Pumpa-Pumpa Burnin’ Lovie (Or: Got Gas in Pocket)

I think I called it a couple days ago with the Reebok Pump jacket. Of course, I said you could fill it with Bill Belichick’s hot air and keep you warm. Not exactly correct, but pretty darn close.

I volunteer to be the Uniform Czar for MLB. I will be stern, but fair. Ok, no I won’t. I will be arbitrary and vicious. A “No Pajamas” edict will be the first order issued by my administration.

[quote comment=”42545″]I volunteer to be the Uniform Czar for MLB. I will be stern, but fair. Ok, no I won’t. I will be arbitrary and vicious. A “No Pajamas” edict will be the first order issued by my administration.[/quote]

Robert I agree. Also gloves will be either brown or black. Can’t wait for that orange Jose Mesa glove.

[quote comment=”42544″]Will the Pump jacket still inflate if a coach cuts off the sleeves?[/quote]

The only problem with the pump is now you won’t be able to tell whether or not it’s the link or the link in some situations

[quote comment=”42547″]Webber couldn’t wear 4 in Detroit, because that number hangs from the rafters at the Palace. He’s the best player in the city to wear number 84.[/quote]

Not ever. linktakes that cake, though linkshot when he was an honorary captain looks horrible.

Thanks, Richard. I, too, was going to revive the memory of Herman Moore. Yet another great athlete (with a pretty good attitude, too) to suffer through a career with the Lions. Without a doubt, I’d give Detroit’s 84 to Moore.

Plus, he’s still involved in the area. He owns several businesses in southeast Michigan.

I wonder if Reebok will make an inflatable suit for Nolan and Del Rio.

I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?

I love how he said “Reggie Bush’s High School”, not Alex Smith’s High School.

Reggie Bush’s high school (Helix HS) is the same one that current Niners QB Alex Smith attended. They were in the same backfield for at least one year, i think two. I’m unsure if it’s Smith in the given picture/video though. He’s wearing #11, so I’m thinkin’ it is.

No way Allen! You submitted your comment while i was typing mine and watching the highlight video. Haha. It may also be “Alex Smith’s high school,” but it was certainly Reggie Bush’s team. All Smith had to do was hand it to the guy…he took over from there.

I await Paul’s comments regarding the new NHL jerseys today. Not a picture or a description… but rather his comments.

I’m still peeved at the NHL for their inane “news conference that no one can talk about until we say so” today.

Wow, the Admirals found the only possible way to make that logo worse. Put it on a surfboard with flowery colors. Please, make them stop!

Also, is this the first time we’ve had animation in the lead story? Pretty sweet!

[quote comment=”42577″][quote comment=”42575″][quote comment=”42560″]I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

More like, “pay attention to ME!”

Interesting uni-related Beckham comment from Grant Wahl on SI.com. I know a lot of the MLS kit are being redone but are they all being redone?

2. Why should fans hold off buying a green-and-gold Galaxy jersey with Beckham’s name on the back?

Simple answer: because Becks will never wear green and gold with the Galaxy. The team is deep into the process of rebranding itself with new colors, a new shield and new uniforms. “We made a decision that it was time to start thinking through how we create a more worldly brand,” Lewieke says. “We have a good name. Galaxy works. But we need a more legendary, traditional kind of look that’s more of a soccer look.”[/quote]

aren’t most of them being redone because Adidas changed their kit designs as Paul mentioned last week? The Galaxy might redesign their logo and team colors, but something tells me they’ll use one of the new Adidas kit templates.[/quote]

Yeah, it’s likely that they’ll use a new design if they re-do their look.

[quote comment=”42584″][quote comment=”42581″][quote comment=”42574″]
I will not be commenting in any way until Monday at 2pm. That’s the deal I agreed to.[/quote]

I would never ask you to risk your journalistic credibility by doing something you can’t, Paul. I have more respect for what you do than that.

I’m simply trying to release my frustration over this entire debacle.[/quote]

I hear ya. I was just making it clear (to everyone, not just to you) that I won’t be able to discuss what goes on today. I should have an ESPN column running promptly at 2pm on Monday, however.[/quote]

Then I shall be at the ESPN website at 1:59 hitting refresh until I see it. I am really anxious to see these.

I second the animation kudos by the way – lovin it!

[quote comment=”42562″]I love how he said “Reggie Bush’s High School”, not Alex Smith’s High School.[/quote]

or bill walton’s.

Yep, that’s Alex Smith (11) doing what he did best in high school, hand the ball to Reggie.

Interesting article here… towards the bottom it says that part of Lyle Overbays extension with the Jays was him getting the number 17. Seems like kind of a tongue-in-cheek comment, but interesting still.

Had a good e-mail back-and-forth yesterday with Tyler Kepner, who covers the Yankees for the New York Times. “I used to cover the Seattle Mariners in 1998-99,” he wrote at one point. “One day they just decided to wear their BP top for the games. It was the strangest thing. I remember thinking, ‘Can they do that? Isn’t there some uniform czar to regulate this stuff?’ ”

Back in September of 1983, the Reds were playing the Giants at Candlestick park, wearing not their road grays, but a red version of that jersey. The announcers said that the red jersey would be the Reds’ road jersey the next season. That didn’t happen, but it was kind of curious as to why the Reds chose to pick a September game in SF to try out a new uniform choice.

