Aggie Antiquities

Paul got this one posted early! Good morning everyone!

I am glad to hear that Vince is from Cleveland. Northeast Ohio has produces a fair share of Uni Watchers.

Plus, the more I see of link, the better.

Allright, some Aggie love!

Doesn’t maroon and white look better than that t.u. orange?

Also link the extra set of link.

And the link on the two guys in thre front row.

Take Care
Dennis

As a uni fan, I’d have to say I like the AggTies jersey, but as a Longhorns fan, I have to say it’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen in my life.

First off, the basketball jerseys are awesome, the belts fit well. Second, I still don’t get it Ducks and Flames????

link

Wow, I’m surprised that no one else has mentioned the suddle logo creep found link.

Kerry, ya just beat me to that when I was typing..LOL.

Wow, if you look closely on the Oregon helmet, you can even see a Swoosh engraved on the little rubber tab on the facemask…..now that is a little bit gratuitous….

Above that, on the faceshield, you can even make out a Nike-based URL:

link

Subtle is Nike’s middle name?

Actually its not your guy DJL

Who is that guy, I know he was wearing a Browns jacket

All I could think of when I saw that lead picture was “Degeneration X”. And I’m stopped watching wrestling 10 years ago. What’s wrong with me? Also that looks like some damn fine meat there, Paul. Enjoy!

In other facial protection news, I believe Herb Raglan of the 1991 Quebec Nordiques wore a half cage on his helmet that covered his eyes only. I am looking for a picture, and I know I have it on a hockey card at home. If anyone has a card and wishes to scan the hockey card, please do so.

The half-cage visor has not been work since, to the best of my knowledge.

Holy Toledo! “Someone”. I’m now banned until I have a cup of coffee. See you in five minutes.

To continue yesterdays topic about indoor games played outdoors, turns out the link are interested also.

The Redskins Cheerleader article has some false info. The Baltimore Colts, not the Steelers, were the link in 1953.

There go the link again…trying to take something else from B-More.

[quote comment=”31650″]”Not been used since” rather than “not been work since”.

Some get me a large double-double. Yes… I know the Americans on here won’t get that. Yes, I’ll gladly explain if someone asks.[/quote]

Is that a Tim Horton’s reference?

[quote comment=”31658″][quote comment=”31650″]”Not been used since” rather than “not been work since”.

Some get me a large double-double. Yes… I know the Americans on here won’t get that. Yes, I’ll gladly explain if someone asks.[/quote]

Is that a Tim Horton’s reference?[/quote]

Yes. And another subtle hockey reference. :o)

link with a half-cage.

See? That coffee does help.

[quote comment=”31634″]link[/quote]

wow, 19-8. What a barn-burner! They couldn’t dribble? That must’ve been a sight. So I guess the traveling rule wasn’t invented yet!

Not to steal Dan Hardin’s thunder or anything, but I brought up the Texas A&M Cushing Library site a long time ago.
link
Look at comment #5
I guess Dan made a better presentation of it than I did.
No sour grapes here though. It is a great site and most of my destops come from there.
Gig ’em

I read in today’s Arizona Republic that the Coyotes practiced in the new Reebok jerseys set to be unveiled next month. Defenseman Keith Ballard liked the tighter socks but didn’t like the tighter jersey due to lack of freedom of movement. He also said it breatehd less than he was expecting.

I’m assuming other teams have started practicing as well… any spy shots out there?

[quote comment=”31673″]I read in today’s Arizona Republic that the Coyotes practiced in the new Reebok jerseys set to be unveiled next month. Defenseman Keith Ballard liked the tighter socks but didn’t like the tighter jersey due to lack of freedom of movement. He also said it breatehd less than he was expecting.

I’m assuming other teams have started practicing as well… any spy shots out there?[/quote]

Anybody think that this idea will go over as badly as the new ball in the NBA? Seems like the same approach David Stern and company used to introduce the new ball. Introduced it at the all-star game the previous year. Allowed each team to practice with the ball over the offseason and then introduced it very first thing the next season. I think all the hub-bub about the ball was stupid and am kind of upset they are going back to the old ball in the first place. I wonder how hockey players, reporters and fans will react to the new uniform design?

[quote comment=”31675″]I wonder how hockey players, reporters and fans will react to the new uniform design?[/quote]

It is bad for hockey. Period.

At least they aren’t tucking the jerseys in, though. That’s a huge relief.

Again from the A&M web site.

