, 2014 at 9:37 am |

      Different shades of blue work well together, but a wide degree of separation is needed for contrast. Columbia blue+Navy blue=good. Medium blue+Dark blue=bad.

      • DJ | August 13, 2014 at 9:55 am |

        I don’t know…I like the Blue Jays’ use of royal and navy blue. But the navy blue is used sparingly.

        • walter | August 13, 2014 at 10:22 am |

          True, the last time I voiced this point of view, I got a commenter asking for some love for the St. Louis Blues uniform, so my opinion is only my opinion.

  • Simply Moono | August 13, 2014 at 8:45 am |

    And I emerge from the depths of hell to talk about something that I didn’t get to yesterday:

    Looking at the SEC circle logo post, I was slightly salty that they didn’t include the CIF logo.

    • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 12:13 pm |

      I missed that one from yesterday too.

      Oddly enough, I just noticed something about the SEC’s diamond logo: the font that makes up the letters SEC is the same one used for the titles for Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan!

  • Jesse | August 13, 2014 at 8:46 am |

    1. I know Phil happens to be a big fan of the green and gold color scheme, to which I agree
    2. I would like to point out how you say Red, black and white doesn’t work for the Reds yet you love it for the Bulls.

    • Mainspark | August 13, 2014 at 9:30 am |

      Jesse – You beat me to it. He loves the Bulls’ red white and black but the Reds’ red, white and black is “ruined”?

      • David Firestone | August 13, 2014 at 3:01 pm |

        Explain how a team called the “REDS” needs a color other than RED in their color scheme.

        • Dan | August 13, 2014 at 6:19 pm |

          When you explain how that is judging just a color scheme by itself.

  • Jesse | August 13, 2014 at 8:48 am |

    That was supposed to read “Paul”, not ” Phil”. Haven’t had my coffee yet this morning…

    • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 8:50 am |

      Phil is a very big fan of the green and gold color scheme as well.

  • James | August 13, 2014 at 8:48 am |

    ‘New’ NBA city Charlotte? As in 1988 is more recent than the 1940’s sure, but…

    • terriblehuman | August 13, 2014 at 10:35 am |

      Seriously, there are three NBA cities newer than Charlotte (Toronto, Memphis, OKC), four if you include the Borough of Brooklyn.

        • terriblehuman | August 13, 2014 at 1:54 pm |

          I thought about the Huskies too, but if you read your link:

          The teams were part of the Basketball Association of America, the forerunner to the NBA.

        • Jim Vilk | August 13, 2014 at 5:55 pm |

          I read it. And it counts. The NBA says the first game in league history was played in Toronto, with the Huskies hosting the Knicks. Same league, different name.

    • Frank | August 13, 2014 at 1:59 pm |

      Was there a time gap in between the Hornets leaving and the Bobcats’ (now the rebranded Hornets) inaugural season? Even if you count just the Bobcats, Charlotte still isn’t really a ‘new’ NBA city.

      • terriblehuman | August 13, 2014 at 2:10 pm |

        The original Hornets left in 2002 and the Bobcats joined in 2004, and the Bob/nets will be entering their 10th season. So yeah, weird use of “new”.

        • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 3:10 pm |

          It should be noted that while Toronto has yet to host an All-Star Game (though is slated to do so in 2016), Charlotte hosted one back in 1991.

  • Fite Club | August 13, 2014 at 8:54 am |

    Silver & Black is bland?

    Bah!

    • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 10:59 am |

      Not to mention that blue & white “is a simple, yet very elegant and very attractive color scheme”, green & white and red & white top the list, yet black & white is “in a word, bland.”

      I get that at some level all these decisions boil down to personal aesthetics, but I’d like to see some sort of reasoning behind it.

  • CWac19 | August 13, 2014 at 8:58 am |

    Could not disagree more with David’s conclusion regarding contrasting shades of blue. Could. Not. Disagree. More.

    • Straw | August 13, 2014 at 12:20 pm |

      Great. response. thank. you.

