In case you missed it in yesterday’s Comments section, there was a lot of chatter about the new Reds and Diamondbacks logos. The discussion was primarily due to a Deadspin item that appeared yesterday, which in turn was prompted by a long thread last week on Chris Creamer‘s message boards, which had itself been fueled by the logos being leaked on the Fanhome boards (which I’d never even heard of before — there’s only so much of this stuff a guy can keep up with).
I have plenty to say about both logo sets, but that’s not what I want to talk about today. Instead I want to talk about the issue of leaked info, confidentiality, and how sports designs are disseminated. All this seems particularly timely because control of sensitive information is a huge topic in the world right now: Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers in the early 1970s, is back in the news with a much-discussed article in which he encourages leaking as a form of dissent; Hewlett-Packard’s chairwoman resigned last week after it was revealed that the company had engaged in some highly questionable practices to discover and neutralize the sources of unauthorized media leaks; the White House continues to criticize the New York Times for having disclosed the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program last winter (and we now know that Times editors were actually summoned to the Oval Office by President Bush, who personally urged them — unsuccessfully — to withhold the story); access to classified information is also a major sticking point in the ongoing saga of how terrorism suspects should be tried; and on the sports scene, two San Francisco Chronicle reporters are facing possible jail time for refusing to name the confidential sources who leaked them the BALCO grand jury testimony. (By coincidence, several of these news items, and several other leak-related tidbits, were discussed yesterday in this article, which I didn’t even notice until I’d already written most of this post.)
Obviously, the question of whether we all get to see the Diamondbacks’ new sleeve logo a month or two ahead of time isn’t quite as earthshaking as any of those other issues. But the principles are the same, and it’s something I think about a lot, because leaked and/or confidential uni-related info comes my way pretty frequently — sometimes because I seek it out, and sometimes because it seeks me out. In fact, as you may recall, I’m the one who broke the story that the Diamondbacks would be getting a design overhaul in the first place, after a source at the team’s pro shop got in touch with me last month. (I didn’t have visuals, just a verbal description. If you want to see how I reported it, scroll down to the “Battlefield Report” section of this ESPN column.) I don’t say that to toot my own horn; indeed, it wouldn’t surprise me if some of you knew about the Dbacks facelift long before I did. I’m just explaining that these are questions I deal with on a semi-regular basis.
First, a bit of background. Each major sports league produces a “style guide,” which shows the official logos, colors, and uniform treatments for every team. These are used primarily by merchandising licensees and media outlets. In the past, the style guides were produced as printed volumes and looked sort of like catalogs; more recently the leagues have stopped printing the guides and have instead put all the information on password-protected web sites.
In Uni Watch’s early days, the leagues were usually happy to provide me with style guides if I asked nicely, I think in part because the column was such a small enterprise in those days and I was writing for a fairly obscure media outlet, at least in terms of the sports world (the Village Voice‘s now-defunct sports section, which was buried in the back of the paper, amidst the phone sex ads). In short, I think the leagues didn’t really take me seriously, so they could basically pat me on the head and say, “Here you go, here’s your style guide, now run off and place nice.”
Nowadays, of course, Uni Watch runs on ESPN.com. You’d think the leagues would be more eager to work with me now that I’m part of the world’s biggest sports media company, right? Wrong. Most of them are much more restrictive now. In fact, I don’t currently have official access to any league’s style guide (although I have unofficial access for one league, and another league is generally happy to show me anything I ask to see). Part of this, I think, is that I’m often critical of the leagues, plus I bug them for lots of picky information — they file me under P, for pest. And part of it, I’m sure, is that the internet has made it much easier to spread uniform and logo information, and has given rise to communities that are very hungry for that information (like all of you reading this), so things can often spin out of control. That’s how the Reds and Dbacks logos were revealed: Someone downloaded the logo pages from Major League Baseball’s style guide web site, uploaded them to an image-hosting server, and then announced them on the Fanhome message board.
Who did this? I have no idea, although I can tell you it wasn’t me. It could have been me, though, because I saw the logos a few days before they began appearing on various message boards. I also saw the full Cincinnati and Arizona uniforms, which to my knowledge haven’t hit the internet yet.
So why didn’t I write about the logos when I first saw them? Because they were provided to me under the condition that I not go public with them. I gave my word, and my word is good. (As a journalist, I’m frequently given information on an “embargoed” basis, which means I’m not allowed to talk about it until a specific date — that’s similar to what happened here.) When the logos began circulating last week, I stayed mum, because the designs were still confined to a very small subculture, and I thought it wasn’t my place to give them wider exposure. Obviously, that’s a judgment call. Similarly, when the Deadspin link appeared yesterday, I said to myself, “Okay, lots of people read Deadspin, so now the logos are really public — I can talk about them now.” That’s a judgment call, too. The full uniforms, meanwhile, haven’t been yet been leaked in any public forum I’m aware of, so I’m keeping mum about them.
But what if someone had forwarded the logos and/or uniforms to me with no strings attached? Would I have leaked them then? Maybe, maybe not — it would depend on the specific circumstances. Why? A better question might be, Why not? Here are the usual answers to that question:
• “Leaking a design before its scheduled unveiling shows no respect for the designer.” This argument, which has been promulgated primarily by the design world, doesn’t really work for me. Some of my best friends are designers, but the designer is ultimately just a contractor working for a client. The client is the one who owns the design and calls the shots, and in this case that’s the team or the league. Which brings us to…
• “Leaking a design can screw up a team’s marketing plan.” I have even less sympathy for this position. Sports marketing these days is insipid on so many different levels — if anything undercuts a team’s plan, or just raises the marketing staff’s blood pressure, I’m inclined to think that’s probably a good thing. Fans are tired of everything in sports seeming calculated and scripted, and that includes uniform programs. The level of secrecy about team designs has become offensive, since the designs ultimately belong to the fans — not legally, of course, but emotionally, because the fans are the ones who’ll be rooting for the colors, the logos, the uniforms. Teams need to remember that they’re not just business entities — they’re also civic entities (that’s why we all get so worked up about this stuff to begin with), and fans have a legitimate civic interest in seeing their teams’ designs. So in this case, I lean toward Daniel Ellsberg’s position that leaking can sometimes be a legitimate form of dissent, and a way for fans to claim some sense of empowerment in an increasingly alienating sports world — or at least a way of fucking with people who probably deserve to be fucked with. (That sound you just heard is my file being moved to E, for enemy.)
Besides, I’ve yet to hear of a single case in which leaking caused any harm other than annoying a bunch of suits. When the Sabres’ new logo was leaked back in June, it prompted fan outcry, a petition drive, political cartoons, and lots of hairpiece jokes. But did the Sabres make any changes? No. By the time they finally unveiled the new uni two weekends ago, managing partner Larry Quinn was telling reporters, “In retrospect, we couldn’t have done it any better. [The leaks have] been a great guerilla marketing campaign.”
And here’s something else to consider: As many of you know, new uniform designs can often be seen in video games well before the design’s official unveiling. And why is that? Because teams and leagues want to milk every last licensing penny out of their designs. So please don’t tell me a design is too “sensitive” to be shown ahead of time when you’re already making money off of it in the video game market. You can’t have it both ways.
• “What’s the rush? We’ll all get to see the design eventually.” As simplistic as it may sound, I think this is actually the best reason not to publish a leaked design. Does it really matter whether we see the Diamondbacks’ new logos now or in November, when they’re slated to be officially unveiled? Nah. If a league representative showed me a new uniform design and said, “Listen, you can do what you want with this, but I’d appreciate it if you could just wait and let us handle it our own way,” I’d probably oblige. It’s a certainly a more honest approach than trying to convince me that the fate of western civilization — or the Western Conference — hangs in the balance.
Your thoughts? I’m listenin’.
A good analogy would be Snakes on the Plane. There was so much online hype before the movie that by the time it came out everyone was expecting more than what it was.
As a member of the media, you obviuosly have much more of a responsibility to not “leak” info against the wishes of those that provide you with information. Those of us in sports communities have much less of a responseability, with only the fear of not being given future information.
I can appreciateyour position and I think it definitely adds legitimacy to your writing.
Paul,
You made some very good points. I suggest continuing to do what you have been doing, following your gut and making a decisions on a case-by-case basis.
It’s probably not a good idea to betray the trust of team/league uni folks who give you information in confidence. Betraying their trust will do nothing more than make them even less likely to share info with you later on.