I don’t think I’ll ever really beleive that these new uniforms aren’t constricting until I get a chance to wear one myself. Obviously I haven’t seen the final product, and the players say its not as bad as the original concept (then again, they were told what they are and aren’t allowed to say about them) but every player brings up the tightness of them, even if its to say ‘its not so bad’, they still bring it up. They’ve only worn them for a practice or two, it’ll be interesting to see their opinions after wearing them for a real game first, and then a whole season. Unless there is a big improvement for the players, this all seems like a waste of time and money to me. To change the design of something that has worked for at least a few decades seems frivilous to me.

One more comment on the new jerseys, what levels will be wearing them… if they are more custom fit and tight, they’ll never work at the minor hockey level where the same uniforms are used by teams for years. That means one more thing players will have to get used to as they move up to the CHL/NHL/College/who knows.

One more thing I forgot to add to my last comment, which is kind of obvious if you think about…

These are Reebok jerseys, so only Reebok leagues will be able to wear them (which includes the OHL I know for sure, no clue about anywhere else). And what happens when reebok loses the NHL contract? Do we go through this entire process again with Bauer-Nike (or whoever)?

Geez, I thought it was unique. No worse than the “Pink for Breast Cancer” thing

I’m not dogging the concept, its a pretty good one in my opinion. The link needs to go, however.

Bob, it’s funny you should mention the OHL: next week I’m going to a Plymouth Whalers game for the first time. I’m looking forward to it.

[quote comment=”42598″]Back in September of 1983, the Reds were playing the Giants at Candlestick park, wearing not their road grays, but a red version of that jersey. The announcers said that the red jersey would be the Reds’ road jersey the next season. That didn’t happen, but it was kind of curious as to why the Reds chose to pick a September game in SF to try out a new uniform choice.[/quote]

Photos of the Reds playing in those jerseys are few and far between. In fact, I do not think that I have ever seen an action photo of a player wearing that jersey.

[quote comment=”42567″][quote comment=”42560″]I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

George Mikan’s no whackjob![/quote]
I’m not saying he was.

I’m just saying that in today’s game, if a player has a number higher than 55, he’s usually a nut.

Paul, could you let us know roughly how many people are there after the event (or now, if you know). And if it was mostly well known guys, or guys such as yourself? I’m just curious.

[quote comment=”42620″]if it was mostly well known guys, or guys such as yourself?[/quote]

HA! I’m sure no offense was taken, but you probably could have omitted that last part.

[quote comment=”42615″][quote comment=”42567″][quote comment=”42560″]I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

George Mikan’s no whackjob![/quote]
I’m not saying he was.

I’m just saying that in today’s game, if a player has a number higher than 55, he’s usually a nut.[/quote]

Drew Gooden? He wears 90 and he isn’t really a nut. Although that hair cut is wierd.

Antoine Walker wore #88 his first few games back with the Celtics. Unless you consider shooting far too many threes and fluctuating in weight odd then he isn’t really a nut.

I also wouldn’t claim Webber is a nut. Just a little full of himself, but what NBA player isn’t really? Rodman and Artest I’ll give you but Scott Pollard just looks wierd, he isn’t a nut.

Paul, I know you’re sworn to secrecy, but I do have a question about the press conference.

Not one mention in any of the articles I’ve read has mentioned the AHL. And I think it would not be very logical to introduce a new line of equipment for the majors and not send it down the line to the AHL (and ECHL, etc).

So, is it possible that the question could be asked at the press conference, or if you can let us know if the changes to the NHL uniforms will apply down the line to the minors?

Thanks

Burrill makes link Not sure that link is working but you know where to look. Well said Mr. Strong.

[quote comment=”42633″][quote comment=”42626″][quote comment=”42593″]Yep, that’s Alex Smith (11) doing what he did best in high school, hand the ball to Reggie.[/quote]

That may have gotten him scouted and recruited a little better, but he certainly took advantage of the opportunity. Beats BYU twice, wins the Fiesta Bowl and goes number one overall. Sure looks like just handing off to Bush was what he was all about.[/quote]

just remember that bush and smith were teammates and not classmates. smith was 02 bush 03.
smith would have had an established reputation and would have been recruited by the time bush lit things up…[/quote]

True, But it was widely reported that the reason Utah even went to see his games were to recruit Bush. I’m sure it was when Bush was younger and not as accomplished because otherwise we can’t recruit on the levels of USC, Arizona, and most of the Pac-10. If I remember right Smith only had scholarship offers from Utah and one other school.

HA! I’m sure no offense was taken, but you probably could have omitted that last part.

I actually had another couple sentences in my post, but I took them out, I guess the part where I said “No offence” was in there somewhere, because it was there originally. I think/hope Paul knows what I meant. He doesn’t seem to be bothered by much.