  • LT | August 13, 2014 at 9:05 am |

    I don’t think that listing Durant (off the team), Paul George (injured) and James Harden constitutes a leak of the 2014 roster.

  • Bernard | August 13, 2014 at 9:11 am |

    Dear David Firestone,

    You will probably catch grief for these rankings all day, but as long as you have the Pirates and the Bulls at number one in their respective lists, you’re okay in my book.

    Just make sure the Steelers and Blackhawks are number one in their respective lists too, or you will no longer be okay in my book.

    • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 9:14 am |

      What if only one of those teams is #1?

      • Bernard | August 13, 2014 at 9:27 am |

        Then he should redo the other list.

        • JTH | August 13, 2014 at 12:00 pm |

          What if it’s the Bruins and Falcons topping their respective lists?

          Hmmmmmmm…..?

    • Judy | August 13, 2014 at 4:02 pm |

      The Giants and the Orioles should top the MLB list, although I’d reluctantly give the edge to the Giants for their cream colored unis. But as long as Washington tops the list for the NFL, it’s all good.

  • adam treiber | August 13, 2014 at 9:15 am |

    thats funny that two of the three USA jersey’s that they are selling are guys that arent gonna be on the final roster (# 8 George), # 5 Durant)

    • CJ | August 13, 2014 at 9:20 am |

      I was thinking the same thing. Those were probably the 3 player jerseys that Fanatics bought into, and they wanted to be the first people out there with them online, so they put the stock, Nike photos online. Being a former employee of major licensed retailers, I can tell you that is a common practice. You want to show the customers that you have the product, and sometimes you get burnt, especially when a player gets injured (George) or a player pulls out of the event (Durant).

  • Britton Thomas | August 13, 2014 at 9:19 am |

    Green and gold aren’t a good look? UniWatch blasphemy!

  • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 9:26 am |

    I think this is a great idea for an article, and I commend David for all his work putting it together, but the inconsistencies and unsupported opinions are driving me crazy.

    • Jeff H | August 13, 2014 at 4:57 pm |

      *Slow clap.*

  • Mainspark | August 13, 2014 at 9:40 am |
  • Kyle | August 13, 2014 at 10:03 am |

    So its just each teams colors with a comment on whether or not he thinks they look good?

    The page made me yearn for the cool graphs at the Sports Design Blog analyzing pro league colors in an easy to see graph.

    http://www.thesportsdesignblog.com/2011/05/17/team-colors-by-sport/

  • Hawk | August 13, 2014 at 10:08 am |

    Does it strike anyone else as odd that two teams are throwing back to cities in which they no longer play? (Boston Braves & Philadelphia A’s)

    • Motown | August 13, 2014 at 11:15 am |

      It doesn’t strike me as odd since those cities are part of their histories. It’s odd when teams like Oklahoma City deny their Seattle roots.

      On another note related to the throwback game, who else is crossing their fingers that Bob Melvin wears a suit like Connie Mack?

      • terriblehuman | August 13, 2014 at 11:30 am |

        It’s odd when teams like Oklahoma City deny their Seattle roots.

        It’s the other way around, actually – it was part of the agreement when Clay Bennett moved the team that the Thunder wasn’t allowed to keep any of the Sonics history or stats (sort of like how Cleveland kept all the Browns history when the original team moved to Baltimore).

        • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 12:35 pm |

          That’s not actually true.

          Bennett wasn’t allowed to take the physical trophies, but the Thunder took the history with them. He also still owns the colors and logo, but will give them to a new Seattle team if wanted. And at that point the Thunder will “share” the Sonics’ history.

          This expresses itself in odd ways – new players on the Thunder can’t wear numbers retired by the Sonics, even though the Thunder won’t acknowledge the Sonics’ championship with a patch on their uniforms.

    • Ferdinand Cesarano | August 13, 2014 at 11:48 am |

      If by “odd” you mean “absolutely wonderful”, then yes.