Just my two cents. Keep up the good work.
I tend to fall more in to the “dissent” category. I agree that the scripting of everything sports-related and secrecy surrounding something that is just as much a public entity as it is private one is offensive. Being a Sabres fan, I especially felt that way in the case of that leak, and still feel offended by the whole way that shook out. Part of me still thinks “wow, maybe I shouldn’t be seeing these new designs before they’re released, because I could be spoiling the surprise for myself” but the other side of me thinks “if they’re keeping them so quiet, WHY are they doing so?” In the case of the Sabres logo, that skepticism was directly on target, as the log o was, in fact, fugly.
Which actually brings me to something I’ve been thinking alot about lately. There was a time where sports marketing was all about catering to the desires of the fan. “Plucking the low-hanging fruit” as it were. If the fans want to name the team the “Indians” well, we’ll let them vote on it in a newspaper poll, and we’ll go with their decision. But that’s all gone by the wayside now. Again, the Sabres situation is a good case in point. They COULD have gone with a design that was… I guess I’ll say “expected” by most of the fans. But instead, they went with a design that seems to cater to the non-fan. That is to say “let’s make a design that will be ‘cool’ to people who are not hockey/Sabres fans, and we can just ASSUME that the actual fans will fall in line and buy up just about any old thing we put out.”
As a fan, that’s offensive. I don’t want ANYONE to assume they’ve got my money firmly in their pocket, while they go out and trash a tradition to suck in a few extra dollars from non-fans. I don’t want them to assume the “low hanging fruit” will just fall in to their laps, while they shake sticks at the higher branches. And if leaking a logo is a form of dissent against this kind of thinking… then I’m ALL for it.
Sorry… rant over.
i concur with the first commenters. You provide a wonderful forum for us here and your professionalism and eye-for-detail are unmatched. Keep up the great work and continue to follow your heart, it’s not let you down yet.
On a less serious note: please devote a blog-entry to boxing ! Hey it’s much more (well, slightly)legitimate than pro wrassling.
Having worked in the journalism field, I know all the ethics behind leaks. When you get down to it, unless public heath is at risk, there is no reason to go public with a leak if asked not to.
Since you’re writing about uniforms, there is no chance public health can be an issue, unless you consider a bad design as dangerous to our eyes.
Keep doing things teh way you have as it’s working great. It aint broke so don’t fix it.
I think the only real reason that teams are so worried about the ‘official’ unveiling is because of merchandising. While it’s not even that strong a point, I can see why teams would want to hold onto it until a fat stack of shirts have been printed so they can ride the piqued interest to the bank. Many teams earn a lot of their money on merchandising, and while it’s a rather grey area, a lot of teams change their identity to boost lagging sales. Some teams also need to worry about bootleg merchandise as well, and having a premature leak will mean that bootleggers can get fake stuff out there before the legit stuff. To you and I, who would scoff at some of the pathetic attempts by bootleggers to sell us obviously false stuff, it’s absurd, but to 75% of casual fans, they don’t mind. So I can see why teams are as secretive as they are. Myself, I like when teams are open and let fans decide things like this. The Seahawk-helmet design vote comes to mind.
Just my 2 cents.
I just spent the last half hour or so trying to word a response to today’s column and the best I can do is to quote Ryan at #4. I couldn’t have said it better myself. Go read what he said.
Teams today change unis, logos, and colors for one reason, and one reason only —to make more money. There is no other reason. It’s a chance to make fans buy more merchandise to keep up with the changes. To leak these changes is a good thing. It lets fans voice displeasure, however feebly it may be, as they look forward to many seasons of the Buffa-slug or stupid black Flyers jerseys. At least they can register their opposition in hopes something will change, though it won’t, not until the team has sucked up some serious coin.
Paul, I don’t envy your position when asked not to leak something. Protecting the ability to receive future leaks or letting us fans know what’s up. That is a tough decision…
DITCH THE BLACK UPDATE
The Mets 2006 NL East Champion shirts (grey w/ black sleeves) have been selling so well they’ve decided to release a limited edition “alternate” version.
The difference?
BLUE sleeves.
Lukas 1
Mets… well, more than one but you’re rallying!
“All publicity is good publicity.”
I don’t see the big deal over seeing the uni designs a few months in advance, I really could have waited to see them. However, I do not understand how the leaking of these style guides is detrimental to the organizations. Looks what it did- it created a buzz, created awareness of there forthcoming uniform modifications. The more eyes these guides reach, the more likely these teams are to sell product. They probably say that they dont want them to be realeased, so that when someone puts them on the internet, it creates mini controversy. And everyone loves to stop and take a look at controversy.
Couldn’t agree with you more Paul. Some of my friends think I’m insane/pathetic for reading this blog and every comment everyday, but I know that I’m reading quality commentary.
Now the real question…what is your analysis of the new logos and wordmarks? I for one am rather disappointed. The Reds could have done so much better, and maybe I misheard, but weren’t the D-Backs supposed to incorporate a sand-ish color into their logos? I feel like right now, the red and black are too simple.
I think I’d honor a club’s wishes if they simply asked me nicely. I agree with Paul that the arguments he often hears don’t hold much water. I don’t care about your marketing plan, but if you ask me nicely to hold onto information until a certain day or to not release it at all, I would certainly honor that request.
Weren’t the Reds supposed to go back to the navy blue in place of the black?
[quote comment=”10576″]Some of my friends think I’m insane/pathetic for reading this blog and every comment everyday…[/quote]
Dude, you clearly need some new friends…
I’ll discuss the new logos in a day or three.
“The Mets 2006 NL East Champion shirts (grey w/ black sleeves) have been selling so well they’ve decided to release a limited edition “alternate†version.
The difference?
BLUE sleeves.”
I don’t get it, why would anyone want ‘Division’ championship stuff anyway? For me it’s all or nothing!
Yeah, why are the Reds still using “Cincy black?” And what the hell is Cincy black? Also, doesn’t the new D’Backs logo seem a little too phallic (sp?).
A question for the group – does anyone know why the Saints sported the white unis for last night’s home game? Hopefully, Coach Payton isn’t bringing the Dallas phobia of dark jerseys to the Crescent City.
[quote comment=”10578″]Weren’t the Reds supposed to go back to the navy blue in place of the black?[/quote]
Yeah, I’m REALLY dissappointed by the black.
[quote comment=”10580″]”The Mets 2006 NL East Champion shirts (grey w/ black sleeves) have been selling so well they’ve decided to release a limited edition “alternate†version.
The difference?
BLUE sleeves.”
I don’t get it, why would anyone want ‘Division’ championship stuff anyway? For me it’s all or nothing![/quote]
You must be an arrogant Yankees fan. For any other team winning the division is a great accomplishment.
The thing with leaks is, if you leak something your not supposed to, no one else is going to give you confidential information. I agree with Paul, if a team told you it doesnt want you sharing information don’t share it.
What’s so new about the Reds logos? I don’t see mcuh difference from before. Could someone point out the changes.
[quote comment=”10584″][quote comment=”10580″]”The Mets 2006 NL East Champion shirts (grey w/ black sleeves) have been selling so well they’ve decided to release a limited edition “alternate†version.
The difference?
BLUE sleeves.”
I don’t get it, why would anyone want ‘Division’ championship stuff anyway? For me it’s all or nothing![/quote]
You must be an arrogant Yankees fan. For any other team winning the division is a great accomplishment.
The thing with leaks is, if you leak something your not supposed to, no one else is going to give you confidential information. I agree with Paul, if a team told you it doesnt want you sharing information don’t share it.[/quote]
I kind of agree with not celebrating a Division Championship and I’m a lifelong Met fan. A team built like the Mets cannot simply win the Division and then get swept out of the Playoffs. It’s WS or bust for me.
If seeing a new jersey before the “official” announcement causes some wortheless marketing guy to get his panites in a bunch, I’m all for it.
[quote comment=”10581″]A question for the group – does anyone know why the Saints sported the white unis for last night’s home game? Hopefully, Coach Payton isn’t bringing the Dallas phobia of dark jerseys to the Crescent City.[/quote]
I think the NFL asked teams to wear white at home for their opener. But I’m just speculating. The Chiefs said they used white jerseys because of the heat. It was 65 degrees and raining. They hadn’t worn white at home since ’82. Almost half of the home teams in week one wore white. I don’t know how many did week two. Now the Saints. What it that hot in the dome? Did the team want to welcome their fans back by wearing the jerseys the fans never see the them in? Sounds like a suggestion from above.