[quote comment=”42635″][quote comment=”42560″]
I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

I tend to agree when it comes to baseball uni numbers above 59. Examples include Turk Wendell #99, Barry Zito #75, Joe Beimel #97 (that drunk). Can’t think of any others, and unfortunately my theory isn’t that great, since it doesn’t apply to Bill Lee or Mark Fidrych.[/quote]

I think Rodman is entirely responsible for the “High Number = Crazy” thing; he wore link, link, and link.

With baseball, like 70-80 people get invited to spring training and many are obviously assigned high numbers; every once in a while someone decides to keep their spring training number. I think that’s why former Oriole Alan Mills always wore #75 and link wears #63.

The Montreal Canadiens have a ton of link, and I know that link wore #71 with the Canadiens because that’s just the number they gave him in training camp his rookie year.

Famed link J.T. Snow wore #84 with the Red Sox last year in tribute to link.

Interesting picture on the ESPN.com’s Baseball Front Page (“Dice Game” story about Daisuke Matsuzaka)

Look at the “name” on #19s jersey.

[quote comment=”42644″]Interesting picture on the ESPN.com’s Baseball Front Page (“Dice Game” story about Daisuke Matsuzaka)

Look at the “name” on #19s jersey.[/quote]

The lettering is too small to make out, but I recognize the character “nin” meaning “endure”, second from right. The 19 is also pinned on to the jersey; look closely and you’ll see that it’s in a different font. I wonder if that player is pasting stuf fover his regular name and number in an effort to honor someone. When was this picture taken?

And I’m another person who hates high numbers… but the really outlandish ones don’t bother me for some reason. In baseball, seeing Zito’s 75 or Beimel’s 97 doesn’t bother me nearly as much as seeing numbers in the 50s and 60s, which for some reason look ugly. It must be because as a kid in the late 1980s, the Cubs and Mets didn’t give out many numbers higher than 50.

There have been several guys in the 70s (add Shawn Bradley, who had 76 thanks to his height), 80s, and 90s, but has anyone in the NBA ever worn a number in the 60s? I can’t think of anyone.

To Rich Burns,

I had only saw the article on Petr Cech yesterday from link. I then looked at Cech’s homepage and found some pictures.

I had not seen the posting in the comments earlier, because I normally do not look at the comments everyday.

I had not intended to take credit for someone else’s findings. It is often that we as a whole (readers) find things and hope that they will be put on the site.

It was just something that I hadn’t seen and thought would be interesting and sent it to Paul, and he posted it.

[quote comment=”42643″][quote comment=”42641″]High basketball numbers – didn’t Gheorge Muresan wear 77? I seem to remember that…

I’ve never liked players wearing “0” or “00” – technically a number has to have a value – and “0” and “00” have no value by their very nature….[/quote]

Don’t forget, though, link claimed to wear an “O,” not a zero.

link may be a little loony, but he got to be the only person to ever wear six zeroes on his jersey at once when he played for the Phillies.[/quote]

If you think people with “00” are cooky, tell that to link. Also, check out the stripes in the socks (picture 7), and how the Big 3 aren’t wearing the same striping.

[quote comment=”42641″]High basketball numbers – didn’t Gheorge Muresan wear 77? I seem to remember that…

I’ve never liked players wearing “0” or “00” – technically a number has to have a value – and “0” and “00” have no value by their very nature….[/quote]
Gilbert Arenas wears 0 because thats how many minutes he was told that he would play at Arizona.

Maybe black undershorts, like compression gear or UnderArmour stuff. I have a pair of compression shorts with a pocket for a cup, and they’re gray, but generally stuff comes in either black or white.

[quote comment=”42602″][quote comment=”42582″][quote comment=”42577″][quote comment=”42575″][quote comment=”42560″]I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

More like, “pay attention to ME!”

Interesting uni-related Beckham comment from Grant Wahl on SI.com. I know a lot of the MLS kit are being redone but are they all being redone?

2. Why should fans hold off buying a green-and-gold Galaxy jersey with Beckham’s name on the back?

Simple answer: because Becks will never wear green and gold with the Galaxy. The team is deep into the process of rebranding itself with new colors, a new shield and new uniforms. “We made a decision that it was time to start thinking through how we create a more worldly brand,” Lewieke says. “We have a good name. Galaxy works. But we need a more legendary, traditional kind of look that’s more of a soccer look.”[/quote]

aren’t most of them being redone because Adidas changed their kit designs as Paul mentioned last week? The Galaxy might redesign their logo and team colors, but something tells me they’ll use one of the new Adidas kit templates.[/quote]

Yeah, it’s likely that they’ll use a new design if they re-do their look.[/quote]

Seems odd that the Galaxy would change their color scheme to match the old San Jose Earthquakes. If MLS ever put an expansion franchise back in San Jose, I’d imagine they would try and use the same colors and name as before the team moved to Houston.[/quote]

Who said anything about rebranding the Galaxy in Earthquake colors. The trophies, name, logo, and colors for the Earthquakes are reserved for them, until a new San Jose franchise comes along (if they ever do).

I NEED SOME HELP…

I am going to order a UniWatch t-shirt today…should I get a “basic T” or the “fitted T?” Has anybody order one over the holidays? Which one fits better?