      As I said yesterday about the Giants’ giveaway of 1954 World Championship rings, it’s great that Major League Baseball teams tend to acknowledge their full histories. The A’s, Braves, and Giants each represent one continuous entity, just as the Yankees, Cardinals, and Tigers do.

      Even the Orioles showed their respect for history a few times, donning St. Louis Browns uniforms:

      http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kl-4VYh7R3Y/SP0vKlaAvyI/AAAAAAAAA4k/kc1bI1X1yic/s320/04MORAUD.JPG

      https://d13csqd2kn0ewr.cloudfront.net/uploads/image/file/44863/cropped_Baltimore_St_Louis.jpg

      And before anyone objects that the teams’ main motive is to sell gear, I’ll say: so what? I hope they all sell a ton of throwback gear, because the upshot is that people (especially kiddies) gain an understanding of the facts of history.

      And we need more acknowledgement of the facts of history, not less. (Looking at you, Expos/Nationals).

      • Gusto4044 | August 13, 2014 at 12:51 pm |

        Agree about the occasional nod to history of a relocated team, it would be foolish to ignore those teams and players. But talking about Jimmie Foxx and those 1929 Philadelphia A’s in the context of today’s Oakland A’s is as general of a statement as talking about the number of college football championships in the state of Florida. And I’ve never seen a Mel Ott throwback jersey at a San Francisco Giants game.

        It’s just factually incorrect to call the A’s, Braves, and Giants continuous entities the same way we regard the Yankees, Cardinals, and Tigers. They aren’t, regardless of whether ownership changed hands at the point of relocation. It’s not the complete name of the team, and that makes all the difference in the world.

        Sports teams aren’t like McDonald’s franchises across the country, which are virtually identical to one another. You don’t walk in and order a burger and see the town name on the person behind the counter. The entity changes as soon as the first pitch is thrown at the new location, and the history, accomplishments, and memories are played out.

        To be honest and accurate is always the best way to go, and this isn’t brain surgery. Almost no Atlanta Braves fan has any ties to the old days in Milwaukee(that was back in 1965). And to have that Atlanta fan going on about Warren Spahn in the same way Chipper Jones is remembered is absolutely hilarious.

        Summing up, it’s fine to talk about the past in general terms for these relocated teams, but they’re different as entities as compared to the traditional teams in one city.

        • Ferdinand Cesarano | August 13, 2014 at 1:13 pm |

          Mel Ott’s and Christy Mathewson’s names are displayed alongside those of Willie Mays and Willie McCovey on display of Giants’ retired numbers; Ott and Mathewson played before there were uniform numbers, so their plaques say “NY” instead of a number.

          There is a statue of Warren Spahn outside the Braves’ ballpark.

          Before Game 1 of the 1972 World Series, the A’s had Lefty Grove throw out the first pitch, as he had been the star of the last A’s team to win a pennant, in 1931.

          Also, a change of ownership has nothing to do with the continuity of a franchise; all teams (whether they move or not) change ownership eventually.

          If you want to be honest and factual, then you have to acknowlege that a team remains a continuous entity, regardless of any relocations or any changes of ownership.

        • scott | August 13, 2014 at 2:07 pm |

          So Willie Mays was playing with a different entity when the Giants moved from New York to San Francisco?

          The Nationals do acknowledge their previous history as the Expos; I believe Carter and Dawson are listed among the players in their ring of honor.

        • Ferdinand Cesarano | August 13, 2014 at 2:31 pm |

          It’s true that the Nationals placed Carter and Dawson in their ring of honour. Unfortunately, however, the team does not acknowledge the Expos’ retired numbers. And the Nationals’ logo says “Est. 1905”, despite the fact that the team was actually established in 1969.

        • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 3:42 pm |

          The problem with the Nats and Washington baseball history is that there are two other current, active teams involved, and neither team has completely relinquished their Washington history.