[quote]
I kind of agree with not celebrating a Division Championship and I’m a lifelong Met fan. A team built like the Mets cannot simply win the Division and then get swept out of the Playoffs. It’s WS or bust for me.[/quote]
I tend to disagree only because it’s the NL East and the Braves had a 14 YEAR stanglehold on the division title. I do expect a lot more from this team but winning the division is a pretty big deal.
Well speaking of making big bucks off of new unis, I saw a commercial for an airline (I forget which one, maybe Southwest?) which showed an NFL referee wearing the newer ref uniform. The NFL is alrady cashing in big time on that.
Paul, I think you bring up a valid point here, and that is… it’s a sports uniform. You aren’t leaking plans for jet fighters, atomic bombs, recipies for crystal meth, etc. And while they are a part of our lives (a big part in some cases), the world spins whether we see them this month or next year. And if it ruffles the suits feathers, screw ’em.
Personally, I like the Reds using black. I think they are one of the only teams that look good with it. And if you look at the leak thing, I don’t think they are having a black uni or anything, just as a back drop, etc. unless the BP jersey is black. But I figure that will be red, kind of like the current alt uni. I know it is old, but link looks better than link and its 100 times better than when he was an link But besides the high socks, it was always better than link so suck up Mets fans, at least your black has all black, not mismatched.
But Paul, do what your gut tells you to do. You have brought all of us here, it’s not like we all gathered and elected you as our leader. Otherwise, we all would just be the weirdo’s that our friends hated being with during a game. So, I don’t know if you’re told this enough, but thanks, you bust your ass and do all the things that you do, so I can’t complain. Yeah, sometimes we all don’t agree with you, but that’s what makes this great. Just keep it up, and we know you’re a good guy who can be trusted, keep that edge. Like you said, we all hold these teams, in my case the Browns and the Buckeyes, as MY team, not the owners, coaches, administrators, and/or anyone at Nike or RBK. So I should be part of the redesign. At least let us see them, they all ready make so much money off us fans, it’s only fair if I know what new logo they want to spit out on me. Just my thoughts.
I agree with Paul in that as a journalist, he does hold the key to numerous “breaking news” stories more than us as John Q. Public. I could be wrong here, but I believe journalists hold an unwritten rule that you never bite the hand that feeds you. In Paul’s case, if he is asked by a team not to show pictures or name names, I believe he has a responsibility to not tell the story until the team advises him to do so. Being blacklisted as a reporter is far worse than hearing “no comment”.
However, I also believe that in the sports world, “the worst part about being talked about is not being talked about”. The Sabres did a great job in not stifling the talk about their new jerseys, and I don’t see why any other league would make a huge deal out of chatter from the fans. The fans are the ones who put money in the pockets of the owners and players, and they have a right to see what is being rolled out on the field of play as consumers. As Paul said, teams squeeze every last penny they can out of licensing. Who is the one paying for this in the end? The consumers. The fans.
As a side note, I am really enjoying the conversation on the posts here today. Great article, Paul, and good work everyone!
As a Braves fan, I imagine some people are buying up the Divisional Championship shirts because the Braves, for once, aren’t the division champs. Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this the Mets’ first division championship since ’88 or so? I can understand wanting World Series or bust (stupid Bravos with only one title), but it is kinda big to win the division after the Braves have had it for every year since 1995.
I thought it was interesting that last night in the Saints/Falcons game, New Orleans cornerback Mike McKenzie was wear two pairs of gloves, one on his hands and the other attached to his belt.
link
I know that recently there have been discussion about MLB players and their glove habits, but has anyone seen anything like this in the NFL before?
Looks like the lettering for the Cincy jerseys is different – more of a “riverboat” theme.
If they really want to start something, they should go back to these: link
Frankly, they were the only team that looked good in pullover jerseys when they were popular; why not stake out a nitch as the only pullover jersey team?
But, On the new EA NHL 07 Game they do not have the new Uni’s. And the game came out last week
[quote comment=”10598″]But, On the new EA NHL 07 Game they do not have the new Uni’s. And the game came out last week[/quote]
They Don’t have the new Sabers Logo or Uni
“You must be an arrogant Yankees fan. For any other team winning the division is a great accomplishment.”
Actually, I’m a Mets fan, so calm down…
I would agree with the sentiment that a leak like this would only help the subject of the leak. The Sabres example is very appropriate. How much have people been talking about the Buffalo uniforms? A lot more than they would have otherwise. Like them or not, it created a buzz and anticipation. That’s more than the Sabres could have possibly hoped for. Arizona may see the same, and with the Reds its not going to mean much at all.
In general, though, I have no problem with leaks. I wouldn’t leak information myself, but I don’t have any bitter hatred for someone who does. And I work in a field where leaked information would become MY problem and MY crisis if it did get out. I’d be annoyed, but I wouldn’t go on a witch-hunt. And the journalists involved would just be doing their job. What would (and does) piss me off, though, is a journalist going public with embargoed information. Doing this serves the journalists interest. They are seeing material they wouldn’t have otherwise for the express purpose of giving them an opportunity to be fully prepared to respond when it is publicly released. They aren’t hiding anything from their readers in a useful manner. They were given the info for a specific purpose. If they ignore that deal, they better have a LOT of clout, because they’ll be souring their working relationship with that source perminently and risk getting completely black-listed. And with good reason. If the team itself is coming to you, you have a responsibility to honor their wishes. You abandon that responsibility at your peril.
Back to the uniforms, I like the new Dbacks sleeve logo. Its a much more inspired rendering of their team name that the coiled snake “D”. Frankly, ditch that and go with the “db” snake logo on the cap. And there is a sand color, there. The PMS breakdown at the bottom of the page lists an “Arizona Diamondbacks Beige” as being PMS 7501. Looking at my PMS guide, this is definetly a sand color. Achievable in CMYK, too. I’m guessing that’s a standard for MLB teams, though. Its 97% Trans. White, 1.9% yello, .7% black, and .4% warm red. And lets all thank our lucky stars that they aren’t making it the color of their road unis like a certain south-western city.
[quote comment=”10594″]I agree with Paul in that as a journalist, he does hold the key to numerous “breaking news” stories more than us as John Q. Public. I could be wrong here, but I believe journalists hold an unwritten rule that you never bite the hand that feeds you. In Paul’s case, if he is asked by a team not to show pictures or name names, I believe he has a responsibility to not tell the story until the team advises him to do so. Being blacklisted as a reporter is far worse than hearing “no comment”.
[/quote]
Exactly right. In my brief time having to deal with reporters, the ones I dealt with regularly were much happier being told info and being told to keep it “off the record” than they were being told “no comment”. They also honored the off the record request everytime.
Today’s article and the conversation it has sparked was worth not ebing able to read the column with my morning coffee. But just barely!
Lifelong Mets fan here who will not be purchasing the division champs gear unless they win it all, at which time they will be unloading the division champs stuff at bargain prices. At that point, the divsion stuff has a kind of novelty ring to it. If they don’t win, it’s just too bitter to own a division champs shirt (since as mentioned above, the expectations are much higher).
The only reason sports teams change uniforms is to fleece another nickel out of their fan base. With this being their sole motivation, i feel that leaking the info is justified.
More important than finding out something first, is finding out from a source (uniwatch) that doesnt have an agenda or isnt annoucning it as a part of a marketing campaign.
Paul, this is why i hope you pass along information, but i do understand your hesitency and the concequences that come with.
As a mets fan, i will not buy a Division Champs shirt out of fear of jinxing the next round. I will wait and hopefully buy all of them in blue.
I think that I would leak something that was obtained second or third hand, but not something given to me by the team with an explicit note that it is embargoed. I definitely would have leaked the Buffaslug in hopes of getting it banished. In short, a case-by-case decision.
As for celebrating a division championship or not, I am happy as hell that my Twins just made the playoffs, especially considering where they were at the beginning of the season. Yeah, a World Series is great, but I want to enjoy the ride along the way. Even with a team as loaded as the Mets, it’s not a sure thing to win the Series—see, Yankees. The Mets are Division Champs. Take some pride and happiness in that.
My two cents, as usual.