Thanks

in reading about the rumored relationship between tom brady and (the smoking hot) giselle bundchen today in gallo’s jump on dot com, i couldnt help but to laugh at the tomkat/benifer/brangelina name they have been assigned.

gisom

genius. utter genius. i hope it (pardon the pun) sticks, because i will be laughing everytime the folks on ET, access hollywood, the daily 10, etc. say it.

[quote comment=”42649″][quote comment=”42644″]Interesting picture on the ESPN.com’s Baseball Front Page (“Dice Game” story about Daisuke Matsuzaka)

Look at the “name” on #19s jersey.[/quote]

The lettering is too small to make out, but I recognize the character “nin” meaning “endure”, second from right. The 19 is also pinned on to the jersey; look closely and you’ll see that it’s in a different font. I wonder if that player is pasting stuf fover his regular name and number in an effort to honor someone. When was this picture taken?

And I’m another person who hates high numbers… but the really outlandish ones don’t bother me for some reason. In baseball, seeing Zito’s 75 or Beimel’s 97 doesn’t bother me nearly as much as seeing numbers in the 50s and 60s, which for some reason look ugly. It must be because as a kid in the late 1980s, the Cubs and Mets didn’t give out many numbers higher than 50.

There have been several guys in the 70s (add Shawn Bradley, who had 76 thanks to his height), 80s, and 90s, but has anyone in the NBA ever worn a number in the 60s? I can’t think of anyone.[/quote]

Scot Pollard, who typically wears 31, wore 62 when he was with the Indiana Pacers. Reggie Miller was still playing then, and he clearly had dibs on 31 – which happens to be the best number of all time.

[quote comment=”42671″][quote comment=”42653″][quote comment=”42649″]There have been several guys in the 70s (add Shawn Bradley, who had 76 thanks to his height), 80s, and 90s, but has anyone in the NBA ever worn a number in the 60s? I can’t think of anyone.[/quote]

Shawn Bradley wore #76, played for the 76ers, and had some kind of $7.6-million contract.[/quote]

Also he was 7’6″. Which is why he wore 76 and Gheorge Muresan wore 77 (he was 7’7″).

The NBA has a history of players wearing 0 and 00, they are the only sport that it is worn frequently. Baseball, Football (not allowed to wear it at all), and Hockey haven’t had a big history of 0 and 00 numbers. That’s why I like it in the NBA.

link
link
Eric Montross (Couldn’t find him wearing 0 with the Celtics but here is a link of him at UNC)
Tony Delk – link link, link
link
Hibachi: link, link, link

I’m sure there are more that I am missing.[/quote]

Dont forget link

Excerpt form Jim Caples Page 2 link:

“As it is, the most challenging part of Baseball-Reference.com is convincing your spouse that you aren’t surfing for porn — that you really can spend that many hours staring at the computer screen without a single salacious image.

Unless you count stirrup socks as erotic (there is a link to a Hall of Fame page displaying every uniform).”

Benito Santiago wore 09 in 1991 and 1992 so people could read the number on his back when he was wearing the chest protector. I can’t find visual proof, but here is the Padres roster in the link.

ah screw it

[quote comment=”42691″]there[/quote]

Is that better?

[quote comment=”42670″]in reading about the rumored relationship between tom brady and (the smoking hot) giselle bundchen today in gallo’s jump on dot com, i couldnt help but to laugh at the tomkat/benifer/brangelina name they have been assigned.

gisom

genius. utter genius. i hope it (pardon the pun) sticks, because i will be laughing everytime the folks on ET, access hollywood, the daily 10, etc. say it.[/quote]

Pretty funny, but wouldn’t a better name for these two have been ‘The Brady Bundchen”? ;)

Here’s hoping simple HTML can end the italics.

Something always bothered me about Walter McCarty wearing #0 in Boston. Parrish’s #00 is retired. Shouldn’t that prohibit anyone from wearing any form of zero? After all Benny Santiago wouldn’t have been able to wear #09 if the Pads had #9 retired.

[quote comment=”42666″][quote comment=”42653″][quote comment=”42649″]There have been several guys in the 70s (add Shawn Bradley, who had 76 thanks to his height), 80s, and 90s, but has anyone in the NBA ever worn a number in the 60s? I can’t think of anyone.[/quote]

Shawn Bradley wore #76, played for the 76ers, and had some kind of $7.6-million contract.[/quote]

He’s also 7’6″. My brother and I saw him at DFW Airport a few years back (he’s hard to miss). He puts his height in his signature too.[/quote]
I thought that Illinois forward Brian Carwell was tall and he is 6’11”. I got his autograph at my high school’s basketball game last year and I was only a foot above his waist. Too bad he only wore 33 in high school and 21 this year at U of I.

In the high-number discussion, don’t forget the best high-number uniform of all time…Boston Brave and New York Giant pitcher Bill Voiselle, number 96 in your program.

And proud resident of Ninety-Six, South Carolina.

