Earlier today I wrote about how the Mariners’ new Nike pants appeared to be alarmingly transparent. As it turns out, they’re not the only team dealing with that problem.
Lots of teams have been having their players pose for their annual Photo Day pics this week, plus other photos are beginning to circulate, and it’s becoming apparent that the new see-through pants are an MLB-wide problem. For team after team, you can see the jersey, including its jock tag, showing through the pants. It’s worse for some teams than for others (which could be due to different lighting settings). Here are the teams that have been afflicted so far (but be sure to see the update at the end of the post, which has a bit of a reality check):
Angels
Cardinals
Dodgers
Orioles
Padres
Rays
Red Sox
Reds
White Sox
Yankees
———
I’ll add pics for more teams as they become available.
It’s worth noting that some teams are using last year’s pants for Photo Day (you can tell because of the different belt loops), including the Astros, Pirates, and Rangers. Players have had lots of complaints about the fit and feel of the new pants (more so than for the jerseys), so that may be why those teams aren’t wearing them. Or maybe it’s because of the see-through factor. Or both!
Update: A few people have sent me this shot from the Astros’ Photo Day shoot, showing the same see-through problem with the old pants (again, you can tell from the belt loops):
In addition, reader Matthew Houk points out that there were also some transparency issues in last year’s Photo Day pics, although it seems to me that the see-through factor is worse this year. Still, instead of just piling on, we should acknowledge that this isn’t necessarily a new issue, so maybe it has something to do with the lighting they use on Photo Day. My thanks to everyone who’s brought this reality check to my attention!
Paul that header image is a lot! Lol
Yeah thought I entered eunuch-watch for a second
Well played, Sir.
Seriously, geez. like the several close ups on groins weren’t enough to drive the point home
I came here just to say the exact same thing. Really, Paul? You can see that guy’s entire unit. Why, of all the possible pics would you choose that?
Uni Watch… proving once again that Rule 34 exists.
It looks like the problem is just as much about layering as it is about what we see. I don’t remember ever seeing the jersey equivalent of pronounced panty lines on old uniforms like I’m seeing them here.
Mark my words.
The players will NOT ever wear these sheer pants and Nike/Fanatics WILL have to redo them. And I doubt they can produce that much in time for the regular season. Maybe the gray pants can be “salvaged,” but no way will MLBPA allow their players on the field in these.
This!
Maybe I am misremembering but I vaguely recall there was a similar issue when Majestic first introduced the Cool Base or Flex Base uniform and also had pants made of the same fabric. And for one team the pants were even more see thru than what’s depicted above and it caused Majestic to revert to using the double knit fabric for the pants only
The emperor’s new pants
Waiting for a smart-ass player to start wearing bright floral board shorts underneath…
Or go “commando” LOL The “lighting thing” does create some issues. Has anyone ever seen the pictures of celebrities wearing sheer outfits on the red carpet?
You just said it: “sheer outfits.” But that’s the thing — an MLB uniform should not be sheer!
Sure have… and I’ve never understood why some pose virtually naked for those photos but freak out when a nude pic leaks onto the web LOL
Perhaps because it was leaked.
Or a leopard-skin thong.
Yep, no shame then ashamed when those nudes “leak” on the web LOL
Don’t forget Nike had this same issue with white football pants over a decade ago. They switched to a “lighter, higher performance” fabric and it had the side effect of being able to clearly see what everyone was wearing underneath – be it tights or especially jock straps.
If it was only transparency that was the issue with these pants I don’t think anything would be done about it. But the players complaints about lack of customization leading to poor fits well inevitably lead to a redesign.
Don’t forget Nike had this same issue with white football pants over a decade ago.
Yes, if only someone had mentioned that in an article earlier today…. link
Well, so much for the hidden ball trick.
(sorry)
LOL
COTD!
Have mercy!
This is absolutely comical. Not uni-related, but reminds me of the new ball fiasco in the NBA nearly 20 years ago (that was nearly 20 years ago!?) I agree with Phil — I would be shocked if this is not addressed prior to the season.
Yeah, it was 2006 when the NBA backed off after trying to switch from leather to a new synthetic ball. Almost 20 years!
“ball fiasco” indeed
At least baseball doesn’t get played in the rain. I’ve witnessed some grim scenes involving white cycling shorts…
I’m barely over last year’s juiced balls controversy, and now this?
This site became Uni-Crotch so gradually, I didn’t even notice!
I still want to see these on the field first. I watch a lot of college baseball, and a lot of the Nike schools are wearing the new template and I haven’t noticed the pants issue.
That’s a really good point. Flash photography in particular can cause clothes that aren’t really see-through to show. All of the examples appear to be taken in a flash setup…
Actually, there’s no reason to believe that the Mariners video — the one that started this whole storyline — involved a flash. Ditto for the outdoor Angels and Orioles pics.
Note that Joe Kelly’s Dodgers pants appear to be last years model with the different belt loops.
MLB, Nike, and Fanatics all deserve the crap coming at them. MLB will sacrifice anything for a buck. Nike and Fanatics will cut corners and sacrifice quality at any opportunity. Perfect match.
Was at the MLB store on 6th Ave in NYC this past weekend. Those sad, tissue paper jerseys weren’t exactly flying off the shelves.
Those diagonal belt tunnels are just horri-bad. Besides the pants being see-through, they just make every player look like they have a belly with the way the belt seems to twist down.
It’s like the italic belt loops are designed to be arrows, directing your eyes to the see-through crotch.
The first rainy game should be…ummm…revealing.
Add sweat, rain, or a Gatorade celebration, and we might have more than just wardrobe malfunctions. Yikes.
The rose goes in the front, big guy.
The comments just keep getting better.
I see London, I see France, I see your underpants.
Why do I have a feeling that this is all just part of Nike’s sinister plan to replace every team’s outfits with full-color unitards?
I hope every player remembers to wear their cup. Constant outlines of mushroom tips could be bad for business. (or great for for the Giants)
And here’s today’s lineup:
1. Pete LaCock
2. Johnny Dickshot
3. Dick Pole
4. Jack Glasscock
5. Trey McNutt
6. Charlie Furbush
7. Ed Head
8. Pickles Dilhoeffer
9. Three Finger Brown
Pay close attention and see why they call him Three Finger!
The Reds player has the right idea…hide the family jewels!
Thank gawd that the shirt tails are long, or these shots would need to be censored.
This is pitiful and comical at the same time. The fabric buyer at Nike must have had a field day choosing fabrics for daring yoga pants until realizing the chosen fabric was for official MLB pants…
Garrr.. Change the name of the site to Dick-Watch. Seriously, where is George Costanza when you need him?
This photo pretty much sums this whole thing up
link
It’s not well known but Nike designed uniforms for a couple movies back in the 90s…
link
I’m debating on which was the biggest disaster. Is it current 2024 Nike/ Fanatics MLB uniforms or the Seinfeld episode The Chaperone when George Costanza talked the Yankees into switching from polyester to cotton uniforms which immediatly shrank after the first laundry causing the team to be unable to run and Don Mattingly splitting his pants?
link
Nuts to this
Lots of possibilities, logos, floral designs, emojis, etc embroidered on jock to show through the crotch area, priceless.
I sent this article to my 73 year old mother, and now she’s dead. Thanks Paul.