In response to some banter yesterday about adidas’ and Nike’s similar sleeve decoration (check comment #101 from yesterday):
I can’t confirm when adidas released theirs, but Nike did it 2002. As a precursor, Oregon had been wearing link up through 2001. The next year they added an link which, in my opinion, ruined a great look. That same year, Maryland unveiled their new unis using the link that Oregon was using (I think it was the best Maryland’s ever had). USC also redesigned their uni with the same template but customized it, dividing the shoulder stripe to create a link reminiscent of link. The orginal template is still worn by link, whereas link has since borrowed SC’s version.
Adidas’ looks weird and kinda awkward, it’s link and doesn’t flow with the shoulers like SC’s. And why isn’t the point link?! It can look alright at times, I guess. Though, I do like Houston’s version. Sharp clean and crisp. But USC’s still tops my list!
Side note: Carson Palmer is going all link with his link. I just noticed it today, but apparently there’s link.
NL East Champs Stuff:
Tonight I am going to see the Mets in Atlanta.
I would KILL for one of those blue NL East caps to wear tonight!
On the topic of “Championship” shirts: Back when the Red Sox and Patriots were winning championships, I decided that I would buy the shirt that corresponded to the highest level that the team advanced. Then the Patriots started having clearence sales on AFC East Champion and AFC Champion shirts a few months after the season ended, so I was able to get those shirts for about 5 bucks apiece. Sometimes it pays to wait.
As someone that’s been the benefactor of a leak (the Jason Grimsley no-pay story), I can say that I believe most leaks are harmless, and are designed to get the truth out there.
If a leak were to violate national security, or legitimately put people in danger, I can completely understand withholdhing your info.
By the way, how do you think the new Arizona colors will look when Chase Field hosts the 2009 MLB All-Star Game?
I bought a NY Rangers 1994 Stanley Cup shirt the day after they won the cup for $19.99. Two years later the Rangers were selling them out and I bought 20 more at $1 each. I still have a few and I break a new one out every few years. But I would never wear clothing that is less than the overall championshp. It is like teams that hang a banner for each level of accomplishment. Teams should only one banner per year.
So, uh, when I go to the Jake tonight I’m not going to be turned away at the gate or anything since dumb luck had me be the first moron to see the Deadspin thing and post it in the comments here, am I?
And thanks, but no thanks, to Buckeye Mike for spotting the black (eek!) socks by the Browns. Cant exactly spot that from link. I say no thanks, because it’s going to drive me insane for the rest of the year when I watch the road games…
One more comment on the pullover jerseys. Stanford still uses them, and they look pretty good. Eventually, some team is going to take the “next step” in uniform design. Aside from cool base fabrics and non-wool hats, the new look might involve ditching the button-up jersey. Just a hunch.
link
I just wanted to say that that last picture is so homo-erotic its scaring me.
As a journalist I am fully aware that some “sources” are told to leak information so that it can create public awarness without the larger company being held responsible. Taking the Reds and Diamondbacks for example. Would it be concievable that they leaked it to a small community of people who are critical of uniforms so that they could monitor what was thought about them. In other words, use the smaller community as a test group. If you go around the city I would bet that 95% of people may not know that the teams are going to change their colors, let alone have seen them in the form that we have. Anyhow I am just wondering if the purpose of for them to gain actual feedback.
Since this is on their site, it’s definitely not a “leak”, but Uni-News anyways…
The Nets have link
[quote comment=”10615″]One more comment on the pullover jerseys. Stanford still uses them, and they look pretty good. Eventually, some team is going to take the “next step” in uniform design. Aside from cool base fabrics and non-wool hats, the new look might involve ditching the button-up jersey. Just a hunch.[/quote]
I don’t see that as the “next step”. I see that as a step backwards.
[quote comment=”10616″]I just wanted to say that that last picture is so homo-erotic its scaring me.[/quote]
ROFLMAO thats great!!!!
[quote comment=”10595″]As a Braves fan, I imagine some people are buying up the Divisional Championship shirts because the Braves, for once, aren’t the division champs. Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this the Mets’ first division championship since ’88 or so? I can understand wanting World Series or bust (stupid Bravos with only one title), but it is kinda big to win the division after the Braves have had it for every year since 1995.[/quote]
Actually the Braves have won every NL East title since 1991, which would be 15 straight seasons but for the strike shortened 1994 season. As events turned out, the Braves wouldn’t have their streak were it not for the Strike in ’94 because the Montreal Expos were running away with then division that year and had the best record in baseball.
If you’ll recall the Braves played the Twins in the World Series in ’91 and the Blue Jays in ’92 and these were two of the greatest Series matchups in the last 25 years if not all time.
Question: Since the DBacks are changing apparently…..when is it ok to start calling your Brandon Webb jersey a throwback?
[quote comment=”10614″]And thanks, but no thanks, to Buckeye Mike for spotting the black (eek!) socks by the Browns. Cant exactly spot that from link. I say no thanks, because it’s going to drive me insane for the rest of the year when I watch the road games…[/quote]
Well, trust me, I would rather not have seen them myself also. but I finally couldn’t take it anymore. but atleast you are lucky enough to go all the time. but if you start saying something at the stadium, maybe u can get more people to piss and moan and get them to change it(the socks) back to at least brown, but more to the stipes that they have rocked at one time with both home and away uni’s. see here(first game back in link) and we all know about the former road link
here’s your bombshell of creativity for the day, kids. that new diamondbacks logo is a link of david blaine’s link. don’t ask me how i know link.
too bad craig counsell, damion easley, and co. can’t make my vomit disappear…
(i mean an upside down spade?? link.)
As a Journalism Major and having worked in the Sports information Department at a University I have been through all the philisophical debates about sources and such. I think Paul is right on. We get to see things before a lot of people and apparently he is keeping his sources happy so we can keep seeing things early! It’s not like it is life and death but judging from the comments posted it makes a lot of people happy to read this blog and comment on things (myself included!).
Keep up the good work Paul!
[quote comment=”10621″][quote comment=”10595″]As a Braves fan, I imagine some people are buying up the Divisional Championship shirts because the Braves, for once, aren’t the division champs. Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this the Mets’ first division championship since ’88 or so? I can understand wanting World Series or bust (stupid Bravos with only one title), but it is kinda big to win the division after the Braves have had it for every year since 1995.[/quote]
Actually the Braves have won every NL East title since 1991, which would be 15 straight seasons but for the strike shortened 1994 season. As events turned out, the Braves wouldn’t have their streak were it not for the Strike in ’94 because the Montreal Expos were running away with then division that year and had the best record in baseball.
If you’ll recall the Braves played the Twins in the World Series in ’91 and the Blue Jays in ’92 and these were two of the greatest Series matchups in the last 25 years if not all time.[/quote]
Matthew, the Braves have won every NL East title since 1995 – the first year of the newly aligned divisions. Before that, they won the NL West in 91, 92 and 93.
[quote comment=”10610″]NL East Champs Stuff:
Tonight I am going to see the Mets in Atlanta.
I would KILL for one of those blue NL East caps to wear tonight![/quote]
Scream to your heart’s content, Brother. and for added measure: give ’em a sarcastic tomahawk chop to boot!!! Have an adult beverage on me!
[quote comment=”10629″][quote comment=”10621″][quote comment=”10595″]As a Braves fan, I imagine some people are buying up the Divisional Championship shirts because the Braves, for once, aren’t the division champs. Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this the Mets’ first division championship since ’88 or so? I can understand wanting World Series or bust (stupid Bravos with only one title), but it is kinda big to win the division after the Braves have had it for every year since 1995.[/quote]
Actually the Braves have won every NL East title since 1991, which would be 15 straight seasons but for the strike shortened 1994 season. As events turned out, the Braves wouldn’t have their streak were it not for the Strike in ’94 because the Montreal Expos were running away with then division that year and had the best record in baseball.
If you’ll recall the Braves played the Twins in the World Series in ’91 and the Blue Jays in ’92 and these were two of the greatest Series matchups in the last 25 years if not all time.[/quote]
Matthew, the Braves have won every NL East title since 1995 – the first year of the newly aligned divisions. Before that, they won the NL West in 91, 92 and 93.[/quote]
Very good point. I completely forgot about realignment. That was a major brain fart on my part.
I really hate MLB’s gestapo-like tactics when dealing with their intellectual property rights. God forbid that they lose out on any potential merchandise sales. These clows also send out cease and desist letters to simple fansites just for using photos of players who happen to be wearing a uniform item with a team logo on it.
Lighten up, MLB. The free spread of information can only help a marketing campaign, not diminish it.