[quote comment=”42687″]Benito Santiago wore 09 in 1991 and 1992 so people could read the number on his back when he was wearing the chest protector. I can’t find visual proof, but here is the Padres roster in the link.[/quote]

Benitolink also wore 09 with the marlins

[quote comment=”42701″]Something always bothered me about Walter McCarty wearing #0 in Boston. Parrish’s #00 is retired. Shouldn’t that prohibit anyone from wearing any form of zero? After all Benny Santiago wouldn’t have been able to wear #09 if the Pads had #9 retired.[/quote]

Following that logic, if a team retired #22, then no player could ever wear #2 either. Also, no NHL player could ever wear link.

[quote comment=”42719″][quote comment=”42687″]Benito Santiago wore 09 in 1991 and 1992 so people could read the number on his back when he was wearing the chest protector. I can’t find visual proof, but here is the Padres roster in the link.[/quote]

Benitolink also wore 09 with the marlins[/quote]

this is better
link

The mention of Turk Wendell just inspired me to accidentally write a little poem. I know nobody asked for it, but here’s the poem anyway:

A Poem About Turk Wendell, #99

Weird as a Cub
Weird as a Phillie
Weird as a Met
Basically Silly.

(takes bow)

[quote comment=”42726″]This may be one of the overlooked bits of genius on this site. The post titles are always entertaining.[/quote]

I try to do the same (on my site, not here!), so I do notice them, and I would agree — the titles are consistently amusing.

Consider your work complimented, Paul.

this is better
link…
Maybe Benito Santiago wore 09 because he was born in 1909. Did you see that picture?

[quote comment=”42669″]Metsfan, thanks for noting the TMQ thing. I wondered if he’d use it, but I hadn’t thought to check this week yet.

Minna, I think you’re being a bit optimistic about five people liking the new death-friendly Admiral logo. In fact, you’ve been disturbingly optimistic the last few days. As the cynical intern, I have to ask: are you okay?

Oh, and Paul, I love today’s post title. Very creative.[/quote]

Heh. Never fear, my dear intern, Burrill—I am fine. I was going to say, “I am probably the only one…” until I remembered that I don’t like it when other people say that. I stuck in five because it is a reasonably low number, and I recall at least two other people claiming to like the logo.

The optimist pokes her head out now and then—but I usually manage to bash her unconscious before she gets out of control.

I like ’00’ as a uni number, but not ‘0’.

was bothering me

[quote comment=”42737″]I’m back from the NHL shindig. As you know, I can’t discuss any aspect of it, so don’t ask. But I will say this: I was seated at a round table, just two chairs away from the Commish. I kept imagining what Teebz would have done if he’d been sitting where I was. Wasn’t pretty.[/quote]

Wow. You were in the present of hockey royalty (link), and all you could think of was the apoplectic fit Teebz would have if he were in your place? Way to infiltrate Paul’s brain, Teebz!

Paul, I will be eternally jealous that you had a chance to speak to the most powerful Munchkin known to man.

However, I would have had many questions. I’m sure security would have escorted me out, and the NYPD would have had “a car waiting for me”.

A la Milton in Office Space, I would have burned the building down.

[quote comment=”42627″][quote comment=”42615″][quote comment=”42567″][quote comment=”42560″]I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

George Mikan’s no whackjob![/quote]
I’m not saying he was.

I’m just saying that in today’s game, if a player has a number higher than 55, he’s usually a nut.[/quote]

Actually in today’s game if a player has a number higher than 55, he has to have permission from the League Office. The NBA wants the officials to be able to signal player numbers to the Scorer’s Table more easily so the uniforms tend to stop at 55 since you can hold up your hands and show the scorer the number (“five-five”). Numbers higher than that require math on the part of the referee’s (What do you hold up for 8? two fours? a five and a three?) You can see where it might get complicated for a referee . . .

Okay, checking my anti-ref sarcasm at the door.

As for the NFL not allowing double zero . . .link

Noticed in the new “Happyness” Will Smith movie (set early 80s in SF)—they used the current Niners logo. Oops.

[quote comment=”42731″][quote comment=”42728″][quote comment=”42723″][quote comment=”42701″]Something always bothered me about Walter McCarty wearing #0 in Boston. Parrish’s #00 is retired. Shouldn’t that prohibit anyone from wearing any form of zero? After all Benny Santiago wouldn’t have been able to wear #09 if the Pads had #9 retired.[/quote]

Following that logic, if a team retired #22, then no player could ever wear #2 either. Also, no NHL player could ever wear link.[/quote]
Well aside from the fact that 00 and 0 are the same number as are 09 and 9. 99 ≠ 9.[/quote]

But zero in a mathematical sense represents a value. It’s in the middle. It is neither a positive or a negative but, it still is a number. If that means to you that because the Celtics retired “00” they couldn’t give out “0” then it would hold true that any number with the number “0” in it could not be given out either. “0” and “00” are two seperate numbers just like “10” or “20.” So how exactly is “09” wrong if a team had retired “9”????[/quote]

I’m not sure that I agree that #0 and #00 are different numbers. 0-00=0. All I’m saying is if Walter McCarty #0 and Tony Delk #00 were on the same team the roster would look wierd.

As far as #09 being wrong if a team retired #9, could you imagine someone on the Yankees wearing #03? Not a chance.