Check out the link symbol on the girl socks.

link

I stumbled across this. Its not the same as the side-link Game-Worn Hockey Jersey Museum. Enjoy.

[quote comment=”31659″][quote comment=”31644″]DJL, here’s your guy on Troy Smith last night

link

Dave, I actually posted that jacket last Friday. The stiffarming Elf is my favorite interpretation of the Brownie.

For the Cleveland Uni Watchers, there is a place in Rocky River called link on that specializes in products adorned with the link.

The Web site sucks, but the store itself is pretty cool. Lots of autographed memorabilia as well.[/quote]

I don’t know how many times I’ve driven past that place, as my sister lives in the area. I guess now I have a reason to stop and have a look.

[quote comment=”31683″]Not a fan at all of the Aggie basketball jersey. Am I the only one that sees it as a nod to the Confederacy? In that respect, it makes them more interesting, but for all the wrong reasons, like the Frito Bandito.[/quote]
Um…..in a word, “Yes.”

[quote comment=”31686″][quote comment=”31680″]Again from the A&M web site.

Check out the link symbol on the girl socks.[/quote]
Ok, what does “Gig Em” mean?[/quote]
Found an link to answer my own question.

Note that the Duck in this picture has a six point chin strap hookup (one on top, two on the bottom) but doesn’t have them all connected. I wanted to bring this up yesterday because I distinctly remember some linemen wearing six point chinstraps. But I couldn’t find any photo evidence. Anyone?

[quote comment=”31654″]To continue yesterdays topic about indoor games played outdoors, turns out the link are interested also.[/quote]
I don’t see how that’s a good idea as a) BMO is getting a bubble over it in winter so it won’t be outdoors. And b) it’s hardly any bigger then the ACC. They should hold it in the Rogers Centre with the lid open if they want a huge crowd.

On the subject of outdoor sports gone wrong, a charity hockey game that got held in Hamilton during the lockout, “Our Game to Give” was played in a largely empty Ivor Wynne Stadium in a driving rain.

The highlight of the game was Mike Vanderjagt switching from skates to cleats during the second intermission and trying to kick a 30-ish yard field goal from the ice. Unsurprisingly he slipped and fell and the kick was no good.

[quote comment=”31693″]I was watching “Rudy” the other night and I noticed that he is the only one that isnt wearing his name on his jersey.

a few questions…

1)Did ND ever really have naems on their jerseys?
2)Was it common practice for players that werent sonsistant players to not have their name on their jersey?[/quote]

Notre Dame did have names on their jerseys from sometime toward the end of the Ara Parsegian (sp?) era in the early 1970s through the Gerry Faust era in the 1980s. When Lou Holtz came (in 1986 IIRC) he took the names off.

Considering that universities didn’t have these huge equipment contracts like today where they not only get free equipment but get paid to wear a brand, it would make sense that those practice squad walk-ons who only dressed for the final home game would get left-over jerseys without names, etc.

In fact, ND always appeared to be kind of tight regarding recycling uniforms, as I remember them still wearing pants with nylon (not spandex, but the backpack/tent type of nylon) front/knit back in the era when virtually every other team was wearing all knit pants (in those pre-spandex days).

[quote comment=”31703″][quote comment=”31662″]link with a half-cage.

See? That coffee does help.[/quote]
Not only the cage – but behold the majestic beauty that was the Nordiques road uni – loved the fleur-de-lis and even the logo – like the logo on the pants too.[/quote]

100% with you on that, Banker Bill. One of the best jerseys ever in hockey.

I saw this picture on sportsline yesterday during the Iverson hoopla, and I noticed the shoulder pattern. What was the occasion for this jersey? And where can I buy one?

link

[quote comment=”31705″][quote comment=”31673″]I’m assuming other teams have started practicing as well… any spy shots out there?[/quote]

I’ve read that a few teams have been using them in practice, including Nashville and, I think, Colorado. Does this photo depict the “new style” practice jersey? I can’t tell: link
[/quote]

Those are the Reebok “Slim-Fit” practice jerseys. You can see more of them link. link is a better view of how they look. Notice that the logo is tiny compared to game jerseys.

The old practice jerseys that were made by CCM and had the JOFA label on them looked like link.

Did I say orange? Damn I need coffee. I meant red and gold are the colors of the Spanish flag.

I like the new Oregon helmets.

I think they’re pretty damn cool.

And despite what Paul and other posters have been endlessly bleating and shrieking, they aren’t going to cause the world to end or for Nike to take over the world and install Phil Knight as worldwide dictator for life.

