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

A Newly Discovered Quirk in Twins Design History

1987-TWINS-PAGE_03

Click to enlarge

[Editor’s Note: Today we have a guest entry from uniform designer/historian Todd Radom, who’s discovered a heretofore undocumented chapter in MLB logo history. ”” PL]

By Todd Radom

I recently acquired a rare copy of the 1987 Major League Baseball Style Guide. It was a fun trip down memory lane, back to an era when the Cardinals wore pullovers, the Phillies’ jerseys had zippers, and the Padres rocked the brown and orange. But one thing in particular stood out ”” the Twins’ then-new look for 1987. The page for the Twins’ uniforms (shown above), marked as having been created in September 1986, shows a primary logo that doesn’t quite match the one that the team actually ended up using (click to enlarge):

There are three primary differences between the logos:

1. The drop shadows. The logo that was eventually used featured disconnected navy blue drop shadows around the “Twins” letterforms. This effect gave additional detail and visual density to the mark, making it more complex. The original logo looks stark by comparison, far more streamlined, with abundant negative space.

2. The stitches. The stitches on the baseball were changed to red. I can understand why they didn’t want the stitches in the original version to be red. Having these fine lines abutting the navy outline of the “Twins” letterforms ”” as well as the navy “Minnesota” ”” would have ensured clean reproduction, an especially important factor in the days before digital printing. But someone very important must have looked at this after it had been released and said, “Baseball stitches should be red,” and that was that.

3. The outline of the ball. The original outline was red, which certainly gave the elements a more red look when compared to the logo that replaced it.

The reasons for this seemingly abrupt change are unknown. Research reveals that the remaking of the Twins identity was an appropriately deliberate process. In late June of 1986 the team publicly acknowledged that it was in the midst of rebranding itself for 1987, specifically seeking a “more meaningful logo.” The new look was unveiled on October 10, 1986. Longtime local icons Minnie and Paul were out, a less traditional visual sensibility was in. “Over the years, three different logos were utilized concurrently, which led to some confusion,” said Twins president Howard Fox. “With that in mind, our aim was to create one emblem that would singularly identify the Twins and Major League Baseball in an animated fashion.”

The new uniforms featured pinstripes both at home and on the road, a seldom-used combination. Interestingly, the Twins’ home uniform lettering never featured the drop shadow that was present in the (eventual) logo. Why was that the case? It now seems clear ”” the overall graphics package, once unified across various visual assets, became disjointed when the logo was modified prior to the 1987 season.

The Twins’ logo underwent additional changes over the next several seasons. MLB digitized its visual assets in the early ’90s, which led to refinements and editing of this and other club logos. As of 1992, the simplified red stitching no longer butted directly against the navy blue outline of “Twins.” This was a sensible, pragmatic call for both structural and aesthetic reasons:

One year to the day after the Twins unveiled their new identity, they were playing in Game 3 of the American League Championship Series. The Twins would go on to win the first World Series championship in franchise history later that month, thus cementing the bond between the team’s new look and a new era of prosperity. Take another look at the word “Twins” and note the fact that “win” is underlined, a subtle directive that the 1987 club certainly took to heart.

•  •  •  •  •

Click to enlarge

Patchwork: No surprise that the gent shown above would come up with a great application for the Uni Watch 15th-anniversary patch, because he’s none other than Scott M.X. Turner — the guy who designed the anniversary logo in the first place! Not only that, but he also designed that jacket when he was working for Stall & Dean about 10 years ago. So the whole package is a Scott Turner production — nice. (For more about Scott’s involvement with S&D, look here.)

If you want to order your own Uni Watch anniversary patch, you can do that here. And if you already have a patch and have sewn it onto something, let’s have a look.

• • • • •

T-Shirt Club reminder: In case you missed it yesterday, the Uni Watch T-Shirt Club’s February design is now available for purchase. Full details here, or just go straight to the ordering page.

• • • • •

Baseball News: The Mariners will be unveiling a new Sunday home alternate uni on Friday. I’ve seen it and can report that it’s a nice little addition to their wardrobe but definitely not a big deal. That last link also includes a really nice slideshow of Seattle baseball history. … More on those pocketed BP jerseys that Phil wrote about last weekend: the Royals wore them too, and Leigh Bellinger has one in his collection. “Unfortunately, no uniform number is written on the tag, so I have no way of knowing who wore it, but I like to think it was George Brett,” he says. ”¦ Students at an Indiana high school were each assigned a city and then had to come up with proposals — including uniforms, mascots, and more — to move the Rays to that city. ”¦ Here’s the logo for the inaugural World Baseball Softball Confederation Premier 12 tourney, which will take place in Tokyo this November. Further details here. … New mascot, as yet unnamed, for the South Bend Cubs. … Safeco Field in Seattle is slated to become MLB’s first LED-lighted stadium (thanks, Mike). … The Mets are increasing the size of their scoreboard screen. ”¦ Yesterday’s Ticker had the news that BYU is relaxing its anti-beard rules. Now the Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that prison officials can’t prohibit Muslims from growing beards. Can the Yankees’ beard ban be far behind? At the very least, this would be a good time for someone to do a House of David throwback game.