[quote comment=”42759″]It seems odd to me that NHLers seem to have high numbers all the time (Gretzky 99, Fedorov 91), but rarely in baseball or basketball. Why are they different?

To add my two cents to the dispute about whether a player should be allowed to wear 0 if 00 has been retired, I think he should. Wearing 00 is a concious decision as much as choosing any other number, 0-99 is. The whole purpose is to not sully the identification of one great by allowing a current player to wear the same number, and so as far as I am concerned, 00 is different than 0.[/quote]

I don’t know about basketball, but baseball numbers used to be assigned by position in the batting order when they first started appearing on uniforms in the 1920s. Babe Ruth usually hit 3rd in the batting order, thus, his #3.

link

[quote comment=”42560″]I wonder if Reebok will make an inflatable suit for Nolan and Del Rio.

I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

It could be argued that it never functioned too well to begin with…

[quote comment=”42759″]It seems odd to me that NHLers seem to have high numbers all the time (Gretzky 99, Fedorov 91), but rarely in baseball or basketball. Why are they different?

To add my two cents to the dispute about whether a player should be allowed to wear 0 if 00 has been retired, I think he should. Wearing 00 is a concious decision as much as choosing any other number, 0-99 is. The whole purpose is to not sully the identification of one great by allowing a current player to wear the same number, and so as far as I am concerned, 00 is different than 0.[/quote]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned before, but in college basketball the players can only wear digits 0-5. So the highest number you’ll ever see is 55. I think this is so the refs can indetify the player they called a foul on using theyre fingers. So numbers 6-9 can’t be worn either or numbers such as AS 16, 28, 37, 49, etc…here is the link

[quote comment=”42560″]I wonder if Reebok will make an inflatable suit for Nolan and Del Rio.

I associate weird basketball uni numbers with whack jobs like Rodman, Artest, or Scot Pollard. Is this a sign that Webber has lost his mind?[/quote]

He’s lost his defensive agility.

I think only if you’re playing for the league minumum should you wear a uniform # higher than 55.

[quote comment=”42765″][quote comment=”42759″]It seems odd to me that NHLers seem to have high numbers all the time (Gretzky 99, Fedorov 91), but rarely in baseball or basketball. Why are they different?

To add my two cents to the dispute about whether a player should be allowed to wear 0 if 00 has been retired, I think he should. Wearing 00 is a concious decision as much as choosing any other number, 0-99 is. The whole purpose is to not sully the identification of one great by allowing a current player to wear the same number, and so as far as I am concerned, 00 is different than 0.[/quote]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned before, but in college basketball the players can only wear digits 0-5. So the highest number you’ll ever see is 55. I think this is so the refs can indetify the player they called a foul on using theyre fingers. So numbers 6-9 can’t be worn either or numbers such as AS 16, 28, 37, 49, etc…here is the link[/quote]
This is my understanding as well, so the ref could ID the player’s number when calling the foul at the scorer’s table using only one hand. And it was done that way back in my Indiana High School Basketball days…when they had a one class state tournament.

High numbers in the NHL normally do have meaning.

As someone pointed out, Mogilny wore his #89 for the year he defected.

Jagr and Palffy both wore #68 for a while to represent the Czechoslovakian uprising versus the USSR, and the resulting independance of Czechoslovakia.

Sidney Crosby wears #87 as his birthday is August 7, 1987.

Wayne Gretzky started wearing #99 in Ste. Sault Marie when he played in the OHL. He wanted the number “9” – Gordie Howe’s number – but it was already taken. His coach suggested doubling it to “99” and from then on, it became his playing number.

There are others, but those quick off my head. :o)

Yeah I remember Jim Otto wore #00 for Oakland.

And Ken Burroughs was wearing #00 for the Houston Oilers.

What I meant was, they don’t allow it now.

Isn’t that right?

[quote comment=”42782″]High numbers in the NHL normally do have meaning.

As someone pointed out, Mogilny wore his #89 for the year he defected.

Jagr and Palffy both wore #68 for a while to represent the Czechoslovakian uprising versus the USSR, and the resulting independance of Czechoslovakia.

Sidney Crosby wears #87 as his birthday is August 7, 1987.

Wayne Gretzky started wearing #99 in Ste. Sault Marie when he played in the OHL. He wanted the number “9” – Gordie Howe’s number – but it was already taken. His coach suggested doubling it to “99” and from then on, it became his playing number.

There are others, but those quick off my head. :o)[/quote]
That uprising was known as the Prague Spring, and I believe Jagr’s Father or grandfather was either hurt or killed in it.

[quote comment=”42751″]Nice. The Oilers will wear ’80s throwbacks to commemorate Messier’s career. If the Oilers did that for me, I would request that they spend the extra $1,000 (probably less) to buy the players shells for their pants so that the pants matched the socks and sweaters. On top of that, wear white so the helmet matches, and the only thing that may be slightly off-color will be the gloves. Of course, no team ever does this; they allow their players to take the ice looking like crap on these special occassions that warrant special jerseys.[/quote]

The Vancouver Canucks wear matching helmets, gloves, jersey, pants, and socks when they wear the home and away version of the stick jersey. Which, btw, they’ll be wearing the white stick jersey against Buffalo this Friday while the Sabres wear their retro blue jerseys.