Nike spent a good bit of money developing and designing the helmets and I have no problem with Nike making that fact now by putting the swoosh in a prominent position on the helmet, in fact it’d be horrible from a business and marketing standpoint if they didn’t.

As I said in my Saturday Open thread post, this is what the majority of helmets in college and the pros will look like inside of ten years. The trend towards this started a few years back when teams switched to metallic paint on their helmets.

And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.

[quote comment=”31717″]I like the new Oregon helmets.

I think they’re pretty damn cool.

And despite what Paul and other posters have been endlessly bleating and shrieking, they aren’t going to cause the world to end or for Nike to take over the world and install Phil Knight as worldwide dictator for life.

Nike spent a good bit of money developing and designing the helmets and I have no problem with Nike making that fact now by putting the swoosh in a prominent position on the helmet, in fact it’d be horrible from a business and marketing standpoint if they didn’t.

As I said in my Saturday Open thread post, this is what the majority of helmets in college and the pros will look like inside of ten years. The trend towards this started a few years back when teams switched to metallic paint on their helmets.

And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]

Ben, firstly I’m not sure that anyone on this board, let alone Paul is worried Nike will take over the world. There is nothing wrong (at least in my opinion) of Nike or any other manufacturer putting their logo on a piece of equipment or apparel that they manufacture. But rather it’s HOW they do it. But a uniform is much more than just apparel. It’s the connection between a fan and their team (which itself is an increasingly harder concept to realize as athletes continue to make more and more money and act like they are above the game they play and the team they play for).

I don’t pretend to speak for Paul, but I think the majority of people who dislike Oregon’s new helmet do so simply because it’s ugly. Alsothe majority of people would think so if the design originated with Nike, Reebok, Adidas, or some Joe Schmo in Anytown, USA. Someone asked it earlier: what exactly do flames have to do with a team that’s nickname is the Ducks?

And if you don’t think logos can get out of control, they can: link

Ok, that logo creep photo didn’t work, so hopefully this one will: link

[quote comment=”31717″]I like the new Oregon helmets.

I think they’re pretty damn cool.

And despite what Paul and other posters have been endlessly bleating and shrieking, they aren’t going to cause the world to end or for Nike to take over the world and install Phil Knight as worldwide dictator for life.

Nike spent a good bit of money developing and designing the helmets and I have no problem with Nike making that fact now by putting the swoosh in a prominent position on the helmet, in fact it’d be horrible from a business and marketing standpoint if they didn’t.

As I said in my Saturday Open thread post, this is what the majority of helmets in college and the pros will look like inside of ten years. The trend towards this started a few years back when teams switched to metallic paint on their helmets.

And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]
Corporate logos in stadiums have never been the focus of anti logo creep. Those are ads. The main issue is the manufacturer of the equipment/uniform putting their logo on it. As Paul has said before, I want to root for my team not the company that made their uniforms. That being said, unadorned stadiums are gone forever. I actually think the subtle logo on the facemask is neat in that it is unobtrusive. I also like that they left the bumper for the school logo unlike link, link, et al.

[quote comment=”31717″]
And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]

Since the boards on a hockey rink are rarely considered anyone’s jersey or apparel, I think you had better realize what board you’re on. Uniforms can be billboards (Nike), but billboards cannot be uniforms.

And since you fail to take into account that the money generated from the sale of space around the boards to businesses who have a relationship with the teams who advertise them, perhaps you wouldn’t mind NHL teams charging you $300/ticket to sit in the nosebleed section? Since corporate America pays to have their logo on the board, the team, in turn, can use that money any way they feel fit, whether they sign new players, lower ticket prices, or whatever.

Revenue from advertising helps the consumer in this case. If you, Ben, buy any products from anyone who ever advertised on the boards of an NHL rink, shame on you. That would make you, Ben, hypocritical to your own cause.

[quote comment=”31727″]And here’s the history of Wrigley Field:

link
I wonder if Wrigley Field or the Cubs would make more money if they did in fact build a new stadium. Wrigley only cost $250,000!!, but that was way back. Unless the taxes are killing them, the Cubs franchise must be making a lot of $$. But they don’t seem to spend it wisely. Although Mark Prior and Kerry Wood were shit for luck draft picks.