NFL News: Concussion discussion: Mike Ditka says he wouldn’t let his kid play football. ”¦ Here’s something odd: a 1939 photo showing a Bears team jacket with the 1939 New York World’s Fair “trylon and perisphere” logo. Strange that a Chicago team would commemorate an NYC event. “The Bears did play in New York against the Giants at the Polo Grounds on Oct. 22, 1939,” notes Ryan Becerra, so maybe that explains it. Anyone know more? … White Castle is not an NFL sponsor, so they Photoshopped all the league and team logos out of the jerseys in this ad (from Joseph Bailey). … According to this story, Seahawks WR Jermaine Kearse offered to trade his helmet to the fan who ended up with the game-winning ball from Sunday’s AFC championship game, which invites “Gotcha!” retorts from those opposed to the NFL’s one-helmet rule (from Scott Lederer). ”¦ Todd Radom has written a very nice piece on Super Bowl artwork. ”¦ The NFL will use narrower goalposts for the Pro Bowl — you know, to help you take the game more seriously. ”¦ Minor kerfuffle in New England, where Pats WR Julian Edelman was shown on TV wearing a less-than-wholesome T-shirt. ”¦ When the Seahawks went to the Super Bowl last year, the city of Spokane hung a 12th Man banner on its clock tower, but not this year.

College Football News: Penn State’s athletic director, who said it was “inappropriate and insensitive” for the PSU hockey team to wear “409” helmet decals in the wake of Joe Paterno’s wins being restored, has now apologized for that statement. … If you’re into rankings, here’s one observer’s picks for the best and worst college football uniforms of the past season (thanks, Phil). … Also from Phil: Looks like Pitt has added its script logo just below the jersey collar. ”¦ Ohio State alums who’ve gone on to play in the NFL now have their own lockers back at OSU (from Andre Torres).

Hockey News: Maple Leafs fans have been showing their disgust with the team’s lousy performance by throwing jerseys onto the ice, and now three such fans have been banned from the team’s arena. At least one observer thinks these fans should find better ways to protest. Or maybe they can just be distracted by this amazing ice projection that the team has been doing (thanks to Phil for that last link). ”¦ New GFGS jerseys for UMass-Lowell (thanks, Phil). ”¦ “Superhero Weekend” jerseys for the Alaska Aces (Phil again).

NBA News: The Heat’s “black tie” unis, which I feel like we’ve been hearing about forever, finally debuted last night. Note the Adidas stripes on the shoulders — a first for a regular season game, I’m pretty sure. Check that, it’s actually four stripes, not three. ”¦ The Heat’s cheerleaders wore uniforms that matched what the players were wearing. ”¦ Here are the socks that’ll be worn in the NBA All-Star Game. ”¦ Oh baby, Matt Miskelly was clearing out some old posters that his dad designed and came up with these NBA beauties.

College Hoops News: People never get tired of writing article about menswear designer Alexander Julian’s connection to UNC. ”¦ The South Carolina coaching staff wore Coaches vs. Cancer socks last night.

Soccer News: Adidas’s new deal with ManU is so expensive that the company is reassessing its relationship with the England cricket team (from George Chilvers). … Interesting series of infographics showing which parts of the UK are buying which jerseys. … Here’s a look at U.S. men’s national team kits over the years (thanks, Phil). … Also from Phil: All MLS teams will be doing that thing where they put season ticket-holders’ faces in their uni numbers. ”¦ New camouflage jersey for the Norwegian club Sandefjords. “It’s made by Macron, the people behind Napoli’s camo and faux-denim monstrosities,” says Yusuke Toyoda.

Grab Bag: A 53-year-old Brooklyn man, distraught after his wife divorced him, has found solace by making his own miniature golf course out of trash. ”¦ Cycling’s governing body United Cycliste Internationale (UCI) has blocked the IAM Cycling team’s jersey design that features the rider’s NOB. “The NOB apparently will be moved to above the sponsor’s name,” says Sean Clancy. Further info down around the middle of this page. … New logos for Jackson County, Mississippi, the United Fresh Produce Association, and, possibly, Wrestlemania 32. … England’s and India’s cricket teams went blue-vs.-blue the other day. “With only ten or so major cricket-playing countries, you’d think they’d be able to get some sort of contrast,” says Richard Hunter. ”¦ Louisville has extended its contract with Adidas (thanks, Phil). ”¦ How bright is Nike’s Aussie Open tennis attire? So bright that it caused a reflection on Roger Federer’s skin (from Cork Gaines). ”¦ Some British policemen are trading in their helmets for peaked hats. ”¦ The Ben Hogan golf club line, dormant since 2008, is being revived. ”¦ Interesting note about newly elected Syracuse-area Congressman John Katko: “At his swearing in ceremony on Jan. 6, Katko wore a purple tie as a symbol of his bipartisanship. On Tuesday night [at the State of the Union address], he wore an orange and blue striped tie as a nod to Syracuse University” (from Matt Dowell).

117 comments to A Newly Discovered Quirk in Twins Design History

  • Phantom Dreamer | January 21, 2015 at 7:44 am |

    So is the Mariners’ new alternate uniform more cream garbage? If it is, I’ve dreaded this day ever since that Ebbets Field Flannels’ Facebook post leaked 2 years ago.

    • scott | January 21, 2015 at 8:28 am |

      Cream garbage? I think the cream look is one of the best trends in baseball. The Giants, Phillies, Twins and Indians all look great in those jerseys.

      • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 9:32 am |

        Cream in baseball doesn’t really bother me, because for one thing, the players are standing on a green/brown playing surface, so it just looks like a slightly warm white.

        In hockey, however, when you’re on a bright white surface, off-white colors just make the jerseys look extra dirty.

        • Chance Michaels | January 21, 2015 at 10:11 am |

          I love the look of cream, but not as an alternate. Either use it all the time, or don’t use it at all.

        • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 11:28 am |

          Complete agreement with Chance. Also, since cream is intended to convey a sense of deep historical continuity and heritage, it should only ever be used by teams that are older than at least 50% of the other teams in their respective leagues. Sorry, Seattle, but no cream for you.