[quote comment=”42786″][quote comment=”42782″]High numbers in the NHL normally do have meaning.

As someone pointed out, Mogilny wore his #89 for the year he defected.

Jagr and Palffy both wore #68 for a while to represent the Czechoslovakian uprising versus the USSR, and the resulting independance of Czechoslovakia.

Sidney Crosby wears #87 as his birthday is August 7, 1987.

Wayne Gretzky started wearing #99 in Ste. Sault Marie when he played in the OHL. He wanted the number “9” – Gordie Howe’s number – but it was already taken. His coach suggested doubling it to “99” and from then on, it became his playing number.

There are others, but those quick off my head. :o)[/quote]
That uprising was known as the Prague Spring, and I believe Jagr’s Father or grandfather was either hurt or killed in it.[/quote]

I believe his father was imprisoned, but not positive.

[quote comment=”42785″][quote comment=”42761″]A lot of the high NHL numbers have to do with Europeans and dates. Alexander Mogilny wore 89 because that’s when he escaped the Soviet Union. Jagr wears 68 because of a Czech uprising against the Soviets in 1968, I think… Could be wrong about the event, but it is political in nature. I recall several other Euro players having similar reasoning.[/quote]

That’s exactly the reason. link wore the number when he broke in with the Islanders.

Ziggy did wear teh 68, but it wasn’t for political reasond. In fact, the equipment manager at the time thought he’d like waring the number because of the significance it held for Czech players, but Ziggy was pretty indifferent about politics/ In fact, he wound up changing his number while with the Isles to get away from the pressure of the comparisons. So, link? link.

In link and link, he wore 33. In international competiton, he wore a link again.

I’m sure that when Benito Santiago wore 09 with the Padres, the Padres would have been forbidden to issue 9 to any other player at he same time. Ergo, 09 = 9 and 00 = 0.

As a Celtic fan, I felt that it was a slight to the Chief when they issued Eric Montross 0 and then later, Walter McCarty.

[quote comment=”42787″]I thought NCAA and NBA basketball players were prohibited from wearing numbers higher than 55 due to the limited fingers on referee’s hands when signaling fouls to the scorers’ table. How can Webber be wearing 84?[/quote]

The number rule does not apply to the NBA. Remember, up until this season, Kobe wore #8.

I think that the numbers that the refs cannot do with their hands are still technically illegal and the players have to pay a fine. I think it is along the same lines as the fine for wearing different colored sneakers. Nike used to pay Michael Jordans for years.

I know Eric Montross wore #00 at Carolina, but I can’t think of any other 0s or 00s in college hoops (did Arenas wear 0 at Arizona?). I’m sure as soon as I post this, I’ll think up about twelve of ’em.

[quote comment=”42805″]I’m sure that when Benito Santiago wore 09 with the Padres, the Padres would have been forbidden to issue 9 to any other player at he same time. Ergo, 09 = 9 and 00 = 0.

As a Celtic fan, I felt that it was a slight to the Chief when they issued Eric Montross 0 and then later, Walter McCarty.[/quote]

How do you feel about Leon Powe wearing it this season?

[quote comment=”42806″][quote comment=”42798″]A late addition to striped socks fotos:

University of Wisconsin hockey, circa 1930.[/quote]

Oh. My. God.[/quote]

Not sure if there is any further info available on this pic, but the team is standing on a beach. No snow to be seen. Very interesting place for a team photo. Also the “keeper” has a different sweater than the rest of the team. Good stuff

[quote comment=”42833″]That Tampa Bay patch is telling. Note that it doesn’t say ’10 years of excellence,’ or even ’10 years of adequacy.’ Just ’10 seasons,’ as in “We’re delighted to still have a franchise.”[/quote]
It should say “10 seasons of ineptitude”

I believe Mario Lemieux’s No. 88 came about because of his agent. When Lemieux was ready to enter the league, they wanted something distinctive, and went with 88. Not nearly as inspiring as Jagr’s No. 68.

[quote comment=”42837″]I believe Mario Lemieux’s No. 88 came about because of his agent. When Lemieux was ready to enter the league, they wanted something distinctive, and went with 88. Not nearly as inspiring as Jagr’s No. 68.[/quote]
Lemieux wore 66; Lindros wore 88

[quote comment=”42841″][quote comment=”42837″]I believe Mario Lemieux’s No. 88 came about because of his agent. When Lemieux was ready to enter the league, they wanted something distinctive, and went with 88. Not nearly as inspiring as Jagr’s No. 68.[/quote]
Lemieux wore 66; Lindros wore 88[/quote]

Lemieux wore 66 when he played in the Quebec Junior League as well. If I recall correctly, I believe he wore 66 as an homage of sorts to Wayne Gretzky (66 is 99 upside down) because there were so many comparisons to Lemieux as The Next One.