[quote comment=”31730″]Actually, come to think of it, didn’t the Cubs just sign Soriano? Pinella I know of. Derek Bell didn’t work out, Clemens would look good in a Cubs uni. Alfonso Soriano is gonna make a difference (I hope) it’s about time they win.
Cubs vs Yankees early World Series prediction. That would be lovely for Mr. Nielson, and me :)[/quote]

You had to suffer through Derek Bell too? As an Astros fan we had to deal with his ‘tude for several years. He had one good year and a couple of decent (but not outstanding) years and suddenly he was walking around like he owned the city of Houston and that the Astrodome should be renamed Derek Bell’s Plaza of Greatness.

Any Pirates fans out there remember “Operation Shutdown”? I’m so glad that guy’s out of baseball.

I’m no financial expert, but I’m willing to bet that $250,000 in 1914 dollars is a little bit higher in 2006 dollars. Any financial services folks care to do that conversion?

Last thing, on that website (link), you can look back at past ballparks as well. It’s interesting to see how much quicker it was to throw together a stadium back in the day. Even Cleveland’s “Mistake by the Lake” with it’s 75,000 person capacity, only took a little over a year to build.

[quote comment=”31726″][quote comment=”31717″]
And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]

[quote comment=”31726″][quote comment=”31717″]
And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]

Since the boards on a hockey rink are rarely considered anyone’s jersey or apparel, I think you had better realize what board you’re on. Uniforms can be billboards (Nike), but billboards cannot be uniforms.

And since you fail to take into account that the money generated from the sale of space around the boards to businesses who have a relationship with the teams who advertise them, perhaps you wouldn’t mind NHL teams charging you $300/ticket to sit in the nosebleed section? Since corporate America pays to have their logo on the board, the team, in turn, can use that money any way they feel fit, whether they sign new players, lower ticket prices, or whatever.

Revenue from advertising helps the consumer in this case. If you, Ben, buy any products from anyone who ever advertised on the boards of an NHL rink, shame on you. That would make you, Ben, hypocritical to your own cause.[/quote]

Besides, advertising on the boards does not impair your ability to see a puck ON THE ICE. If it did, I’m sure the players would have complained – and they’re more in danger from a speeding puck – I think they’d beef if they couldn’t see it. Does a billboard on the side of the road hamper your ability to drive?

Advertising and logo creep are seperate animals. Teebz is well stated about the revenue generated from board advertising, scoreboard advertising, you even sometimes see little RBK ads on the line marks on the boards. I have no problem with any of this. The minute my beloved team becomes the “Canon Digital Solutions New York Rangers” with a big Canon logo on the jersey, then I have a problem.

Derek Bell left his stench on the Mets as well – I don’t think ANYONE wore their uniform sloppier than Derek Bell.

[quote comment=”31723″][quote comment=”31717″]I like the new Oregon helmets.

I think they’re pretty damn cool.

And despite what Paul and other posters have been endlessly bleating and shrieking, they aren’t going to cause the world to end or for Nike to take over the world and install Phil Knight as worldwide dictator for life.

Nike spent a good bit of money developing and designing the helmets and I have no problem with Nike making that fact now by putting the swoosh in a prominent position on the helmet, in fact it’d be horrible from a business and marketing standpoint if they didn’t.

As I said in my Saturday Open thread post, this is what the majority of helmets in college and the pros will look like inside of ten years. The trend towards this started a few years back when teams switched to metallic paint on their helmets.

And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]
Corporate logos in stadiums have never been the focus of anti logo creep. Those are ads. The main issue is the manufacturer of the equipment/uniform putting their logo on it. As Paul has said before, I want to root for my team not the company that made their uniforms. That being said, unadorned stadiums are gone forever. I actually think the subtle logo on the facemask is neat in that it is unobtrusive. I also like that they left the bumper for the school logo unlike link, link, et al.[/quote]

Since this is a Schutt helmet and the paint color and design was Nike’s imput, Schutt does leave the bumper available for schools, additionally most schools cover both brands with stickers of their school name or mascot.

Also Schutt has to make blank bumpers for the NFL as Riddellhas hte exclusive right to advertising on helmets which is also why you won’t see an Adams chinstrap labeled as such in the NFL.

[quote comment=”31741″][quote comment=”31723″][quote comment=”31717″]I also like that they left the bumper for the school logo unlike link, link, et al.[/quote]

Since this is a Schutt helmet and the paint color and design was Nike’s imput, Schutt does leave the bumper available for schools, additionally most schools cover both brands with stickers of their school name or mascot.