          I’d grant limited exceptions for teams in cities with older roots in the given sport, so the Milwaukee Brewers might just make the cut thanks to the Braves.

        • Chance Michaels | January 21, 2015 at 11:38 am |

          Or at the very least, since it’s a visual callback to flannel, teams birthed in the double-knit era shouldn’t wear it.

        • Tape | January 21, 2015 at 4:26 pm |

          also, Milwaukee is the Cream City.

      • Joe O. | January 21, 2015 at 10:53 am |

        The cream trend would look okay if the color was warmer and the fabrics weren’t so synthetic. Most of the cream uniforms look way too yellow and it feels like forced vintage.

    • Mainspark | January 21, 2015 at 12:11 pm |

      I hope cream doesn’t make it as one of the twelve renditions for the t-shirt club.

    • Mike Chamernik | January 21, 2015 at 12:49 pm |

      Cream strikes me as a bit of a money grab through merchandise sales, as with all new unis. Cash rules everything around me.

  • Kek | January 21, 2015 at 7:47 am |

    so they are going to have some mechanism to make the goal posts more narrow for just extra points?

    If you want to just get rid of the extra point, do it. But there’s better ways. The old WFL “action point” rule where a TD is 7 and you can run or pass 1 for instance.

    Or, you know… just leave well enough alone, is this REALLY that big of a deal that PATs are “too easy”?

    • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 7:50 am |

      They’re doing it for the whole game, not just PATs.

      • Kek | January 21, 2015 at 7:56 am |

        i swear, that link changed from the first time I clicked it… there was no video link and a different write up and it let me to believe they were using the more narrow posts for JUST extra points. Apologies

        • Chance Michaels | January 21, 2015 at 10:14 am |

          Unless they eliminate field goals from the game, I don’t know how they’d limit the narrow goalposts to just PATs.

        • Lee | January 21, 2015 at 12:00 pm |

          They could have a another set of goalposts inside the current goal posts. Basically four uprights.

          Field goals would be as they always have been (if they hit the inside goalposts, the field goal is ‘good).

          Extra points must go through the inside goalposts.

          Viola!

          Lee

        • Jim Vilk | January 21, 2015 at 12:18 pm |

          Just glad no one’s suggested putting a giant windmill in front of the posts.

        • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 1:45 pm |

          Windmills? That’s just insane. You’d obviously go with Anraham Lincoln.

    • Jim Vilk | January 21, 2015 at 12:15 pm |

      You could always deflate the balls to make them harder to kick…nah, no one would ever think of something like that…

      Or they could just do away with soccer-style kicking. Make them kick straight-on instead. Move the hashmarks back to college width.

      I wish they would eliminate special teams from the game, and spin it off into a different sport. That way all the people who scoff at kickers and punters can have their game, and I could have my game.

    • Graham Clayton | January 21, 2015 at 3:28 pm |

      Get rid of the holder, and make the punter catch the ball and then drop-kick it between the posts.

    • Tim | January 21, 2015 at 3:48 pm |

      Do it like it’s done in Rugby. Try’s (touchdowns) are 5 points. You get 2 points for a conversion (which is kicked in a line directly back from where the ball is touched down. For the NFL, you’d walk it bac from where where it crosses the goal line…would make the extra point for a corner of the end zone fade pretty interesting.

  • Tony C. | January 21, 2015 at 7:49 am |

    seems like odd placement to have the prison beard take in with the MLB news and not the grab bag

    • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 7:50 am |

      Not so odd when you consider that I related it to the Yankees and the House of David.

    • scottrj | January 21, 2015 at 9:19 am |

      Also apples (state actor) and oranges (non-state actor).

  • Jerry | January 21, 2015 at 7:52 am |

    Pretty sure the first item in the Grab Bag should be for a ‘golf course’ not ‘gold course’

    • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 7:58 am |

      Yup — thanks. Will fix.

      • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 9:46 am |

        A “gold course” sounds like a Super Mario Bros. level where you collect tons of gold coins.

  • BSmile | January 21, 2015 at 8:00 am |

    Great stuff from Todd Radom (as usual), he’s the man!

  • DenverGregg | January 21, 2015 at 8:16 am |

    I think there’s a fourth big difference between the two Twins’ logos: the original was red, white and black and the second was in the team’s trad combo of red, white and blue. Note the word “Minnesota”.

    • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 8:49 am |

      The “Twins” outline is still navy blue (there’s some bleed from the red on that print sample that causes the interior of the outline to be darker than intended), but the stitches and “MINNESOTA” text definitely appear to be black.

  • Dumb Guy | January 21, 2015 at 8:27 am |

    According to the USA today story the Seahawks ball guy was offered “a” helmet, not necessarily Kearse’s helmet.

    Even so, Kearse could give up his helmet at the end of the season–not right there in the stands!!

    “He also balked when he received a call from Kearse, offering a team-signed helmet and his game jersey in exchange for the football. Shelton asked for a trip to the Super Bowl as well. It’s a tall order, and one that perhaps isn’t the most logistically responsible for Shelton.

    You see, Shelton is going to jail the day after the Super Bowl.”

  • teenchy | January 21, 2015 at 8:28 am |

    “One year to the day after the Twins unveiled their new identity, they were playing in Game 3 of the American League Championship Series. The Twins would go on to win the first World Series championship in franchise history later that month…”

    Walter Johnson and company would beg to differ.

    • Gusto4044 | January 21, 2015 at 9:06 am |

      Definitely understand the business definition of a franchise, but sports will always be different. We can say the Twins won “their first world title in team history”, to be technically correct, but it’s understandable to interchange the words, especially with baseball fans.