Give em’ a chop for me and the Bucs too!
[quote comment=”10581″]Yeah, why are the Reds still using “Cincy black?” And what the hell is Cincy black? Also, doesn’t the new D’Backs logo seem a little too phallic (sp?).
A question for the group – does anyone know why the Saints sported the white unis for last night’s home game? Hopefully, Coach Payton isn’t bringing the Dallas phobia of dark jerseys to the Crescent City.[/quote]
I thought everyone here had a phobia of dark jerseys… come on, guys. Black doesn’t really look that bad when used in moderation, in fact, it looks good. Teams don’t always add black jerseys just to be “cool” or appeal to the younger generation, they do it because it is visually appealing. The Reds’ use of black (matrix-dot undershirts notwithstanding) looks good, becuase it’s used in moderation. The Mets’ black home unis look good. Sure, I would love to see the pinstripes and blue hats more often, and the “snow whites” gone, but I certainly don’t want the Mets to lose the home black altogether. The road blacks, I could take them or leave them. But I would like to see the Mets keep the home blacks on as a Sunday uni, if nothing else.
Back to the leak issue, though. Paul, you do an excellent job day in and day out. Keep it up! I do grow a little tired of all the black-bashing, but thanks for all you do! I guess I didn’t really realize all the ethics that go into this, but I’m glad you actually consider these things.
[quote comment=”10590″]Well speaking of making big bucks off of new unis, I saw a commercial for an airline (I forget which one, maybe Southwest?) which showed an NFL referee wearing the newer ref uniform. The NFL is alrady cashing in big time on that.[/quote]
The thing I found odd about this commercial (if we’re thinking of the same one) is that they were willing to pony up the dough to use the official NFL ref uniform, but they had generic-looking fake uniforms for the players. I would have thought they would have gone all or nothing.
As a Twins fan, there is no way I’d buy a “Wild Card Winner” or “Division Championship” shirt.
It’s all or nothing.
Kind of like how hockey players won’t touch the conference championship trophy.
[quote comment=”10637″][quote comment=”10590″]Well speaking of making big bucks off of new unis, I saw a commercial for an airline (I forget which one, maybe Southwest?) which showed an NFL referee wearing the newer ref uniform. The NFL is alrady cashing in big time on that.[/quote]
The thing I found odd about this commercial (if we’re thinking of the same one) is that they were willing to pony up the dough to use the official NFL ref uniform, but they had generic-looking fake uniforms for the players. I would have thought they would have gone all or nothing.[/quote]
I’m fairly certain I recall that commercial being on the air a few years ago also, but with the old referee jersey. It’s interesting that Southwest Airlines would air a commercial that hasn’t been on in awhile and would take the time to update it with the new ref jersey.
Interesting anecdote: I was watching the Broncos-Patriots game on Sunday and I remarked to my friends that those players who have a blank space or a team name on the front bumper of their helmet wear an Adams or Schutt helmet since Riddell is the only one with on field licensing approved by the NFL. My friends’ reaction ranged from “Who cares” to “I think I was better off not knowing something that arcane.”
I need new friends.
Still link leak-related news today.
Incidentally, in case anyone’s wondering what happened to the gravatars, I asked John to take them down, since they weren’t working (not even mine!). Hopefully, we’ll be able to try again once the gravatar people have their shit together.
[quote comment=”10593″]Personally, I like the Reds using black. I think they are one of the only teams that look good with it. [/quote]
I agree. I think there are already enough teams with red, white, and blue/navy blue. I mentioned this a week or so ago, and someone ranted about my lack of patriotism or something. I’m not so sure those colors are used because of national pride…I think it may have more to do with red and blue being two of the three primary colors, and yellow doesn’t show up as well on a white background.
And I don’t think that just because some color was used back in the good ol’ days means it was great and any change is stupid.
[quote comment=”10638″]As a Twins fan, there is no way I’d buy a “Wild Card Winner” or “Division Championship” shirt.
It’s all or nothing.
Kind of like how hockey players won’t touch the conference championship trophy.[/quote]
Speaking of the Twins… how “insutling” was link? A Canucks t-shirt?! Worse yet, it had Bertuzzi on the back!!!
For chrissake! Why doesn’t he just wear link?!?!
Minnesota Public Enemy #2 getting doused on my team’s champagne!
That hurts.
Paul,
If you give your word to a source not to reveal a uni-related item on your website until a certain date, what would you do if someone else posted that same information in these message boards before that date? Would the post be deleted or would it stay? Have you been faced with this situation?
As a marketing grad student and reading all the opposition to a marketing campaign for the teams, I can only say this:
If the teams were really worried about the information being leaked, do you honestly think they would tell anybody? It’s not top secret and if it does get leaked, people will talk about it and like someone said create a buzz about it. We’ll all see the logo, colors, etc. and want to go out and buy the merchandise or even talk about like we have been. They don’t have to pay for it, so we’re actually doing them a favor.
And to whoever said something about the only reason they change the unis is to get more sales, that might be part of it, but it is also to get a more modern look. Look at what the link , link, link, link, link, link, link, link
I can’t think of any baseball teams and I’m not too knowledgeable on hockey. I’m pretty sure the teams aren’t sitting around thinking of ways to screws fans out of money.
[quote comment=”10642″][quote comment=”10638″]As a Twins fan, there is no way I’d buy a “Wild Card Winner” or “Division Championship” shirt.
It’s all or nothing.
Kind of like how hockey players won’t touch the conference championship trophy.[/quote]
Speaking of the Twins… how “insutling” was link? A Canucks t-shirt?! Worse yet, it had Bertuzzi on the back!!!
For chrissake! Why doesn’t he just wear link?!?!
Minnesota Public Enemy #2 getting doused on my team’s champagne!
That hurts.[/quote]
Justin Morneau is a Canadian from New Westminster, BC. New Westminster is a suburb of Vancouver. He grew up watching the Canucks, and is still a fan of them (obviously). While I understand the Wild-Canucks rivalry from their spirited contests, Morneau is a fan of the Canucks due to his environment.
Had he worn Green Bay stuff, I’d understand the outrage. And if he played for the Rockies, I’d certainly see why there would be anger. But does the Canucks shirt really matter when he’s been the driving force behind the Twins earning a playoff berth?
Well, there’s certainly a lot of grist for the mill here. For Paul, I would say the critical issue for you is balancing the trust of your sources and the trust of your readers. As a journalist, you would certainly lose quite a bit of credibility if you were perceived as having your sources’ interests in mind more than your readers.
Likewise, you can’t burn your sources at every turn. Pretty soon, you have no sources who will trust you.
I’m sure this crosses your mind every day, Paul, but there’s also the question of the credibility of your “off the record” sources. Only you can evaluate that and you certainly seem to have impeccable judgment.
Keep up the good work!
[quote comment=”10645″][quote comment=”10642″][quote comment=”10638″]As a Twins fan, there is no way I’d buy a “Wild Card Winner” or “Division Championship” shirt.
It’s all or nothing.
Kind of like how hockey players won’t touch the conference championship trophy.[/quote]
Speaking of the Twins… how “insutling” was link? A Canucks t-shirt?! Worse yet, it had Bertuzzi on the back!!!
For chrissake! Why doesn’t he just wear link?!?!
Minnesota Public Enemy #2 getting doused on my team’s champagne!
That hurts.[/quote]
Justin Morneau is a Canadian from New Westminster, BC. New Westminster is a suburb of Vancouver. He grew up watching the Canucks, and is still a fan of them (obviously). While I understand the Wild-Canucks rivalry from their spirited contests, Morneau is a fan of the Canucks due to his environment.
Had he worn Green Bay stuff, I’d understand the outrage. And if he played for the Rockies, I’d certainly see why there would be anger. But does the Canucks shirt really matter when he’s been the driving force behind the Twins earning a playoff berth?[/quote]
I know where he’s from, but have a little awaremness about where you are now… that’s all I’m saying – and I’m really not even saying that. I just found it odd.
Watching the MNF game last night and link jersey kept bothering me.
I didn’t realize the problem until the post game.
link what the other guys have. Look closely at the seam where the shoulder material meets the panel with the numbers on it. It makes a link across the jersey right through the nfl equip patch.