Also Schutt has to make blank bumpers for the NFL as Riddellhas hte exclusive right to advertising on helmets which is also why you won’t see an Adams chinstrap labeled as such in the NFL.[/quote]
My mistake, I assumed from the comment that it was a Nike helmet. I knew about the NFL mandated blank bumper but not the school logos. Thanks for the info.

[quote comment=”31740″][quote comment=”31737″]The minute my beloved team becomes the “Canon Digital Solutions New York Rangers” with a big Canon logo on the jersey, then I have a problem.[/quote]
Not trying to be contentious, just a question, isn’t that what the European soccer clubs are? Stereotypical ignorant American here. From the looks of the European hockey leagues we’ve seen on this board, I would guess the same thing about them?[/quote]

Absolutely not. European hockey is not financed by billionaires and a league that uses corporate advertising to build a world-class league. The reason they have advertising on their jerseys is so the games remain affordable for the fans who don’t live and die as their teams go. The games in the Japanese Ice Hockey League have tickets as low as $12 for games. The Russian SuperLeague has no tickets that I’ve seen for more than $25 US.

In the case of MoDo in Sweden, perhaps the most famous of the elite European league teams, they are owned by a paper mill. This paper mill is hardly a multi-billion dollar factory. The team, however, gives each of its players an apartment rent-free, a vehicle payment-free, and pay throughout the season. How can they afford this? Advertising all over their jerseys. They already sell the space on their boards, and generate more revenue by allowing teams to outbid each other for a logo on their jerseys.

This goes back to my “uniforms can be billboards, but billboards can’t be uniforms” explanation.

with all the helmet talk today, it hough this pic is interesting

Vic Emery of the 64 Canadian bobsled team holding what looks like a football helmet with a 2 bar cage. Anyone have an idea if this was the norm back then.

link

[quote comment=”31748″]with all the helmet talk today, it hough this pic is interesting

Vic Emery of the 64 Canadian bobsled team holding what looks like a football helmet with a 2 bar cage. Anyone have an idea if this was the norm back then.

link

That is correct. I don’t know if it was the norm, but Vic Emery was the driver. In link, a man in the bottom right is holding a helmet as well. It appears to be close to a football helmet.

The Italians from the Innsbruck Games wore other types of helmets, as seen link.

I would guess that the Canadian team picked whatever helmet that his team figured would provide the most protection. Since football players run into each other and crack skulls, that might have been their choice.

In the new movie, Rocky Balboa is wearing “Jumpman” boxing shoes.

[quote comment=”31739″]Derek Bell left his stench on the Mets as well – I don’t think ANYONE wore their uniform sloppier than Derek Bell.[/quote]

Combine the sloppy uni with the porno ‘stache and the faceful of copenhagen and he was a joy to behold. To me, he always looked like he just woke up.

Paul, the plate you have your dinner on is shaped exactly like the Oregon “O”.

Coincidence?

[quote comment=”31760″][quote comment=”31742″][quote comment=”31727″]And here’s the history of Wrigley Field:

link
I can’t believe it took the Minnesota Twins how long?, to finally figure out that they were lacking link important feature.[/quote]

Broker75, the Twins have wanted an outdoor park (if that is what you’re saying) for as long as the Minneapolis Marshmallow has been up. It’s just that the MN public has not wanted to PAY for it and had successfully blocked public funding until the local government rammed it through—taxation without representation at its finest.[/quote]
I can’t tell the difference between the Twins new stadium and the new ones in Philly, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc. I guess that’s bound to happen when one Architectural company designs everything. Its close to being a cookie-cutter stadium epidemic.

[quote comment=”31767″]link

rip hamiltons got nothing on them[/quote]
…fava beans and chianti…
Shouldn’t underarmour be “under” something?

[quote comment=”31771″][quote comment=”31745″][quote comment=”31717″]
And I find it really hypocritical of Paul to continually bemoan the Logo creep on unis etc, and yet he has said nothing about how every square inch of the boards in every NHL hockey arena has advertising plastered on it so you can barely see the puck anymore.[/quote]

Dont forget the constant pushing of his stickers. No offense to a guy trying to make a buck but isnt it a bit ironic that someone that hates logo creeps wants us to buy stickers with HIS logo? What are the stickers for? One would assume so that you could stick them somewhere as a bit of free advertising (technically better then free as we have to buy the stickers). Wouldnt that make us all logo creeps?