      If we went back to 1987, I have a tough time seeing old Twins fans reminiscing about the 1924 Washington Senators team. We’re talking about over 60 years in a different city, and other Twins fans just didn’t care. This doesn’t mean the 1924 Senators should be forgotten, but they have a separate identity to the Twins.

      • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 9:17 am |

        But the fact remains: THEY. ARE. THE. SAME. FRANCHISE.

        We GET that you have a problem with teams “who don’t play in (your) city” not having a connection to the fans of that city (a point most of us concede), but that still doesn’t take away from the fact that the FRANCHISE won a title elsewhere.

        Facts are stubborn things, I know. But the fact is that the franchise that currently plays in Minnesota won a World Series in 1924. The team that plays in Washington currently did not (and to their credit, they never claimed they did, although that “Est. 1905” is both specious and annoying).

        Even if the Twins don’t want to celebrate that WS or harkback to anything from their Nationals/Senators days, they still own that title. Whether or not fans care about that title is completely irrelevant.

        • Bud | January 21, 2015 at 9:29 am |

          Gun’s blazing this morning, I see.

        • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 9:40 am |

          “Gun’s blazing this morning, I see.”

          ~~~

          Yeah, I usually let it go, but EVERY TIME something like this comes up, like clockwork, Mr. Gusto has to chime in about the “team didn’t win _____ in that city” so therefore no one, especially the fans, should acknowledge it. I agree that championships are important to denizens of a particular city, but that implies 1) only folks in that city have any connection to a particular team and 2) only those who live there should be able to celebrate wins there.

          History is an important thing. And the franchise that plays in Minnesota currently has three world series titles claimed by said franchise. Not two.

          It’s fine to debate this…but every time something like this comes up, like clockwork, we get the same argument. Whether or not old Twins fans care about a championship won in Washington in 1924, it’s still the same franchise. Deal with it.

        • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 9:44 am |

          “Franchise” necessarily includes a team’s entire corporate history. So the original objection here is correct. The franchise has appeared in six World Series and won three of them, including the 1924 championship.

          But if a less precise word is used, such as “team,” then it’s not incorrect to say that 1987 was the Twins’ first World Series win. The Minnesota Twins did not play in the 1924, 1925, or 1933 World Series. Likewise, the Washington Senators did not play in the 1965, 1987, or 1991 World Series. It’s not wrong to make that distinction, so long as one does not use the word “franchise” when making that distinction.

          On the other hand, neither is it wrong to treat the franchise as a whole in all cases, even when not using the term of art “franchise.” In this case, we have an instance where two people can say seemingly contradictory things and both be correct, given their differing intent and contexts.

        • Bud | January 21, 2015 at 9:45 am |

          I’m not putting my hat on either side of the argument, I understand both viewpoints, to an extent. I just thought it was an aggressive response.

        • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 9:59 am |

          ” The franchise has appeared in six World Series and won three of them, including the 1924 championship.

          But if a less precise word is used, such as “team,” then it’s not incorrect to say that 1987 was the Twins’ first World Series win.”

          ~~~

          Agreed. But both Teenchy and Gusto used the word “Franchise” not “team.”

          The franchise that currently plays in Los Angeles (as the Lakers) in the NBA won FIVE NBA championships (1949, 1950, 1952, 1953 and 1954) in Minnesota. Now, if you want to say the Los Angeles Lakers “only” have 11 NBA titles, that’s fine. But the record books record 16, because as a franchise, that’s how many they have won.

          I guess the ‘problem’ here, if there is one, is that Gusto (and others, no doubt, I don’t want to single him out as the only one who holds this belief/opinion) feels championships “belong” only to the city and its denizens in which they were won, whereas I believe records/titles/etc. belong to a team, no matter where it plays. And since fans of a team DON’T SOLELY EXIST in the one city where a team plays, celebration of those records/titles should NOT be excluded, or exclusive to a city.

          Would it be nice if teams never moved so we wouldn’t have this problem? Of course, but that ain’t reality and it hasn’t been that way for over 100 years.

          Put another way: I guess this is about “city pride” vs. “team pride”.

        • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 11:19 am |

          Phil, I was mostly agreeing with you, especially in the particular instance! I was just laying out the broader principles by which I find both the franchise and the civic accounting of team history to be both correct and mutually compatible. It’s not an either/or thing, unless one uses specific terms of art incorrectly. And you shouldn’t want it to be an either/or thing – if it really does come down to a choice between corporate continuity versus civic pride, civic pride will win every time.

          Just as an example: I’m a Washington-proud Nats fan who’s pleased to see the team finally giving due recognition to its franchise history in Montreal. I’m also pleased to see the team celebrate the great heritage of baseball in Washington, including honoring championships won both by the Senators and the Grays when each team played in Washington. I’m also a Minnesota-proud Twins fan. I regard the 1924 championship as an important part of Twins history, and I wish that the team celebrated its Senators history more in Minneapolis. On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with the Nats flying that “1924” pennant above the scoreboard. It doesn’t take anything away from the Twins for the Nats to also honor a championship won in Washington, just like it wouldn’t take anything away from Washington for the Twins to fly a “1924” pennant or for the Rangers to retire Frank Howard’s number in Dallas. The more the merrier, as far as sentiment and tribute go. Just please, everybody, don’t say “franchise” unless you refer to the team’s entire corporate history.

        • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 11:54 am |

          Scotty, I absolutely agree with your “Just as an example” graf.

          I think there is room for both, and, as a uniform aficionado, I love it even when teams (Washington, for example) celebrates the accomplishments of teams who have nothing to do with the particular franchise that played there.

