Nowadays, only three MLB cities have two teams: New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. But Philadelphia used to have two — the Phillies and the Athletics — and for many years they played an annual intracity exhibition called the City Series. Based on a fan giveaway featured on the Phillies’ 2024 promotional schedule, it looks like the Phils and A’s may be resurrecting the City Series with throwback uniforms this summer.
Here’s the deal: The A’s are due to travel to Philadelphia for a weekend series on July 12-14 — the last weekend before the All-Star break. The Phils’ promo schedule shows that there will be a cap giveaway for the first game of that series, on July 12:
Now let’s take a closer look at that cap:
That cap logo matches what the team wore in 1934, as you can see by comparing it to the photo at the top of this page:
And although it’s hard to make out, it appears that the emblem on the side says “Philadelphia City Series” and features throwback A’s and Phils logos.
Based on this, I think we can say with some assurance that the Phillies will be wearing a 1934 throwback for this game. The photo at the top of the page shows their road uniform (it was the best color photo I could find), but they’ll presumably be wearing a throwback based on the home design:
That was such a weird design, with the contrast-colored “P” and swash on both the home and road uniforms! To my knowledge, the Phils have never worn it as a throwback.
As for the A’s, they will wear throwbacks only if the Phillies cover the costs (that’s how it works for these promotions — home team pays). But the giveaway cap’s side emblem makes me optimistic that the A’s will be included in the retro showcase. If they too go with a 1934 uniform — presumably the road design — it would look like this:
The A’s have worn this throwback at least once before, for a 2012 game in Boston (technically, that was a 1936 throwback, not 1934, but it’s the same design, which the A’s wore for many years):
Should be a fun-looking game on July 12!
(Big thanks to reader Brian Dillon, who alerted me to the giveaway cap on the Phils’ promo schedule.)
Wow. This could be a FANTASTIC show!
Fingers crossed for this!
How terrific it would be if the A’s also wore ‘home’ whites!
Would MLB allow that?
Seems unlikely, especially since photos indicate that the original City Series games featured one team in white and one in grey.
I had no idea the home team covered the cost for the road team’s throwbacks! At least the A’s cheap owner will have no reason to say no.
Yes, that’s how it always works. So if the road team isn’t wearing throwbacks, that’s not their fault — it’s the home team’s fault.
Is this an official rule, or just a norm? Could a road team decide to spring for the uniforms themselves if they so choose, but don’t to preserve the norm that the home team pays, or is this verboten?
It’s the home team’s promotion. They run it the way they want. The road team doesn’t interfere.
I wish more teams with shared historical legacies would do this on the regular. Nats versus Twins and Rangers, Pittsburgh versus Nats, Boston versus Atlanta, Milwaukee versus Atlanta and Boston, and so forth. Even Cardinals versus Orioles, if eventual new ownership in Baltimore could ever be persuaded to acknowledge the franchise’s existence prior to 1954. And, fingers crossed for future expansion, Montreal versus Washington.
The O’s threw back to their time as the StL Browns at least once and should do so more often as you suggest!
While historically inaccurate, I’d love to see a “Battle of Seattle” game – Mariners wearing the Pilots home whites and Brewers dressed in the Seattle powder blue roadies…maybe with the ‘hold the eggs’ spring training cap?
I’d love to see a Pilots v Pilots matchup both in Seattle and Milwaukee! Or have the Brewers wear their 1970 spring training uniforms, which were just Pilots unis re-lettered. It’s not much more “historically inaccurate” than any other example. While the A’s and Phillies technically played in Philly at the same time for a while, I don’t believe the two teams ever played a non-exhibition game against each other.
And surely there are other examples of current teams in cities that share Negro Leagues legacies beyond just the Pirates and Nats; I’d love to see some of those matchups as well.
The Phils were to supposed to host the A’s in 2020 and promoted a “1920s City Series Retro Night” (complete with a period-proper giveaway hat):
link
…but that series was a casualty of the COVID-shortened season.
Ah, interesting! Didn’t remember that.
New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and Boston at one time. But are we considering Los Angeles to be a two-team town just because the Angels have decided the team is currently “from” Los Angeles, as opposed to Anaheim or California? Anaheim appears to be a 45 minute drive away from L.A.
Rexdale is a 45-minute drive from The Beaches, and yet both are in Toronto.
Los Angeles and Anaheim are their own towns with their own teams (Angels, Ducks). The Angels team name may include “Los Angeles,” but they are from Anaheim. I consider Los Angeles a one-team town. I highly doubt Rexdale would get a major league team and, if it did, I assume it would want to be known as the Rexdale (team name), not lumped in with Toronto.