Nothing against you Paul, I love your site and your work, just calling a spade a spade.[/quote]

UWantRadie, I disagree. Paul is not constantly pushing the tattoos, and he is doing it for a free site that we all enjoy. Besides (and I’m not speaking for Paul—he has said something similar in the past), he is not against logos per se, just the wanton and rampant placement of the logo. Paul is not asking us to slap a tattoo on each arm, leg, neck, face, shin, chest, etc. He might not object (except under the pretext that it isn’t aesthetically pleasing)

Ah, hell. Paul can explain it better himself. Read here under link.[/quote]

Wow. I need to re-read before I post. Was going to say, He might not object (except under the pretext that it isn’t aesthetically pleasing)
, but he’s not asking for that.

And now, I’m quoting myself. How depressingly redundant.

[quote comment=”31779″][quote comment=”31768″][quote comment=”31760″][quote comment=”31742″][quote comment=”31727″]And here’s the history of Wrigley Field:

link
I can’t believe it took the Minnesota Twins how long?, to finally figure out that they were lacking link important feature.[/quote]

Broker75, the Twins have wanted an outdoor park (if that is what you’re saying) for as long as the Minneapolis Marshmallow has been up. It’s just that the MN public has not wanted to PAY for it and had successfully blocked public funding until the local government rammed it through—taxation without representation at its finest.[/quote]
I can’t tell the difference between the Twins new stadium and the new ones in Philly, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Detroit, etc. I guess that’s bound to happen when one Architectural company designs everything. Its close to being a cookie-cutter stadium epidemic.[/quote]

Stuby, I heard that. We HAD an outdoor stadium called the MET. It was torn down when the Dome was built. The Megamall’s parking lot now stands where link used to be.[/quote]
And the Vikings haven’t been the same since.

really..ugle….adidas.
link

I like the first Aggies baseball link. Can’t help but think of link.

Derek Bell never played for the Cubs.

[quote comment=”31754″]In the new movie, Rocky Balboa is wearing “Jumpman” boxing shoes.[/quote]

Yeah, I posted a pic yesterday. I thought it was interesting because they’re link shoes, i.e., Roy Jones Jr. shoes. Not what I’d wear if I was in the ring with Antonio Tarver, but that’s just me.

The University of Pittsburgh has historic photos on its website, too: link. They have pictures of old Pitt teams (including 1889 WUP–Pitt’s former name–football link), old Pirates pictures, and high school sports teams. Click on images, then search the archives.

[quote comment=”31801″][quote comment=”31675″][quote comment=”31673″]I read in today’s Arizona Republic that the Coyotes practiced in the new Reebok jerseys set to be unveiled next month. Defenseman Keith Ballard liked the tighter socks but didn’t like the tighter jersey due to lack of freedom of movement. He also said it breatehd less than he was expecting.

I’m assuming other teams have started practicing as well… any spy shots out there?[/quote]

Anybody think that this idea will go over as badly as the new ball in the NBA? Seems like the same approach David Stern and company used to introduce the new ball. Introduced it at the all-star game the previous year. Allowed each team to practice with the ball over the offseason and then introduced it very first thing the next season. I think all the hub-bub about the ball was stupid and am kind of upset they are going back to the old ball in the first place. I wonder how hockey players, reporters and fans will react to the new uniform design?[/quote]

this has the makings of a TRAIN WRECK! messing with tradition. how do you change the original six teams unis?[/quote]

Stop freaking out. They’re just changing the fabric template on which the jerseys are created. Rather than a body and two sleeves as the basis for the jersey, there may be more panels sewn in. But that doesn’t mean they’ll all be different colors or something.

And that doesn’t mean every jersey is going to look the same. They’ll be tighter, but that’s probably going to be about it in most cases. Do you thing the Red Wings, Bruins, Canadiens, etc. are going to trash their uniforms after 9,000 years? Jesus, relax.

As far as the baseball park topic goes, I must profess that I, like Stuby, prefer the older enclosed ballparks to the new open parks. I have been to Comerica Park a few times, and it really isn’t bad at all, but for me, there’s nothing like experiencing a game in a closed park like the old Tigers Stadium. It just feels right. (I will freely admit that this is a matter of opinion.)

As far as Comerica’s nods to history, yes, they did a nice job with that. But even with an acknowledgment of history, you can’t build history into a park. Of course, that is true of every new park. It takes time to let history seep into a park, and I hope the Tigers do just that with Comerica so that it begins to feel storied and great. But for that, only time will tell.

Concerning the new hockey jerseys: I think the comparison to the new-and-soon-to-be-old-new basketball is a good one, simply because it prompts the same question in my mind. Was it needed? I heard nothing (outside league offices) about the old ball being outdated and inadequate, and I hear nothing (outside league offices) about the current hockey jerseys being outdated and inadequate. So is a change really warranted or necessary?