          What bothers the everlovingshit out of me, though, is the constant “Well, the NY Giants may have won 5 world series in New York, but no one in SF cares about those” attitude I see from Mr. Gusto every time something like a franchise record is brought up.

          It’s NOT always about the city. Sometimes it’s about the team too. Yes, the city of SF may only count three world series to “their” credit (as if the citizens won those titles themselves), but the Giants have won 8. Five in NY, and 3 in SF. And there’s nothing wrong with the Giants celebrating (and throwing back to) any NY Giants unis or history they so choose.

          But there is also nothing wrong with them donning unis of, for example, Seals or any other minor/Pac teams who have no direct relationship to the Giants. That’s cool in my book too. Let the city celebrate it’s own baseball past as well.

          Agree with you on the Nats/Expos as well. You were born in Montreal in 1969. Just don’t forget it. You weren’t born in DC in 1901. Celebrate past teams all you want, but you’re still an “expansion” franchise from the late 60s.

        • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 2:23 pm |

          Phil, Phil. 1905, please. [Ducks]

          I jest, of course – that Seligian “Est 1905” thing in 2005 might be the single stupidest bit of “branding” fluffery in the history of the world. And I think the Nats have suffered a bit, reputationally, ever since, in that they seem uniquely to be suspect when they say or do anything about their various corporate or civic antecedents ever since making that insultingly idiotic 1905 claim. They could have said 2005, they could have said 1969, they could even have said 1859 (the very first time a baseball team in Washington is known to have called itself the Nationals) but it’s like 1905 was genetically engineered to maximally pet the peeves of anyone who cares about baseball history.

      • Uni Troll | January 21, 2015 at 10:21 am |

        I’m inclined to agree.

        Still, on rare occasions, that distinction between “team” and “franchise,” in discussions of identity and continuity, gets just a bit blurry.

        Baltimore Ravens, anyone…?

        • Uni Troll | January 21, 2015 at 10:24 am |

          Um…that was intended as a reply to Phil.

          Ouch.

    • Bud | January 21, 2015 at 9:55 am |

      Also, it should probably be noted that the Nationals have been doing their part since their new park opened to make this issue confusing to the casual observer.

      http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-llaSWewx5rk/TZflLo_36XI/AAAAAAAAcM8/e0T6NCLnYQU/s1600/IMG_2620.jpg

  • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 8:28 am |

    Fantastic research from Mr. Radom! Todd is Godd!

  • Alec | January 21, 2015 at 8:28 am |

    Way to make a stand, Penn St. AD.

    What next, free blue Kool-Aid at all home games next year?

  • Dumb Guy | January 21, 2015 at 8:33 am |

    Edelman = Thug (right?)

    • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 8:58 am |

      Amusingly, that’s hardly the big story out of Foxborough.

      • Connie DC | January 21, 2015 at 9:13 am |

        “Amusingly” is so right. Love that inflation-deflation scandal. What’s better than Boston chicanery?

        • DenverGregg | January 21, 2015 at 10:54 am |

          . . . the thing that would be better than the customary Bellicheating would be for the malefactors and the franchise to be punished ruthlessly. Lifetime ban for BB, multi-year suspensions for the others involved, no draft picks for a few years, salary cap penalties, etc.

        • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 1:56 pm |

          If nothing else, I’m sure NFL HQ folks are happy that the talking heads and the Twitter masses are focusing on inconsequential matters.

  • scottrj | January 21, 2015 at 8:39 am |

    Not Sid Luckman wearing that 1939 NYC World’s Fair jacket. Luckman is #42, the QB throwing the ball. Bulldog Turner, perhaps?
    http://www.rmyauctions.com/ItemImages/000006/6347a_lg.jpeg

  • Sully | January 21, 2015 at 8:52 am |

    The UMass – Lowell jersey is Graphite Blue, thank you very much…GBFGBS

    • Tape | January 21, 2015 at 4:56 pm |

      If you’re going to shill for Under Armour, you should at least get their color name right. It’s Graphite.

      I’m of several minds about my alma mater’s unveiling of this alternate:

      1. I was very concerned that this alt was going to end up being black, so I’m very glad that didn’t happen.

      2. Even though it’s trendy GFGS and it’s not a school color, the gray doesn’t really look so bad. Still should stick to school colors. A red alt would have made sense.

      3. The River Hawk head logo looks pretty sharp as a jersey crest – much better than the wordmark they’ve been using for several years. (Though it’s nowhere near as good as this classic: http://www.keefecompany.com/riverhwk_lg.gif )

      4. They moved the wordmark to the shoulders where it’s way too busy. should have used the UML wordmark like in this image (without the logo): http://www.hockeyjournal.com/news/colleges/poll/mass-lowell_RGB.jpg

      Anyway, the big stars of that unveiling ceremony were the two claaaaaasic Lowell tech jerseys being worn by the two girls on the far right. Those are among my favorite unis of all time in any sport. Simple, classic, great colors.

    • Tape | January 21, 2015 at 4:57 pm |

      #GraphiteBlue is merely a hashtag. All of the press copy refers to it as “graphite”.

  • Connie DC | January 21, 2015 at 8:54 am |

    “… … Interesting series of infographics showing which parts of the UK are buying which jerseys. …”

    Interesting indeed. That 45% of Man U shirts are sold in London shouldn’t surprise: giant overall population; tons of tourists; home to rootless cosmopolites. But that only 10% are sold in Manchester itself suggests that maybe it’s not so cool among the core faithful to be seen in some commercial shite that only idiot wankers would wear. Same logic might apply to Man City sales, where only 5% of the shirts were bought in Manchester itself.