          The Twins did give up the Senators name when they moved, but continue to acknowledge their 60 seasons as the Nationals/Senators, including the 1924 World Series championship. The Rangers still control the Senators name, only relinquishing the curly-W logo upon the formation of the Nationals, and still consider their 12 years as the second incarnation of the Senators as part of their history.

  • Payne Lubbers | August 13, 2014 at 10:13 am |

    If you guys like uni-watch, come check out my blog Numbers & Threads! We talk jerseys, uniforms, and everything sports!

  • Jim Vilk | August 13, 2014 at 10:19 am |

    Two contrasting shades of blue is not a good look at all.

    Wow. You lost me there. And every Villanova or Tornto Argonauts fan.

    • walter | August 13, 2014 at 10:29 am |

      To say nothing of the Houston Aeros, Kansas City Royals, UNC Tar Heels, Dallas Cowboys, Pittsburgh Penguins, University of Rhode Island Rams… shall I go on?

    • Sean | August 13, 2014 at 11:08 am |

      I love light blue and navy blue. The Pens throwbacks are great. The U of Maine has the same colors. Really nice looking uniforms. Those colors work great together.

      Same with green and gold. A underused color scheme that works very well.

  • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 10:27 am |

    OK — as of 10:25 am EST, I have updated the post to reflect ALL the MLB teams graphically.

    I hope this ends the confusion. I’ll try to get the NBA teams done as well.

    • JTH | August 13, 2014 at 11:49 am |

      EST? Dammit, Phil. Can’t you do anything right today?

    • just Joe | August 13, 2014 at 1:01 pm |

      Except the Braves…although, to be fair, the Braves have been missing since the All-Star break.

    • Paulie Walnuts | August 14, 2014 at 1:11 am |

      Yet the Rockies and Marlins are absent.

  • DenverGregg | August 13, 2014 at 10:46 am |

    ICYMI a funny take on some new CFB helmets at EDSBS: here.

  • Tom V. | August 13, 2014 at 10:50 am |

    I think Davids post is a good fundamental start to identifying the best jerseys (or ones favorite jerseys) in sports. Most jerseys are not a huge mishmash of a dozen colors, just a few colors usually at most. Your favorite colors (or color combinations) are going to dictate your favorite jerseys.

    Which is why I disagree when Paul ranks the 122 uniforms, so many times uncreative uniforms make it very high on the list because of their legendary status, like the Yankees, who in a vacuum have a pretty blah uniform. I’d rather watch color on color games with the chiefs and the vikings, mets and marlins, reds and A’s, etc. Ducks (black) versus Rangers (white), complete visual snoozer.

  • Thomas J | August 13, 2014 at 10:50 am |

    At first glance the Argonauts’ special event uniform looks nice. Giant chest logo but otherwise restrained.

    Then you notice that the sleeve details aren’t solid Columbia blue. They fade from Columbia to navy.

    • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 12:23 pm |

      Ugh, good catch…

      WHY did they have to do that.

      Lee

  • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 10:59 am |

    Like I said in a reply above, I think that the color discussion is a great concept; I just think the article could use a bit more polish. It doesn’t help that the leagues aren’t complete (the Marlins and Rockies missing from the MLB listing; the Thunder and Jazz from the NBA).

    I’d like to think that, given some additional time to work it out, a more creative and interesting way to provide visual representation in-line with the article could be devised. Just having the color swatches makes me feel like I’m browsing the paint section at the hardware store. The palettes should remain text links; maybe a collage of images relating to the teams and their colors would work better. Logos? Player images? I’m just spitballing here now, trying to offer some constructive criticism.

    The Orioles item in particular intrigues me today; I do find it curious that they’d have a different logo on their helmets, though given the bird on the hat at the time, I wonder if the “B” might’ve just been easier to produce for the helmets? I’d love to see someone out there in the uni-sphere find out more about that little quirk.

    • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 11:06 am |

      I rather like the “paint chip” approach. It’s a really unique take on an old conversation, stripping everything away and leaving just the colors.