(Teebz, I already know your answer!)

jesus, what the hell do you think the street value of troy smith’s torso is?
a. the diamond encrusted chain
b. the mitchell and ness browns jacket

its gotta be a 25,000 chain at least, and the jacket is 400.

that is just 1 nights gear! ahhh, remember when you were a senior in college and how much of a struggle is was to buy a 38 dollar pair of gap jeans? i do… and i also remember that the value of what troy was wearing was equivalent to 6 times what i bought my college car for…
but i guess thats typical gear for a kid from cleveland… i hope vince can back me up on that tomorrow…

The old Cookie Cutters were awful though. Atlanta, Cincinnatti, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia were just awful ballparks

Hey now, don’t forget the original cookie cutter

Though it started this horiffic trend, it’ll be sad to see RFK go down. The tradition instilled in that place by the Redskins of yore still seeps out of every nook and cranny of that stadium. Even when I go to a Nationals game, I can’t help but think about the great football that was played on that field.

[quote comment=”31841″]jesus, what the hell do you think the street value of troy smith’s torso is?
a. the diamond encrusted chain
b. the mitchell and ness browns jacket

its gotta be a 25,000 chain at least, and the jacket is 400.

that is just 1 nights gear! ahhh, remember when you were a senior in college and how much of a struggle is was to buy a 38 dollar pair of gap jeans? i do… and i also remember that the value of what troy was wearing was equivalent to 6 times what i bought my college car for…
but i guess thats typical gear for a kid from cleveland… i hope vince can back me up on that tomorrow…[/quote]

Too bad that necklace is butt-ugly. If you’re going to spend the equivalent of a samall country’s GNP (is that the abbreviation I want?) on a meaningless piece of jewelry, at least have the good sense to make sure it looks good.

So Iverson is getting to keep his same number. Not quite used to link in baby blue.

[quote comment=”31845″]Because NOTHING says tradition like ‘Comerica Park’. I can’t wait to see what the new MN stadium will be called. There are people who want it named Kirby Puckett Stadium, but we all know the chances of THAT happening. Maybe they will call it the 3M Stadium—at least that’s a local company.

It’ll probably be called Comcast Stadium, or, worse yet, Qwest Stadium.

Harumph. Bah, humbug.

M. Scrooge.[/quote]

Yeah, I’m with you on that. I’d like a stadium to be named after important figures in the organization’s history, but I guess that’s not really realistic anymore. And I guess corporate naming is another issue.

But hey, as bad as the Lions are, at least their stadium came as close as possible to being named after someone important to the organization. (Even if Ford Field is actually named after the company, and even if most people blame the Fords for the franchise’s problems.)

This is what I appreciate about going to Michigan Stadium. No corporate name, and no advertisements. It’s very refreshing.

Oh, and Minna, I see the U of Minnesota’s new football stadium is going to be named TCF Bank Stadium. It really warms your heart and makes you think of Minnesota football, doesn’t it?

On the naming note, there were a number of people who wanted Ann Arbor to name its yet-under-construction third high school after Bo Schembechler. But the school board has adopted a policy of refusing to name buildings after people, so they said no way. And now the new high school has the amazingly unique, immediately-makes-you-think-of-Ann-Arbor name of Skyline High School. Sounds like a suburb or a subdivision to me. Of course, their other option was Northcrest, which is even more of a subdivision name.

They refuse to name buildings after people because they say there are too many worthy candidates, and they dismissed the idea of Schembechler High by saying Bo didn’t really do much of anything for Ann Arbor schools. At which point I wonder if Chelsea schools should rename Beach Middle School, named after a World War II general who came from Chelsea and probably, by Ann Arbor standards, didn’t do much for Chelsea schools, either.

Honestly, I wasn’t really set on the idea of Schembechler High; it wasn’t the rejection of the name that bothered me so much as it was the attitude toward naming buildings after people.

Anyway. Meanwhile, back at the topic…

very cool name and number font for Western Michigan’s basketball team. Couldn’t find a picture of the back, but it looks much the same as the front. WMU

[quote comment=”31827″]Concerning the new hockey jerseys: I think the comparison to the new-and-soon-to-be-old-new basketball is a good one, simply because it prompts the same question in my mind. Was it needed? I heard nothing (outside league offices) about the old ball being outdated and inadequate, and I hear nothing (outside league offices) about the current hockey jerseys being outdated and inadequate. So is a change really warranted or necessary?
[/quote]

In both cases, the change wasn’t exactly necessary, in my opinion, but there was a chance for improvement, and that was enough for Stern and the NHL guys to start implementing the change. The old leather was obviously not environmentally friendly, and the commish wanted to make the consistency of the ball better, so he hired the Spalding people to come up with the synthetic one; a good idea, just poor execution, it seems to me.