    Inexplicable (to me, at least; maybe Padday can help here) is that 25% of the Villa shirts and 15% of the Man U shirts are bought in Dublin. I would have thought that the Dubs might buy shirts for Liverpool, that most Irish of English cities, but that figure is a more subdued 9%.

    You’ll note that I haven’t said anything (yet) about listing Dublin as “one of the parts of the UK” (which it is in terms of language, commerce and pop culture, of course), but it’s a no-no.

    • scottrj | January 21, 2015 at 9:17 am |

      Keep in mind that the percentages are just those compiled by the single, on-line jersey retailer that also authored the article – I’d venture that more likely explains the idiosyncratic results than anything else.

    • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 9:29 am |

      Surely a lot of what you observe is just a mathematical artifact: what Americans would call the London “metro area” is home to nearly 25% of the entire population of the United Kingdom. EPL teams tend to have broadly dispersed, “sticky” fan bases that show continuity both through time for individuals and across generations among families. So you’re going to wind up with a lot of fans beyond your own city, and the large plurality of them will necessarily reside in London.

      Take your Manchester example: Manchester has less than 4% of London’s population – there are almost exactly 28 Londoners for every Mancunian. Manchester accounts for less than 1% of the total UK population, so 5% of its national sales coming in-city actually means that a Manchester resident is about 7 times more likely to buy a Man City shirt than an average Briton who does not live in Manchester. If we could see similar data for NFL jersey sales in the USA, surely the vast, vast majority of Packers jerseys would not be purchased in the city of Green Bay; this would not be a sign that “it’s not so cool among the core faithful to be seen in some commercial shite that only idiot wankers would wear.” Rather, the more likely explanation would be that not very many people live in Green Bay, and the team has a widespread national fan base.

      Although the idiot wankers hypothesis remains an interesting possibility! I just don’t think it’s the most probable explanation, given the UK’s population distribution.

      • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 9:43 am |

        You were just dying to use “Mancunian” today, weren’t you? ;)

        • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 9:47 am |

          Connie served that one right over the plate. It would have been disrespectful not to have done so!

        • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 10:34 am |

          Arr forgot to mention that there are almost 18 Londoners for every Liverpudlian.

    • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 10:40 am |

      Agree that the sheer size (and the demographics) of London makes the infographics not that helpful.

      I wish they’d done one of two things:
      * Flip the data and show which regions/cities sold which jerseys
      or
      * Break London down into Boroughs, or at least quadrants so we could see if the territorial divide – Arsenal and Tottenham in North London, West Ham in East London, Chelsea in West London – held true.

      Also, I imagine people in Newcastle would just buy their jerseys from the official club shop instead of a national chain, or maybe not.

  • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 9:01 am |

    Thanks to Todd for this – as a kid in Minnesota in the 1980s, one of my very first conscious uni-watch* moments came sometimes early in the ’87 season when I wondered why the Twins’ home jersey script didn’t feature those beautiful separated drop shadows from the logo.

    *Used as an adjective, Uni Watch takes the hyphen.

    As for this,

    The new uniforms featured pinstripes both at home and on the road, a seldom-used combination.

    Well, strictly speaking it’s true that road pinstripes have not all that often been used by other teams in the modern era. But the Twins franchise was one of the first in MLB history to use pinstripes at all, and to keep pinstripes from season to season, and road pins were part of the package at the beginning. Seldom used, technically, but a style with a heritage rooted in the team’s founding years. Thanks to the road pins, the post-1986 Twins had possibly the most instantly recognizable uniform sets in baseball history. If you saw a navy cap over navy pinstripes with red script and numbers, home or away, even if it was just one guy at the corner of a newspaper photo or at the edge of a two-second highlight clip, you knew the Twins were on the field. That being the first and most important function of a sports uniform, it’s fair to say that for the Twins, road pinstripes were objectively good design.

    • Todd R | January 21, 2015 at 9:57 am |

      Thanks all for the kind words–a few notes:
      1) The art was navy blue and red, the same colors that eventually saw the light of day. Not black.
      2) arr–I remember thinking how weird the road pinstripes looked when this was launched. A quick look reveals that, with the exception of the white pinstriped road Cubs of the late 70s, the last team to wear dark pinstripes on a gray road jersey was the 1938 Cleveland Indians.

      • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 12:06 pm |

        “A quick look reveals that, with the exception of the white pinstriped road Cubs of the late 70s, the last team to wear dark pinstripes on a gray road jersey was the 1938 Cleveland Indians.”

        The Cubs’ uniform in question doesn’t actually count as an exception, because it doesn’t meet the qualification of “dark pinstripes on a gray road jersey”.

      • ChrisH | January 21, 2015 at 12:07 pm |

        Weren’t the San Diego MLB team’s road jerseys gray (or grey?) with brown pinstripes when they were a brown-and-orange team in the late 1980’s?

        • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 12:31 pm |

          Yep, you’re correct – I’d forgotten about those myself, but the Padres did indeed have brown pinstripes on their road grays from 1985-1990, as seen here and here.

        • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 2:16 pm |

          Which would be a terrific look, if the brown pinstripes were on tan fabric. On gray, those are pretty much the only road pinstripes in MLB history that I don’t like. It’s just a personal thing, I’m sure, but for me brown and gray just don’t play well together. It’s my one hesitation about the Padres bringing back brown – fine, but they need to do something other than just a plain old gray road uni if they do.

        • walter | January 21, 2015 at 5:22 pm |

          On TV, the Padres’ greys took on a different appearance than they did, up close. Television’s pixilated picture gave the San Diego uniform the color of butcher’s paper.
          It might not have been so with today’s high-resolution screens.