      Or at least it should, but it’s clear from the descriptions that sometimes logos & uniforms are included in the evaluation and sometimes it’s just the colors themselves.

      • DJ | August 13, 2014 at 8:27 pm |

        Sure. I liked that electric blue/black/charcoal/silver combination that the Blue Jays used to wear. It was just the wrong color set for the Toronto Blue Jays.

    • David Firestone | August 13, 2014 at 2:46 pm |

      I admit I bit off more than I could chew for this project.

  • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 11:02 am |

    And…at 11:00 am, the NBA is now finished.

    Hope this clears up any further confusion.

    • Ben Fortney | August 13, 2014 at 11:46 am |

      Thanks Phil, just read it now, not confused at all… except for David’s opinions.

  • jrod3737 | August 13, 2014 at 11:11 am |

    Can we change it to “devolution of Nike college football uniforms?”

    • BvK1126 | August 13, 2014 at 11:33 am |

      Seriously! But kudos to Andrew Lind for the great work on chronicling Nike’s template changes. That’s some impressive attention to detail!

  • Vee63 | August 13, 2014 at 11:12 am |

    Love that Argos alt! Good to take some chances with the large logo, I think it works.

    • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 11:30 am |

      Personally, I’d like to see the Argos bring this 1995 jersey back as an alt. Though, granted, they went 4-14 that year, and just about the only thing the Argos had going for them was Pinball Clemons.

      • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 12:28 pm |

        I think comparing this newest throwback to the 1995 jersey you linked made me realize something… I can handle a large letter on the jersey front for a football team, but a picture of something just looks awful. To me.

        That 1995 jersey is HORRIBLE, as were the other CFL uniforms of the era that incorporated pictures.

        Lee

      • walter | August 13, 2014 at 2:56 pm |

        Ehhh.. trying to do something really different with a football uniform is a thankless task. Not everyone gets to be the Bears, Steelers, or Raiders. Though I generally dislike the sublimated picture on the jersey front, the Argonauts’ results came out the best of a bad bunch. I’d also use the Acme Packers’ approach or leather straps pattern. It sure beats boring.

    • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 12:26 pm |

      I don’t hate this new Argonauts throwback, but feel they messed it up with the gradient.
      Just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you should.

      Lee

      • BvK1126 | August 13, 2014 at 2:33 pm |

        The Argos’ new third uniforms aren’t great, but compared to those monstrosities the Roughriders are going to wear, they’re absolute freaking masterpieces.

  • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 11:16 am |

    Great visual history of the Orioles’ “B” helmets. Like Rob S, I’d love to learn more about the thinking behind it.

  • Alec | August 13, 2014 at 11:29 am |

    David Firestone, I give you two words that destroy much of you subjective choices: color theory.

    Orange & blue don’t work well together? Puh-leaze.

    • Ben Fortney | August 13, 2014 at 11:48 am |

      Bingo. Color Theory 101.

      (But it’s just one man’s opinion.)

  • FJ | August 13, 2014 at 11:37 am |

    Wow, it’s like 1993 never happened!

    • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 4:10 pm |

      I’m trying to figure out what you’re referencing, and failing.

      • Rob S | August 13, 2014 at 10:54 pm |

        And a-duh! Somehow it wasn’t registering when I saw that earlier. *facepalm*

    • walter | August 13, 2014 at 4:34 pm |

      Is that the year the National League added Miami and Denver?

      • Phil Hecken | August 13, 2014 at 10:07 pm |

        No. That was the year they added Florida and Colorado.

  • Vee63 | August 13, 2014 at 11:49 am |

    One thing I will agree with on the colour rankings is black and yellow at the top – I always thought this was the most unscrewupable colour scheme in sports. It might not always be perfect, but can anyone think of a black and yellow jersey that looked absolutely horrible? I can’t.

    • The Jeff | August 13, 2014 at 12:04 pm |

      Apparently you’ve mentally blocked out the Steelers 1933 and 1934 throwback jerseys.

      • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 12:29 pm |

        Eh, I like them. As long as they are the only team to use the template.

        Lee

    • JTH | August 13, 2014 at 12:13 pm |

      It might not always be perfect, but can anyone think of a black and yellow jersey that looked absolutely horrible? I can’t.

      I can.

      Pooh Bear.

      • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 12:30 pm |

        Oh, wow, you’re right.

        Lee

  • Ben Fortney | August 13, 2014 at 11:51 am |

    re Cubs programs:
    1952 features a baseball headed man. 2 years before the appearance of Mr. Red and 10 years before Mr. Met.

  • Thresh8 | August 13, 2014 at 12:04 pm |

    This seems like the day to ask:

    Am I wrong to want to call the Lakers’ gold* “yellow” because I consider the Saints’ gold* “gold”?

    “Gold” is a better-sounding and -reading word than “yellow” in almost any circumstance, but the pedant in me just wonders.

    Otherwise, did the St Louis Rams change from “royal blue and gold” to “navy and gold” in the c. 2000 updates?

    (*Random examples)

    • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 12:31 pm |

      That sound you may have heard is the sound of a can of worms opening.

      (I agree with you, btw. The Packers wear yellow, the 49ers wear gold.)

      Lee

      • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 1:02 pm |

        If you admit a distinction between teal and light blue, then yellow and athletic gold aren’t the same color either.

        • The Jeff | August 13, 2014 at 1:19 pm |

          That argument might work, if there were any professional teams actually using such obviously different shades of yellow. But there aren’t, so we all know exactly what color you mean when you say that the Packers have yellow helmets.

          Referring to both athletic gold and metallic gold as simply “gold” is every bit as impractical as referring to both columbia and navy as “blue”. It may be technically correct, but it isn’t actually helpful in describing what color a team is using.

          /and now to avoid arguing about it all day, I’m going to bed.

        • Mike Engle | August 13, 2014 at 2:17 pm |

          It may be technically correct, but it isn’t actually helpful in describing what color a team is using.

          Best reasoning I remember The Jeff ever using!
          /One of these days, I’m gonna quote that.

        • Lee | August 13, 2014 at 2:28 pm |

          Yellow and Athletic Gold may not be the same, but they are closer to each other than either is to “Gold”.

          The Packers and Steelers and Vikings don’t wear “gold”, the Saints and 49ers do (even if their shades aren’t exact either).

          Lee

        • Chance Michaels | August 13, 2014 at 2:29 pm |

          The Columbus Crew do indeed use yellow. So you’re left with the exact same problem.

          “Athletic Gold” is perfectly “helpful”. Not to mention more accurate.

        • Thresh8 | August 13, 2014 at 6:20 pm |

          I always took teal to mean “some green in there someplace” v. light blue (Columbia, Honolulu, ice).

          BTJM (but that’s just me.)

  • Straw | August 13, 2014 at 12:09 pm |

    Padres colors, “No. Redeeming. Qualities. Whatsoever.” Really? The Orioles #7? I demand a recount!

  • jrod3737 | August 13, 2014 at 12:13 pm |

    Great graphic of University of Minnesota Duluth helmet designs from 1960-present. Some really nice ones and some uggos. http://www.umdbulldogs.com/news/2014/8/12/FB_0812143954.aspx

  • Derek Reese | August 13, 2014 at 2:48 pm |

    Miami Marlins color scheme – so bad it’s not even ranked lol.

  • David Firestone | August 13, 2014 at 2:49 pm |

    Let me give some more insight to the list, and how I ranked the color schemes. As you all know by know, I write the Driver Suit Blog, and I grade paint schemes, since paint schemes and driver suits go hand in hand. One thing I bitch a lot about are color schemes, since many of the just don’t look good. So I decided to try this as an experement. Since even I am able to admit this was not my best idea, I won’t defend myself.