[quote comment=”42835″]A nit picky detail about Jagr wearing 68 if it is a refernce for what became known as The Prague Spring, the Czech uprising in 1968 which did not result in Czech independence (as previously posted) as Czechoslovakia was an independent nation at the time. However the uprising was an atempt to distance themselves from control by the Soviets as Czechoslovakia fell under Soviet control in the Soviet bloc but still technically remaind independent. The uprising failed and Czechoslavakia remained under Soviet influence until the collapse of the Soviet Union…Just a small detail from a History major, but hey if theres a place for small details this blog is it[/quote]

Good clarification. I had forgotten many details in my explanation of “independance”, and I applaud this effort. Well done, Beats!

[quote comment=”42787″]I thought NCAA and NBA basketball players were prohibited from wearing numbers higher than 55 due to the limited fingers on referee’s hands when signaling fouls to the scorers’ table. How can Webber be wearing 84?[/quote]

Maybe they have a specialized, one fingered gesture in mind to indicate Mr. Webber. :P

Also, in the great 0 vs. 00 and 9 vs. 09 debate – if the purpose of numbering is not only visually identifying players but also communicating to others verbally, 0 and 00 (and 9 and 09) would be said “zero” and “nine” respectively. I am sure that you could say “double zero” and “oh-nine,” but this is annoying and unnecessary when there are so many “real” numbers from which to choose.

Luongo. I’m tired

I’m waiting for someone to bust out with a PI symbol on his back. ‘Now batting, number 3.14159…’

Remember this is Wisconsin we are talking about. There is a lake right behind them, I’d wager thats where they played.

[quote comment=”42851″][quote comment=”42790″]
The Vancouver Canucks wear matching helmets, gloves, jersey, pants, and socks when they wear the home and away version of the stick jersey. Which, btw, they’ll be wearing the white stick jersey against Buffalo this Friday while the Sabres wear their retro blue jerseys.[/quote]

link, link link link. Only link goes fully matched.

Still looks pretty link.[/quote]

The shorts are clearly link than what they link. The colours looked different because the shorts are wet and thus are a little darker.

Kenny, have you noticed the unspoken agreement among publishers and teams that 00 is somehow less than regular 0? Every team in Japan makes use of both numbers now, and every time I see 00 listed above 0 when the players are ordered by number.

In Japan, amateur baseball has strict rules for player numbers. Only 0-30 (and 00) are to be worn, and the manager must wear 30 and the captain has to be number 10. Numbers over 30 can be assigned if the team has more than 30 players (the J-League in soccer has a similar rule).

So on my company team, I requested 37, and they decided to wait until a 36th person joins our club (there are now 34) before ordering my jersey!

oh yeah… link

[quote comment=”42758″][quote comment=”42731″][quote comment=”42728″][quote comment=”42723″][quote comment=”42701″]Something always bothered me about Walter McCarty wearing #0 in Boston. Parrish’s #00 is retired. Shouldn’t that prohibit anyone from wearing any form of zero? After all Benny Santiago wouldn’t have been able to wear #09 if the Pads had #9 retired.[/quote]

Following that logic, if a team retired #22, then no player could ever wear #2 either. Also, no NHL player could ever wear link.[/quote]
Well aside from the fact that 00 and 0 are the same number as are 09 and 9. 99 ≠ 9.[/quote]

But zero in a mathematical sense represents a value. It’s in the middle. It is neither a positive or a negative but, it still is a number. If that means to you that because the Celtics retired “00” they couldn’t give out “0” then it would hold true that any number with the number “0” in it could not be given out either. “0” and “00” are two seperate numbers just like “10” or “20.” So how exactly is “09” wrong if a team had retired “9”????[/quote]

I’m not sure that I agree that #0 and #00 are different numbers. 0-00=0. All I’m saying is if Walter McCarty #0 and Tony Delk #00 were on the same team the roster would look wierd.

As far as #09 being wrong if a team retired #9, could you imagine someone on the Yankees wearing #03? Not a chance.[/quote]

Yeah, the roster would look weird. It also wouldn’t exist.

When I was much younger, I attended a basketball camp run by then-NBA player Dan Schayes. During a question-and-answer session, Mr. Schayes was asked about uniform numbers. I don’t remember how exactly the subject of 0 vs 00 came up, but Mr. Schayes told us that NBA teams are prohibited from having players with 0 and 00 on the same roster.

That always puzzled me because I was under the impression that 00 was the uniform equivalent of 100. Whatever.

[quote comment=”42751″]The NBA wants the officials to be able to signal player numbers to the Scorer’s Table more easily so the uniforms tend to stop at 55 since you can hold up your hands and show the scorer the number (“five-five”). Numbers higher than that require math on the part of the referee’s (What do you hold up for 8? two fours? a five and a three?) You can see where it might get complicated for a referee . . .[/quote]

i’ve talked to a couple refs who said something similar. more specifically, no part of a jersey number is supposed to be higher than five making it easier to signal jersey numbers to the scorer’s table one-handed after a foul. the ref usually only has one hand available since the ball is in his other hand. signaling “five-five” one-handed is much easier than signaling “two-eight.”

the rule isn’t enforced as strictly as it used to be.

Not sure of anyone has mentioned this, but RBK uses “The Pump” in some of their hockey skates for ankle support.

I guess hey are branching out into puffy coats now…