Anaheim, in Orange County, is part of the Los Angeles Basin and television market. Makes more sense for them to be called “Los Angeles” than the two NFL teams located in New Jersey to be called “New York”. But I’d prefer they be named after the region, like New England or Tampa Bay, than a city they aren’t located in. “Southern California” or “Southern Cal” Angels would be great. The reason they were the California Angels when they moved to Anaheim was because at the time they were the only American League team in CA. They will soon be that again, but I never liked a team in Southern California representing the entire state, with Northern California and Southern California being such strong rivals. And sorry, I lived in Orange County, and Anaheim just isn’t a city I’d want to be associated with for my baseball team.
“Makes more sense for them to be called “Los Angeles” than the two NFL teams located in New Jersey to be called “New York”.
No, it does not. The teams physically playing in East Rutherford are located 8 miles from New York City, which is what the “New York” indicates. The city, NOT THE STATE.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: If you want to refer to either the Jets or Giants as the “East Rutherford Jets/Giants,” I’m 100% fine with this. It is not, nor will it EVER be OK to call them the Jersey anything.
I didn’t suggest they be called anything other than New York. But I still contend that calling them the Los Angeles Angels is no different than calling the NFL teams located in NJ “New York”. These teams are representing an area, and Anaheim and East Rutherford is pretty limiting. However, a lot of my OC friends feel differently. They feel real territorial. When I grew up most of my friends liked both the Dodgers and Angels. Now it isn’t that way. The Angels want to benefit by marketing to the entire region, and it’s why I think a good compromise would be to take a name after the region.
Sorry if you took my comment the wrong way. But this “New Jersey” thing is one peeve I continue to have. And I blame Minnesota for starting this “let’s name the team for the whole state thing” — since New York is both a City and a State, a large number of people seem to think the “New York” teams are named for the state, not the city. And that’s wrong.
If folks want to say “Santa Clara 49ers” for example, or “Arlington Cowboys,” which are more appropriate as those are the cities in which they are located, I’m fine with that. And if people want to say that the New York (CITY) Giants/Jets are located in East Rutherford, I’m OK with that too, as it’s correct. But it is ABSOLUTELY NOT CORRECT to refer the team(s) as “New Jersey _____”.
Apologies if I misconstrued your comment, I just want folks to know that it IS different because calling them Los Angeles Angels (different CITY) is not the same as calling the Jets/Giants “New Jersey” (Different STATE).
Carry on :)
And St. Louis.
And I forgot St. Louis.
When I was a kid, it was interesting to notice that Jimmy Foxx bears somewhat of a resemblance to his contemporary icon, Babe Ruth. Foxx is so often overlooked as a major offensive star of the era, and Tom Hanks’ League of Their Own character is loosely based on Foxx
> Foxx is so often overlooked as a major offensive star of the era
Indeed. A three time MVP, with back to back MVP’s in ’32 and ’33. A Triple Crown. Career average of .325, with 534 career home runs, including 58 in ’32. He’s the answer to lots of baseball trivia questions.
I’m sure the A’s will be participating—John Fisher is up for anything as long as someone else is paying.
What makes a hat sustainable?
I’m guessing it’s a natural fabric, like wool or cotton. Polyester is just another plastic. Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode of George getting the Yankees to switch to a “breathable fabric”, and then after laundering them they shrunk.
A few years ago they did a giveaway where the hats were made from recycled plastic bottles, may be the same deal?
Mitchell & Ness sells a swank dugout jacket with that Phillies logo: link
Should be a nice-looking game and that Phillies hat they give away also looks nice.
This made my day! I have a 16-game plan with the Phillies, and was happy that my plan included a Phils/A’s game! The last game I took my father to was a Phils/A’s game in 2017 (also have a photo of him standing next to the Connie Mack statue outside the ballpark!) as he was a fan of both teams growing up here. He passed in 2018.
I was bummed that the 1920’s throwback game didn’t happen in 2020, but this will be a little more bittersweet: my dad was born in 1934. In fact, I have a Mitchell & Ness 1934 Phils jacket I wear in cool weather (spring or fall) to honor him.
Traditionally, when the Phillies have done a throwback, they usually include the visitors. In a pre-Nike world, Mitchell & Ness could be of assistance, though I remember one time when the 1960s throwbacks conspicuously lacked the giant numbers with the font that no other team used before or since.