    • walter | August 13, 2014 at 3:07 pm |

      I’ll admit this is a project I’d be afraid to tackle. Firstly, I’m green/red colorblind. My idiosyncratic tastes would bias the results, and would recognize that a good design can save a wonky color scheme. To take this on in a fair-handed way, it asks the casual observer to be able to distinguish subtle differences in Pantone-type swatches, a huge leap of faith. Not to be pedantic, but beauty is literally in the eye of the beholder.

  • Drew Pearson | August 13, 2014 at 3:33 pm |

    Call me crazy, but I LOVE the current Cavs unis and color scheme. I really don’t understand why people don’t see it’s value.

    If this color scheme had stuck from the old days of the Cavaliers (instead of jumping around to blue, orange, black, and all the weird trim colors on Lebron 1.0 jerseys) it would be revered as one of the best looks in the game, kinda like another wine and gold team I know that gets TONS of love on this site and others….

    http://www.bovadasportsbook.com/images/articles/usc-trojans.jpg

    • Drew Pearson | August 13, 2014 at 3:40 pm |

      For better or worse, the larger impression of a team’s uni/colors is greatly influenced by the success or legacy of that team. The team does well > jersey sales increase > visibility of certain colors goes way up > people rank those colors higher associating them with success.

      Case in point, I’m willing to bet the Seahawks current colors would have ranked far lower in year 1 than they would now.

  • Joe Hilseberg | August 13, 2014 at 4:07 pm |

    Re: Orioles B helmet

    Obviously not a standard part of the uniform for that year, but maybe a throwback worn to honor a particular International League or Negro League team?? Did they do that back then?

    Also. don’t discount the fact that they may have been surplus from the International League team when they moved here in “54 — since they were helmets and not regular caps, they’d be less likely than cloth to wear out, plus they would have been cheaper that new ones. My guess is that their use would have been restricted to pre-game warm-up activities.

  • Newton | August 13, 2014 at 4:14 pm |

    Grizzlies color scheme is last? Come one. I’ve seen polls that say the Griz logo is one of the best in sports so I’d take a good logo over bad color scheme any day

    Also, I cant believe Char could be getting a All Star Game before Memphis. So I did some research and apparently Memphis doesnt have enough hotel rooms to host the All Star game.

    • walter | August 13, 2014 at 4:32 pm |

      Sorry, Newton; the Griz bring up the rear sartorially. The jersey was compromised the day Adidas told them their numbers couldn’t match the titles, then they put out that woofer of an alternate uniform. Granted the bear head half in shadow is a nice insignia.

      • Jim Vilk | August 13, 2014 at 5:49 pm |

        The Grizzlies have my favorite modern-style uniform in the whole NBA. Love the colors, the fonts, and yes, especially the alt. Logo’s pretty snazzy, too.

  • Roger | August 13, 2014 at 6:31 pm |

    I think one has to take into account which color is the primary and secondary and also the ratio of the colors. You have take the aesthetics of the uniform and logo out, but look only at the colors (and their respective ratios). I may not agree with the analysis, but I didn’t do the work, and I think the project is a phenomenal idea.

  • peter | August 13, 2014 at 9:15 pm |

    Regarding the color scheme ranking article:
    1. The list is incomplete.
    2. Purple and blue are different colors.
    3. Black, white, and red is a mediocre combination in one sport but is the best in another.

  • Ron Ruelle | August 13, 2014 at 10:30 pm |

    I know you hate purple, and they don’t play like an MLB team, but the Rockies should at least be in the top 30.

  • Al | August 13, 2014 at 11:36 pm |

    This season , would like to see a write up on the uniforms of LNAH it’s the goon hockey league out of Quebec Canada

  • RyanP | August 14, 2014 at 2:27 am |

    I used to think my biggest pet peeve was college football uniform/helmet rankings (which always seem to ironically feature the author’s alma mater at #1), but instead I realized that an even bigger pet peeve of mine is a “Top 10” list that features each team on a separate page and makes you click through all of them. I only made it to #9 before I got bored and realized I didn’t care where Bill DiFilippo went to school.