Reggie’s jersey has a different seam pattern link and, link
If a Minnesota born player was playing for say, the Blue Jays and he wore a WIld shirt under his jersey would that be an issue? As a Minnesotan I see nothing wrong with what Justin Morneau becasue I apprechaite a loyal fan. I also know it’s not the first time he’s done it as Paul has pointed out Morneau wearing an NHL schield shirt under his game jersey back in July I think.
[quote comment=”10644″]As a marketing grad student and reading all the opposition to a marketing campaign for the teams, I can only say this:
If the teams were really worried about the information being leaked, do you honestly think they would tell anybody? It’s not top secret and if it does get leaked, people will talk about it and like someone said create a buzz about it. We’ll all see the logo, colors, etc. and want to go out and buy the merchandise or even talk about like we have been. They don’t have to pay for it, so we’re actually doing them a favor.
And to whoever said something about the only reason they change the unis is to get more sales, that might be part of it, but it is also to get a more modern look. Look at what the link , link, link, link, link, link, link, link
I can’t think of any baseball teams and I’m not too knowledgeable on hockey. I’m pretty sure the teams aren’t sitting around thinking of ways to screws fans out of money.[/quote]
hey chuckles – maybe you shouldn’t have been smoking dope behind the student union when your link was talking about how you should research your topics before stumbling through the gates with erroneous analyses.
the ravens didn’t change their uniforms to make them more modern. no. they lost a link. furthermore, check out that blurb underneath the ‘logo controversy’ section where they mention that the uniforms have ‘essentially remained the same’ since 1996.
as for the other teams on your list, and the rest of your point – i have no idea.
As a Tigers fan I am ecstatic to just be PLAYING in October let alone win a division title. This is a league where only 4 teams make the playoffs. It may be expected in some places, but win a division or a world series or none, I’m already satisfied.
Still would’t buy a shirt though.
[quote comment=”10652″]If a Minnesota born player was playing for say, the Blue Jays and he wore a WIld shirt under his jersey would that be an issue? As a Minnesotan I see nothing wrong with what Justin Morneau becasue I apprechaite a loyal fan. I also know it’s not the first time he’s done it as Paul has pointed out Morneau wearing an NHL schield shirt under his game jersey back in July I think.[/quote]
I quoted the “insulted” because it definitely is not a problem – it was tongue-in-cheek.
And for the record, would it be a problem if a Minnesota born player wore a Wild jersey under a Jays jersey? Certainly not… can’t blame a dude for having a keen awareness of an up and coming hockey program, can you?!?! GO WILD!
[quote comment=”10652″]If a Minnesota born player was playing for say, the Blue Jays and he wore a WIld shirt under his jersey would that be an issue? As a Minnesotan I see nothing wrong with what Justin Morneau becasue I apprechaite a loyal fan. I also know it’s not the first time he’s done it as Paul has pointed out Morneau wearing an NHL schield shirt under his game jersey back in July I think.[/quote]
After the way Morneau has played this year, he should be able to wear an O.J. throwback jersey if he wants to…
I agree with the going thoughts here. Paul, you ain’t drawing troop movements in the sand a la Geraldo “Benedict” Rivera. Obviously you’ve handled yourself with such upstanding values that you continue to be a trusted confidant to those in the know. This discussion comes at a very apropos link.
I hate to get off subject but I’m really stoked about my Saints winning last night. I do have to say that after the game there was a very bittersweet moment when link came down from his box to dance on the field with his parasol. I love the tradition but I can’t stand the man upholding it.
I got the same feeling from last night’s game that you had link in the Raiders/Vikings game earlier this year. Saints- link, link. Falcons- link.
Good to see the boys on that field. I’ve never seen the Superdome look so good.
[quote comment=”10653″][quote comment=”10644″]As a marketing grad student and reading all the opposition to a marketing campaign for the teams, I can only say this:
If the teams were really worried about the information being leaked, do you honestly think they would tell anybody? It’s not top secret and if it does get leaked, people will talk about it and like someone said create a buzz about it. We’ll all see the logo, colors, etc. and want to go out and buy the merchandise or even talk about like we have been. They don’t have to pay for it, so we’re actually doing them a favor.
And to whoever said something about the only reason they change the unis is to get more sales, that might be part of it, but it is also to get a more modern look. Look at what the link , link, link, link, link, link, link, link
I can’t think of any baseball teams and I’m not too knowledgeable on hockey. I’m pretty sure the teams aren’t sitting around thinking of ways to screws fans out of money.[/quote]
hey chuckles – maybe you shouldn’t have been smoking dope behind the student union when your link was talking about how you should research your topics before stumbling through the gates with erroneous analyses.
the ravens didn’t change their uniforms to make them more modern. no. they lost a link. furthermore, check out that blurb underneath the ‘logo controversy’ section where they mention that the uniforms have ‘essentially remained the same’ since 1996.
as for the other teams on your list, and the rest of your point – i have no idea.[/quote]
erroneous analyses, huh? link, huh?
so sorry to miss on one of the teams i mentioned. and how could you have no idea about what i am talking about? the teams looked old compared to what was going on in the league at their respective times. Also, it’s called link. It uses the imagination and creativity to get people talking about certain things. It would be kind of boring for teams to just all of a sudden release something new without getting people talking about it, especially people who wouldn’t normally give a hoot about it. It raises awareness buddy.
And by the way, the professor looks like this:
link(I must add this is one exception to the all black as well)
[quote comment=”10658″]I do have to say that after the game there was a very bittersweet moment when link came down from his box to dance on the field with his parasol. I love the tradition but I can’t stand the man upholding it.[/quote]
Great win and a great game. Seriously, how awkward was that? My jaw hit the floor when I saw that. It was like watching a car wreck. And all the cheerleaders dancing around him? Totally bizarre. Benson’s got some nerve.
[quote comment=”10658″]
I hate to get off subject but I’m really stoked about my Saints winning last night. I do have to say that after the game there was a very bittersweet moment when link came down from his box to dance on the field with his parasol. I love the tradition but I can’t stand the man upholding it.
[/quote]
That is Grade A “assholery” – even those of us way upstream of the river from you realize that. I felt uncomfortable on my couch when I saw it.
[quote comment=”10659″][quote comment=”10653″][quote comment=”10644″]As a marketing grad student and reading all the opposition to a marketing campaign for the teams, I can only say this:
If the teams were really worried about the information being leaked, do you honestly think they would tell anybody? It’s not top secret and if it does get leaked, people will talk about it and like someone said create a buzz about it. We’ll all see the logo, colors, etc. and want to go out and buy the merchandise or even talk about like we have been. They don’t have to pay for it, so we’re actually doing them a favor.
And to whoever said something about the only reason they change the unis is to get more sales, that might be part of it, but it is also to get a more modern look. Look at what the link , link, link, link, link, link, link, link
I can’t think of any baseball teams and I’m not too knowledgeable on hockey. I’m pretty sure the teams aren’t sitting around thinking of ways to screws fans out of money.[/quote]
hey chuckles – maybe you shouldn’t have been smoking dope behind the student union when your link was talking about how you should research your topics before stumbling through the gates with erroneous analyses.
the ravens didn’t change their uniforms to make them more modern. no. they lost a link. furthermore, check out that blurb underneath the ‘logo controversy’ section where they mention that the uniforms have ‘essentially remained the same’ since 1996.
as for the other teams on your list, and the rest of your point – i have no idea.[/quote]
erroneous analyses, huh? link, huh?
so sorry to miss on one of the teams i mentioned. and how could you have no idea about what i am talking about? the teams looked old compared to what was going on in the league at their respective times. Also, it’s called link. It uses the imagination and creativity to get people talking about certain things. It would be kind of boring for teams to just all of a sudden release something new without getting people talking about it, especially people who wouldn’t normally give a hoot about it. It raises awareness buddy.
And by the way, the professor looks like this:
link(I must add this is one exception to the all black as well)[/quote]
did i say i had no idea about your point? i meant ‘i don’t care.’
(by the way, is it fun going to school at hooters? i mean, don’t those oddly-designed link and drunk derelicts just kinda get in the way?)
Any leaker has an agenda in leaking. Sometimes the leaker’s agenda is aligned with the institution’s agenda, sometimes not. The same is true for the journalist. If a journalist takes advantage of a leak to the detriment of either an individual leaker or an institution on which that journalist relies for information, things could go badly for that journalist.
Of course if the journalist already has an antagonistic relationship with the institution, then it’s bombs away. That’s not too likely in either sports or business journalism, but ubiquitous in political journalism.
And for what remains, there’s too darn much red in sports uniforms!