As for the NHL jerseys, they probably could have gone forever with the loose sweaters, but somebody thought it would be a good idea to make them tighter, faster, lighter, so the game moves faster (less holding) and the players can last longer (less heat fatigue). I’m all for it, mostly. I think a major problem will be with the new panel template, and how it may force bad changes in classic or otherwise good designs. The shirt being tucked into the pants is a separate issue, but still a major problem with the new design.

I think these innovations will eventually work themselves out for the better, as everything in sports does. Remember, the forward pass, hockey helmets, and the Wild Card were all new once, and met with much resistance.

[quote comment=”31853″][quote comment=”31845″]Because NOTHING says tradition like ‘Comerica Park’. I can’t wait to see what the new MN stadium will be called. There are people who want it named Kirby Puckett Stadium, but we all know the chances of THAT happening. Maybe they will call it the 3M Stadium—at least that’s a local company.

It’ll probably be called Comcast Stadium, or, worse yet, Qwest Stadium.

Harumph. Bah, humbug.

M. Scrooge.[/quote]

Yeah, I’m with you on that. I’d like a stadium to be named after important figures in the organization’s history, but I guess that’s not really realistic anymore. And I guess corporate naming is another issue.

But hey, as bad as the Lions are, at least their stadium came as close as possible to being named after someone important to the organization. (Even if Ford Field is actually named after the company, and even if most people blame the Fords for the franchise’s problems.)

This is what I appreciate about going to Michigan Stadium. No corporate name, and no advertisements. It’s very refreshing.

Oh, and Minna, I see the U of Minnesota’s new football stadium is going to be named TCF Bank Stadium. It really warms your heart and makes you think of Minnesota football, doesn’t it?[/quote]

Yeah, especially since the government rammed through public funding for this stadium, too. I have a friend who works at the U who is pissed at the name. At least we still have THE BARN!

Oh, Burrill. I think I am upgrading you to full-time cynic—I can’t carry the load by myself.

p.s. I agree with you about the attitude of disdain towards the idea of using Bo’s name—disturbing.

[quote comment=”31860″]
As for the NHL jerseys, they probably could have gone forever with the loose sweaters, but somebody thought it would be a good idea to make them tighter, faster, lighter, so the game moves faster (less holding) and the players can last longer (less heat fatigue). I’m all for it, mostly. I think a major problem will be with the new panel template, and how it may force bad changes in classic or otherwise good designs. The shirt being tucked into the pants is a separate issue, but still a major problem with the new design.
[/quote]

Exactly what is “heat fatigue”? Fatigue indicates tiredness of the muscles/mind, and your exciting new term would indicate that the players get overheated. This might be the case for a small percentage of players, but CCM changed their jersey design long before Reebok got into the mix. The players appreciate the Cool-Flo jerseys, and this “heat fatigue” you speak of is a thing of a the past.

And I’m not sure about you, but there aren’t a ton of NHL players who hold a player by grabbing their jersey and get away with it. In fact, I’d say less than 5% of holding penalties or obstruction penalites are because someone is tugging on a jersey. The number one called penalty in the game right now? Hooking. Not holding. In fact, holding is number three, behind hooking and interference. So going to a tighter fitting jersey, as it stands right now, appears to be a Reebok/NHL money grab. If you’re gonna rob the fans blind, at least be honest with them. That way, they have no one to blame but themselves.

And since I broke the news about the NHLPA blocking the tuck-in rule, the jerseys will NOT be tucked in the pants next season.

It seems like to me most of the people here just can’t make up your mind about this logo creep issue. Face it logos are going to be on products so you can’t complain when the logos are big and also when the logos are small, like the swoosh on the Oregon facemask. It’s just business. If someone makes a product its only good business to put your logo on it, so its only natural when shoes, jerseys, gloves, sweatbands, visors, etc end up being made by the same company you end up with lots of logos. None of that is even “logo creep” in my opinion since its all different products. It benefits companies everyone is familiar with like Nike…I mean who would have known of the Nike Vision website if it wasn’t on the visor