  • Connie DC | January 21, 2015 at 9:07 am |

    “…… Here’s a look at U.S. men’s national team kits over the years (thanks, Phil). …”

    Here’s where Scott and me and other faithful decry the total lack of consistency in USMNT duds. Just settle on a basic template, ferkreissake.

    But I want it to be MY damn template:
    1. Home: The red-and-white barrel hoops w blue shorts of the 2012 home models.
    2. Away: The all-white with awesome US national shield of the so-called Centennial uni.

    • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 9:36 am |

      Not my first choice for the away treatment, but I could live with that. Truth is, I could live with anything if the USNT (men and women) would just pick a general pattern and stick with it across a 12-year span. I don’t mean, no changes or variations. I mean, pick a general pattern (such as, red-and-white hoops) and change all you want from international tournament season to international tournament season, but preserve the identifying elements in some form from jersey to jersey. You could vary a jersey pretty radically from year to year while preserving a basic design element like red-and-white hoops. Note how pretty much every pro team in the world now varies its home jersey pretty significantly from season to season while preserving whatever basic pattern has become the team’s signature look. It can be done!

      • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 10:19 am |

        I agree: it should be like this:

        1989
        1990
        1993
        1994
        1995
        1998
        2000
        2002
        2004
        2006
        2008
        2010
        2012
        2013
        2014

        • Tim | January 21, 2015 at 3:50 pm |

          USA Rugby has done the same thing. New kit every year.

        • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 4:22 pm |

          Other than the Centennial kit, it’s still a 2-year cycle (I haven’t seen anything about Nike coming out with a 2015 kit, and the 1995 kit was worn through 1997).

          I don’t mess with away kits – they’re mostly for fashion.

    • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 9:51 am |

      And here’s where I point out that the US has had consistent home unis all the way back to the early 90s, save for two exceptions – the stripes/faux denim of 1994 and the 2012 hoops.

      Otherwise, the US has always had white at home (with white or navy shorts) and blue or red away.

      You can’t really have hoops and white tops because they’re both predominantly light. The US is basically like Tottenham – always white tops, and a couple of options for away. Much more consistent than those soccer no-nothings like the Netherlands and France who can’t even stick to the same shade of their home colors.

  • BigMatt | January 21, 2015 at 9:18 am |

    Great Anniversary jacket!

    • Mainspark | January 21, 2015 at 10:46 am |

      Agreed. I originally thought that the patch would be better served as a sleeve adornment but it certainly works very well as a crest patch, particularly on a green mechanic’s jacket. I would buy one.

  • loserem | January 21, 2015 at 9:21 am |

    I’ve studied the Heat Cheerleader outfits and can say with confidence that they do NOT match the players’ outfits

  • ColorWerx | January 21, 2015 at 9:33 am |

    Ironic timing with this one re: the Twins…

    Just this past weekend, I was going through my own MLB Style Guide collection and noticed the same discrepancy with the Twins’ logo. Contacted Todd, who informed me that he had already been working with Paul on this very article. In addition however, there is a SECOND variation of that logo that is also in my collection; a sheet from 09/1987 that shows a 30% tint of Navy used as a drop shadow on “Twins”. Here is a link to a crappy scan of said sheet:

    http://i950.photobucket.com/albums/ad347/ColorWerx/Baseball/MajorLeagueBaseball/MinnesotaTwins/Scans/MinnesotaTwins_STG0100a_198709.jpg

    I’m not sure if this version was actually ever used, or for how long it was used, but there it is anyway.

    • Chance Michaels | January 21, 2015 at 10:07 am |

      Wow. I like that one so much better than any of the others.

  • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 10:12 am |

    It would appear our question about new Pro Bowl unis has been answered.

    Here we go.

    • Phil Hecken | January 21, 2015 at 10:28 am |

      Not much difference between this year and last. Last year was full monochrome, whereas this year they’ve gone with different color tops/bottoms (pants striping is also different, and the white/gray jersey this year has a full yoke). Also, the jerseys appear to have that ‘patented’ Nike sleeve treatment).

    • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 10:31 am |

      I really like the gray/yellow number. It speaks to the heritage and tradition of Team Cris Carter and the Volt accent adds an element of storytelling that evokes the passion that fans of Team Carter bring to every game.

      • walter | January 21, 2015 at 5:13 pm |

        :)

      • BurghFan | January 22, 2015 at 6:00 am |

        I just saw this. Brilliant!

  • terriblehuman | January 21, 2015 at 10:58 am |

    Sylverster Stallone’s mixing uniforms here.

  • Chris | January 21, 2015 at 11:44 am |

    The Heat’s Black Tie uniforms have four stripes on the shoulders, not adidas’s three.
    http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/photosgameId=400578915&photoId=4456914

    • Chris | January 21, 2015 at 11:46 am |
      • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 12:36 pm |

        Ah, good point. My bad. Will change text.

        • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 2:31 pm |

          I’d like to see a close-up of that shoulder panel, because unless I can see that the white stripes are clearly individual pieces, I’m going to consider this possible alternative explanation: that it’s a white panel with three black stripes.

  • ap | January 21, 2015 at 11:54 am |

    Is it me, or would it have made more sense to have the Broncos helmet with the blue jersey,and the seahawks helmet with the white jersey?

    • The Jeff | January 21, 2015 at 12:12 pm |

      It really doesn’t make sense to have the Broncos helmet there at all, does it?

      • Adam R. W. | January 21, 2015 at 3:17 pm |

        Well, last year’s Pro Bowl unis were unveiled with the previous season’s Super Bowl team helmets, and it looks like they followed the same format this year. Next year’s will probably feature the Seahawks and Patriots.