PS – the new secondary logo for the Phoenix baseball team is entirely appropriate for them. It’s derivative, cheap, readily mockable and ultimately disposable.
[quote comment=”10643″]Paul,
If you give your word to a source not to reveal a uni-related item on your website until a certain date, what would you do if someone else posted that same information in these message boards before that date? Would the post be deleted or would it stay? Have you been faced with this situation?[/quote]
That hasn’t come up. Case-by-case. I’d like to think that if someone had sensitive info, they’d run it by me first in a personal e-mail before posting it in the Comments section.
[quote comment=”10658″]I agree with the going thoughts here. Paul, you ain’t drawing troop movements in the sand a la Geraldo “Benedict” Rivera. Obviously you’ve handled yourself with such upstanding values that you continue to be a trusted confidant to those in the know. This discussion comes at a very apropos link.
I hate to get off subject but I’m really stoked about my Saints winning last night. I do have to say that after the game there was a very bittersweet moment when link came down from his box to dance on the field with his parasol. I love the tradition but I can’t stand the man upholding it.
I got the same feeling from last night’s game that you had link in the Raiders/Vikings game earlier this year. Saints- link, link. Falcons- link.
Good to see the boys on that field. I’ve never seen the Superdome look so good.[/quote]
I agree… I’d much rather see the Fat Guy w/ the Trumpet !!! Al Hirt Rules !
I’m not convinced that any sporting team changes its uniforms for the sole purpose of making money. As to the Rams?..well they changed cities and I think that the old blue and yellow was so closely associated with L.A., that the change was inevitable to make a distinction between the New St.Louis Rams and the old Los Angeles Rams. I would say that the recent onslaught of “3rd Jersey’s” and ” Batting Practice ” shirts in the NHL and MLB are more in line with that reason though. Some teams are so encased in tradition that the thought of changing the look is inconcievable. The Yankees…Red Sox…Cardinals..all have kept pretty much the same logos and uni’s over the years…but even they went with the sign of the times with pull over shirts and with the Cardinals?..those baby blue road uni’s that were popular during the 80’s.
I think fashon is fashon, even in sports uniforms and sooner or later what is old will be new again.
[quote comment=”10666″]Some teams are so encased in tradition that the thought of changing the look is inconcievable. The Yankees…Red Sox…Cardinals..all have kept pretty much the same logos and uni’s over the years…but even they went with the sign of the times with pull over shirts and with the Cardinals?..those baby blue road uni’s that were popular during the 80’s.
I think fashon is fashon, even in sports uniforms and sooner or later what is old will be new again.[/quote]
The Red Sox added the signal-flare red alternates, and everyone in Boston knew it was a revenue-based decision. I think most fans accepted it because they play in a small ballpark and to increase the payroll a little, they needed new sources of revenue (monster seats, right field upper deck seats, “Red Sox Nation” membership cards, red alternate jerseys, NESN, selling the sod from ’04, etc.)
[quote comment=”10666″]I’m not convinced that any sporting team changes its uniforms for the sole purpose of making money. As to the Rams?..well they changed cities and I think that the old blue and yellow was so closely associated with L.A., that the change was inevitable to make a distinction between the New St.Louis Rams and the old Los Angeles Rams. I would say that the recent onslaught of “3rd Jersey’s” and ” Batting Practice ” shirts in the NHL and MLB are more in line with that reason though. Some teams are so encased in tradition that the thought of changing the look is inconcievable. The Yankees…Red Sox…Cardinals..all have kept pretty much the same logos and uni’s over the years…but even they went with the sign of the times with pull over shirts and with the Cardinals?..those baby blue road uni’s that were popular during the 80’s.
I think fashon is fashon, even in sports uniforms and sooner or later what is old will be new again.[/quote]
I like your style…thank you for helping me with what I was trying to say…i was only talking about home & away jerseys…you are right on with the alternates and BP jerseys
I know this is a few days late but didn anyone notice that John Kasey was link a link in Suday’s game against the Bucs? I know that other players, Warrick Dunn for example, wear jewelry but does anyone know what the NFL says about jewelry? Especially jewelry that is exposed outside of the pads.
The Red Sox added the signal-flare red alternates, and everyone in Boston knew it was a revenue-based decision.
Wrong.
All 4 pro sports leagues share their licensing revenue equally to all there clubs, so when any team changes their identity, they do NOT directly drive a penny more to there collective bottom line.
Opinions fine. Facts preferred.
I think a leak actually helps a team’s marketing campaign. I personally can’t wait to see what the D-Backs’ new unis look like, and if I like ’em, I might just buy one for myself.
[quote comment=”10671″]The Red Sox added the signal-flare red alternates, and everyone in Boston knew it was a revenue-based decision.
Wrong.
All 4 pro sports leagues share their licensing revenue equally to all there clubs, so when any team changes their identity, they do NOT directly drive a penny more to there collective bottom line.
Opinions fine. Facts preferred.[/quote]
For MLB, national revenue is shared. Local revenue is divided up – 2/3 to local team, 1/3 to league.
It seems as though the “discussion” between Suvo and Kenny has gotten pretty mean spirited on Suvo’s part. I thought this forum was above that. Different opinions welcomed and discussed, but not put down in such a belligerent way.
[quote comment=”10676″]It seems as though the “discussion” between Suvo and Kenny has gotten pretty mean spirited on Suvo’s part. I thought this forum was above that. Different opinions welcomed and discussed, but not put down in such a belligerent way.[/quote]
i apologize. kenny, i love you.
(no really, didn’t mean to come off so belligerently. it’s hard to not to seem mean-spirited when you have such a diverse wealth of images otherwise known as the intarweb. help me, people – i have a problem.)
[quote comment=”10670″]I know this is a few days late but didn anyone notice that John Kasey was link a link in Suday’s game against the Bucs?[/quote]
Great catch!
Reggie Roby always wore a watch when punting. And another kicker — Akers, maybe? — wears his wedding band. Not sure what official NFL policy is on this.
[quote comment=”10679″][quote comment=”10670″]I know this is a few days late but didn anyone notice that John Kasey was link a link in Suday’s game against the Bucs?[/quote]
Great catch!
Reggie Roby always wore a watch when punting. And another kicker — Akers, maybe? — wears his wedding band. Not sure what official NFL policy is on this.[/quote]
I thought it might be Akers too, but it doesn’t look like he’s wearing a wedding ring in either of these pictures:
link
link
Good piont on the video game thing, I had actually noticed that when I was checking out the new screen shots for Madden 07 a few months before it’s release, the Referee jerseys looked funny, but I figured it was some sort of a glitch, and thought nothing of it.
[quote comment=”10641″][quote comment=”10593″]Personally, I like the Reds using black. I think they are one of the only teams that look good with it. [/quote]
I agree. I think there are already enough teams with red, white, and blue/navy blue. I mentioned this a week or so ago, and someone ranted about my lack of patriotism or something. I’m not so sure those colors are used because of national pride…I think it may have more to do with red and blue being two of the three primary colors, and yellow doesn’t show up as well on a white background.
And I don’t think that just because some color was used back in the good ol’ days means it was great and any change is stupid.[/quote]
I agree as well, when I saw the new Reds unis yesterday I was satisfied. I like the idea of going back to the mustachioed Mr. Red. I am looking forward to going to Reds Fest this winter to see the unveiling of the new unis. The retro Mr. Red opens some interesting hat possibilities, something like link or link could be very nice, but keep it red. This is a reflection of the new ownership and their desire to bring back some of the history of the team. The navy blue would have made the Reds look too much like the Cardinals IMHO.
I know we discussed it a while ago but look at this picture of some link
Hodges’ 14 (fifth from the left) is very noticeably different than the Dodgers’ usual font. For immediate comparison, check out the “1” on Erskine’s jersey (to Hodges immediate left) and the “4” on Snider’s jersey (second from the right).
Just thought it was cool to see that on the major league level.
Too bad the NCAA football game isn’t as up to date as the Maddens and NBA Lives of the world. I would have liked to see how many alternate jerseys Oregon would have had. I bet people would just be cycling through and be like ‘Oh forget it! I’ll just go with Alternate 45’
I think I know what the deal is with the “new” NFL referee uniforms.
They aren’t new at all! They are hand-me-down uniforms that link has stretched out over the years!
One thing I did notice in the Southwest ad. On top of reshooting the spot with the same guy wearing the new shirt, he also had an NFL patch on his hat. Anyone know if that is a new ‘feature’ of the ad?