  • 1434 | January 21, 2015 at 11:59 am |

    Now that the Twins road pins have been gone for six years, I realize I miss them quite dearly. They have since gone down a very bland and “me too” road.

  • BvK1126 | January 21, 2015 at 1:07 pm |

    “New mascot, as yet unnamed, for the South Bend Cubs.”

    So why does the South Bend Cubs’ new mascot wear pants but the parent club’s mascot doesn’t?

    • DJ | January 21, 2015 at 2:19 pm |

      Things get a little wild in Lakeview, with all those bars, restaurants and clubs. South Bend is a bit more staid of a city.

      I still think it’s only a matter of time before they give “Clark” a friend — a female bear named “Addison.” Give her a ponytail, and she’d tick off every stereotype of a North Side Trixie.

      • BvK1126 | January 21, 2015 at 3:11 pm |

        “Clark” does kind of come across as an anthropomorphized bear version of the stereotypical Wrigley Bleacher Bum, in which case the backwards-hat-Cubs-jersey-and-no-pants look totally makes sense.

    • Dumb Guy | January 21, 2015 at 3:12 pm |

      Socks too!!

  • PT | January 21, 2015 at 1:43 pm |

    The Heat unis have 4 white stripes…but one can argue the 4 white stripes make 3 black stripes….

    • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 3:02 pm |

      If you have to advocate for an alternate interpretation of something, then it isn’t very good or clear branding. Which means it probably wasn’t intended as branding to begin with.

      • Rob S | January 21, 2015 at 3:25 pm |

        Like I say in an earlier reply, I think it’s possible, but again, I’d have to see a really nice close-up of that shoulder detail to decide one way or the other.

        In any case, the shoulder striping just doesn’t seem to fit with the aesthetic of the rest of the jersey, at least to me.

  • Elena | January 21, 2015 at 3:05 pm |

    In regard to Alexander Julian, his uncle Milton just died at age 96. He too had a clothing store in Chapel Hill for decades. He followed a slightly different path of the usual way Jewish merchants ended up starting clothing stores in the south. The youngest of five boys born to Russian-Jewish immigrant parents in Brockton, Massachusetts, Milton grew up helping his father sell fruits and vegetables from a horse and buggy. But instead of the way the previous generations ended up in the south, as peddlers settling and eventually building a store, he came to UNC to go to law school. He found he preferred selling shoes at his after-class job to studying law. While in Italy in WWII in the Air Force, he made enough prize money at ping pong to open a store when he returned after the war.

  • Turtle12 | January 21, 2015 at 3:28 pm |

    I received my UniWatch home jersey today! It looks great, and I will definitely be wearing it to work this Friday.

  • Terry lewis | January 21, 2015 at 3:50 pm |

    As a resident of Saint Petersburg I appreciate the ambitious scope of this school project. Unfortunately, the Tampa Bays Rays won’t be moving any time soon. However, fear not, because there are plenty of other weak sport franchises who are demanding tax breaks and guaranteed profits (just look at the NFL’s treatment of Los Angeles) as an incentive to plunder new territories. Be careful what you wish for…

  • Chance Michaels | January 21, 2015 at 4:02 pm |

    Remember that new color scheme the Nashville Sounds unveiled last year?

    Yeah, never mind.

    They’re keeping the new logos, but re-coloring them to their old red-and-black scheme.

    • arrScott | January 21, 2015 at 4:27 pm |

      Not a straight recolor. Take a look at the N in the new set (linked above) versus the originally announced set shown here:

      http://www.milb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20141009&content_id=98041790&fext=.jsp&vkey=pr_milb&sid=milb

      The old set used an offset outline on top and to the upper left of the N to give the appearance of a neon sign. The new set moves that element behind and to the lower right of the N so that it’s more like beveling. Very different effect, achieved by moving that one element in a subtle but significant way.

      • BvK1126 | January 21, 2015 at 4:57 pm |

        Neon outline > beveling.

        The new color scheme was risky, to be sure, but I appreciated the design’s originality. And it was well thought-out in terms of tying it to several cultural institutions of Nashville. Black and red is… black and red. I guess there’s something to be said for maintaining tradition, but this feels like a missed opportunity.

  • w_c_hughes | January 21, 2015 at 4:10 pm |
  • Tom | January 21, 2015 at 5:52 pm |

    Probably the only comment on the cricket item . . . not sure why a cricket match would need contrast at all. The US has had millions of baseball games for well over a century in which there has been almost no contrast in the uniforms and none at any significant level is expected.

    • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 5:59 pm |

      Actually, whenever two MLB teams wearing, say, blue jerseys face each other, I always get a *ton* of email complaining about the lack of contrast.

      So, yes, white vs. grey doesn’t have much contrast, and nobody seems to care. But color vs. matching color seems to annoy people.

  • Tom | January 21, 2015 at 7:33 pm |

    What do you think the chances of the Seahawks coming out in Blue over White or Blue over Grey?

    Also, any chances those Bulls jerseys with the new trim is just a mistake on the new template?

  • Eltee of DC | January 21, 2015 at 9:21 pm |

    Paul,

    Probably have seen these already… but some seriously stripey throwbacks by Houston Baptist.

    http://www.superpunch.net/2015/01/unforgettable-throwback-uniforms.html

    • Paul Lukas | January 21, 2015 at 9:39 pm |

      Yup — Phil featured those over this past weekend.

  • Ty from Lockport,il. | January 21, 2015 at 9:43 pm |

    I don’t have a pic but did anyone see the Marquette v. St. John’s basketball game on Fox Sports One? Blue on Gray was terrible, at least on TV. Tough to tell them apart. When will these teams figure out that colors too close together doesn’t work.