This Just In: In light of the leaked Diamondbacks and Reds logos, down in the deep south, Auburn’s new replacement logo has been leaked over the web as well. You can find it link.
[quote comment=”10689″]One thing I did notice in the Southwest ad. On top of reshooting the spot with the same guy wearing the new shirt, he also had an NFL patch on his hat. Anyone know if that is a new ‘feature’ of the ad?[/quote]
One thing I do know is that Southwest is an “official” NFL sponser, and I’m sure that’s why they changed it.
I don’t know why they wouldn’t have used real NFL teams, perhaps that’s a different contract?
Anyone have any info on that?
[quote comment=”10680″]I thought it might be Akers too, but it doesn’t look like he’s wearing a wedding ring in either of these pictures:
link
link
Yeah, but he’s wearing it link.
And he appears to be wearing a wristwatch underneath his sweatband link.
Very good post Paul.
I agree that as you are privilaged to inside info so you should abide by the pre-conditions of the release. This isn’t national security as you say.
The same can be said the other way though, what advantage do you get from seeing a design 2 months prior to issue? Do you go and write a full review straight away and thus have several columns ready on your pc right now? I mean its not like it takes too much advance warning in order to get a position on a new uni, you like it, hate it or care less. It’s not like the politicos who might sound out someone else and so on to get an angle on the piece to be ready with pertinent questions on the day of the press conference.
So what advantage is there to letting you see a uni before release?
Has any one noticed in the commercial on the NFL Network (the one where “It’s an NFL world and we’re living in it), at the beginning when Marvin Lewis flies out of whatever building it is there is a HUGE Motorola logo above the opening he flies out of?
Issue #1- I am now disappointed that EA’s NHL ’07 does not include the Sabres new threads. Wasn’t the game released after the jersey was unveiled?? So, wouldn’t a worry of it being leaked that way be moot??? The Sabres didn’t trust EA’s production staff that much??
Issue #2- NFL teams wearing white for their home opener was not a league-wide thing. The Giants wore blue against the Colts. The Saints probably wore white to sort of tie in with the celebration and atmosphere of rebirth for last night’s game.
Issue #3- You wanna talk about a team that employs WAY too much black…..the Falcons need to go back to this
[quote comment=”10691″][quote comment=”10689″]One thing I did notice in the Southwest ad. On top of reshooting the spot with the same guy wearing the new shirt, he also had an NFL patch on his hat. Anyone know if that is a new ‘feature’ of the ad?[/quote]
One thing I do know is that Southwest is an “official” NFL sponser, and I’m sure that’s why they changed it.
I don’t know why they wouldn’t have used real NFL teams, perhaps that’s a different contract?
Anyone have any info on that?[/quote]
There was some discussion of this commercial a few days ago, and someone (I don’t remember who) pointed out that maybe Southwest didn’t want to show any favoritism to any teams…
Logo creep alert in the Valley of the Sun:
Cardinals get collegiate feel
University of Phoenix buys naming rights to stadium
link
[quote comment=”10651″]Watching the MNF game last night and link jersey kept bothering me.
I didn’t realize the problem until the post game.
link what the other guys have. Look closely at the seam where the shoulder material meets the panel with the numbers on it. It makes a link across the jersey right through the nfl equip patch.
Reggie’s jersey has a different seam pattern link and, link[/quote]
I’m pretty sure that’s been happening since Reebok took over the NFL. It’s a little annoying to see a team uniform that’s not uniform. The worst perpetrators are the Seahawks (compare link to link and link) and Titans (compare link to link). Since those teams have unique shoulder yoke designs, it is much more noticable and annoying.
I’m pretty sure the reason kickers wear a wristwatch on the field is so they can clock the hangtime of their punts or kickoffs.
[quote comment=”10698″]There was some discussion of this commercial a few days ago, and someone (I don’t remember who) pointed out that maybe Southwest didn’t want to show any favoritism to any teams…[/quote]
I don’t know. My guess would be that if you’re going to use NFL unis, then you probably need to put actual NFL players in them, which means you have to pay them as well. Just my two cents…
Uni related discussion during the Twins game. The stat of the night was that the Twins are 42-18 at home since Catcher’s linkand Redman starting wearing the 70’s era helmets. ***Note-They only wear those helmets at home.***
[quote comment=”10703″]Uni related discussion during the Twins game. The stat of the night was that the Twins are 42-18 at home since Catcher’s linkand Redman starting wearing the 70’s era helmets. ***Note-They only wear those helmets at home.***[/quote]
I never understood why the “T” in the Twin Cities logo was white on that helmet. It looks like a Cincy logo unless you’re up close.
When I was 12 I opened my Christmas presents early and then re-wrapped them. It was the worst Christmas ever because all the magic of anticipation was gone. What percent of leaked logos and unis do people react negatively to (bufaslug, etc), probably in the high 80s. If you ask your kid they will tell you that they would rather wait for the new Harry Potter book to come out than hear leaked info about it. Anticipation really is part of the whole experience and knowing early is often a detriment.
[quote comment=”10692″][quote comment=”10680″]I thought it might be Akers too, but it doesn’t look like he’s wearing a wedding ring in either of these pictures:
link
link
Yeah, but he’s wearing it link.
And he appears to be wearing a wristwatch underneath his sweatband link.[/quote]
Martin Gramatica was wearing a wedding ring Sunday for the Colts.
Also, last year when the Cardinals played at Indy, i remember Neil Rackers wearing his wedding ring as well.
I’m a little torn about the UCF jerseys tonight. The gold isn’t bad…..it’s the link that are screwing it all up.
[quote comment=”10705″][quote comment=”10703″]Uni related discussion during the Twins game. The stat of the night was that the Twins are 42-18 at home since Catcher’s linkand Redman starting wearing the 70’s era helmets. ***Note-They only wear those helmets at home.***[/quote]
I never understood why the “T” in the Twin Cities logo was white on that helmet. It looks like a Cincy logo unless you’re up close.[/quote]
I believe the reason that Mauer and Redman have the white “T” is because that what the original link had on them. Now, why did the originals? Who knows, maybe it was supposed to represent the snow that was on the ground at the Met during April?
I check the blog every day and pardon me if you have in the past, but there is a pretty interesting world of football facemask designs. I always wondered if you’d ever touch on it.
Paul, wasn’t it D. Carr from Houston who wears his ring too? or like a taped up ring or something, I think I remember this.
and LOGO CREEP I was watching TV today before work, and one of those dumb Subway ads was on, it was the one with Reggie Bush. In it, he is wearin a fake saints uni, with no logos, but he has his RBK Arm Band on. has anyone else seen this?
Rice is paying tribute to their fallen teammate.
link
The TC logo on the Twins hats stand for Twin Cities.
In 1961, when Calvin Griffith moved the team from Washington, the original name of the team was going to be the Twin Cities Twins. Calvin was convinced by political and business leaders to change the name to the Minnesota Twins (becoming the first team have a state instead of a city as its geographical identifier), but the TC stayed on the hats.
[quote comment=”10710″]I’m a little torn about the UCF jerseys tonight. The gold isn’t bad…..it’s the link that are screwing it all up.[/quote]
Somebody pointed this out…same design as So Cal, so are you saying those stripes screw it up too?
[quote comment=”10690″]This Just In: In light of the leaked Diamondbacks and Reds logos, down in the deep south, Auburn’s new replacement logo has been leaked over the web as well. You can find it link.[/quote]
This has to be from a bitter Alabama fan. Please, should a fan from a school who sold out to Nike over a decade ago really be taking shots at Auburn’s apparel provider?
Focus on more important things, like beating Arkansas. Oh, wait.
War Eagle
[quote comment=”10709″][quote comment=”10692″][quote comment=”10680″]I thought it might be Akers too, but it doesn’t look like he’s wearing a wedding ring in either of these pictures:
link
link
Yeah, but he’s wearing it link.
And he appears to be wearing a wristwatch underneath his sweatband link.[/quote]
Martin Gramatica was wearing a wedding ring Sunday for the Colts.
Also, last year when the Cardinals played at Indy, i remember Neil Rackers wearing his wedding ring as well.[/quote]
Good catch Paul and Chad. I just did a quick search and the two David Akers pictures I found were the only ones with good clear view of his hands. Paul you are somehow worlds better at finding these pictures, you have to share your secrets to this someday.