Game Theory

The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.

KState has been wearing the patch for several games now. His mom died maybe a month ago. On a side note, Clint Stewert did propose to his girlfried last night. (She said yes.)

Kansas State wore a “VS” patch last night, a memorial tribute to Vanessa Stewart, mother of team member Clent Stewart, who died yesterday afternoon. Detail here (with thanks to Phil Hecken)

Clent Stewart also proposed to his girlfriend prior to the game, which was also senior night:

link

Not much of a throwback for Sweden, just 3 insted of 2 stripes. I’m not sure what it is about the link, but they always make me smile, love em. One of the most recognizable unis in all of International sports, IMO.

As the one who contributed the NATS FANS #10 item to the ticker, it looks like I was wrong about the Nationals bringing their retired numbers with them from Montreal.

I have always used the link site as my go-to reference for retired numbers. It clearly indicates that the Nationals have #10 retired for Staub and Dawson as well as #8 for Gary Carter and #30 for Tim Raines.

The link of the Nationals would indicate otherwise, as they have players wearing both #8 and #30.

Pretty weak on the Nationals part to ignore the team’s history, in my opinion.

Does MLB 08 have a “ditch-the-pajama-pants-because you-look-like-shit” setting?

Those World Championship hockey throwbacks are boss.

Too bad nobody’s actually going to watch the games here in the U.S.

[quote comment=”233626″]As the one who contributed the NATS FANS #10 item to the ticker, it looks like I was wrong about the Nationals bringing their retired numbers with them from Montreal.

I have always used the link site as my go-to reference for retired numbers. It clearly indicates that the Nationals have #10 retired for Staub and Dawson as well as #8 for Gary Carter and #30 for Tim Raines.

The link of the Nationals would indicate otherwise, as they have players wearing both #8 and #30.

Pretty weak on the Nationals part to ignore the team’s history, in my opinion.[/quote]

It’s a delicate thing. Kasten has remarked that they need to have a “franchise” record book, a Nationals record book and a Washington record book in the media guide. Maybe Cleveland was on to something and that records should stay with the city and not travel with a franchise.

link

Look at his helmet

[quote comment=”233648″]Are the images of the video game from MLB 08, or MLB 2K8? Paul, you refer to it one way in your intro, and then Will says otherwise in his. Not much of a gamer myself…[/quote]

2K8, it seems.

TakeTwo Interactive is starting to ramp up its coverage for their latest installment in the MLB 2K Baseball franchise.

[quote comment=”233654″]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0802/mlb.strange.injuries/content.3.html

Look at his helmet[/quote]

This was mentioned on here last week……..

rumor is that kentucky will be wearing new system of a dress nike unis for for 1st time either tonight @ south carolina or at home this saturday against florida. the link appear to be similar to the template that wvu wears but the link show the detail that has a lot of fans buzzing… subtle checkerboards. it reminds me of rocking link in jr. high.

“Andrew Tanker, who works for the Orange Bowl, recently uncovered some old OB pics. “If you check out this picture, you’ll see how they had the letters on the front of the helmets (when did it switch to the sides?)”

Interesting that Boston College used to have Michigan’s current design on them.

[quote comment=”233672″]In that one Orange Bowl picture (“…had the letters on the front of the helmets (when did it switch to the sides?)”—that one), I feel like Mike Holovak and WWII-era Boston College must have been the precedent for the Michigan Wolverine helmets.[/quote]

Beat me to it. So now I am wondering if Michigan was even the first to use that design, etc. I assume they are, but you never know. All I know is they didn’t get it from Deleware.

[quote comment=”233680″][quote comment=”233672″]In that one Orange Bowl picture (“…had the letters on the front of the helmets (when did it switch to the sides?)”—that one), I feel like Mike Holovak and WWII-era Boston College must have been the precedent for the Michigan Wolverine helmets.[/quote]

Beat me to it. So now I am wondering if Michigan was even the first to use that design, etc. I assume they are, but you never know. All I know is they didn’t get it from Deleware.[/quote]

If I remember correctly, the Michigan helmet design was the result of simply painting the panels on the helmets. They just painted on every other leather strip, and then the painted the front part. So the “design” really came from the helmet manufacturer who stitched together the leather pieces in that configuration.

[quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

The Twins gave out bobbleheads of Walter Johnson in his Senators uniform a while back, but that is the only example I can think of where they have acknowledged their Senators roots.

[quote comment=”233673″]rumor is that kentucky will be wearing new system of a dress nike unis for for 1st time either tonight @ south carolina or at home this saturday against florida. the link appear to be similar to the template that wvu wears but the link show the detail that has a lot of fans buzzing… subtle checkerboards. it reminds me of rocking link in jr. high.[/quote]

Oh crap! I was hoping that UK wouldn’t get involved in this whole SOD thing. Schools like Kentucky, Duke, Carolina, Indiana don’t need to drastically redesign the uniform (remember the UK denims?). They have an identity that is steeped in tradition. Schools like Oregon that are not as well known in the whole country can get away with their style BECAUSE it gives them an identity. I don’t care for Oregon’s choices, but, we do talk about them a lot. We rarely discuss Kentucky’s unis. I believe that is because the basic uni for Kentucky is classic and not in need of drastic changes.

[quote comment=”233644″]Those World Championship hockey throwbacks are boss.[/quote]

I predict those Italian throwback jerseys are going to be seen all over Woodbridge and Saint-Leonard.

With the championships in Canada this year, I wonder if the national uniforms will be ruined with linklike in Europe?

What’s the deal with the new Sox St. Patrick’s day jerseys (and all posted on MLB.com for that matter) not having the MLB logo on the back? I know the Sox have work kelly green hats with no MLB logo the past several years. Since when is the MLB logo optional?

[quote comment=”233668″]It shouldn’t really matter if the team changes names and identities when moving, in my opinion. Just because they aren’t the Washington Expos doesn’t mean the Montreal years didn’t happen. Plus I doubt Montreal is in line to get an MLB franchise any time soon.[/quote]

No one’s saying those years didn’t happen. I mean, I see your point, a franchise is a franchise, even with all the [Aykroyd]hopping from city to city with the frequency of a cheap ham radio[/Aykroyd] that goes on these days.

But part (not all) of the notion of retiring a number is for the fans of that team (as well as, obviously, to say “Well done” to a player). The fans in Washington likely have very little idea what Le Grande Orange meant in Montreal, nor should they be expected to.

Of course, you could make the point that today’s White Sox fans don’t have a big connection to Luke Appling, and that’s a valid point.

It gets dicey when teams move. #19 belongs more to Baltimore than it does to Indianapolis, but it is what it is.

[quote comment=”233697″][quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

As opposed to the Braves that seem to embrace their Milwaukee days.[/quote]

Not surprising that a team which changes its entire identity would choose not to look back, while a team which retains its identity incorporates all its stops along the way. The New York Yankees don’t feel compelled to incorporate their Baltimore Oriole years into the official history.

OTOH, the Brewers regularly do Seattle Pilots throwback days.

But do the Orioles recognize their Milwaukee Brewer history?

I’m of the opinion that records and retired numbers should stay with the city and not the franchise. Being from Baltimore, I can’t tell you how glad I am that Art Modell left the Browns name, colors and records with the fans of Cleveland. The Ravens are essentially a brand new franchise who does pay tribute to the Baltimore sports past (Unitas and other Baltimore Colts in the Ring of Honor, etc.). It pains me to see Baltimore records being broken by Indy players. Those Baltimore Colts have been very outspoken about how those records should stay in Baltimore since they never have and never will step foot in Indy.

Should be “past” in the last line

gotta love the rampant speculation about michigan’s helmets when the topic has been addressed ad nauseum and this link has shown up repeatedly.

Did anyone see the shorts Tubby Smith’s son was wearing for Ole Miss Vs. Arkansas last night? He had maybe 2 inches of skin showing they were so long. Looked like complete shit on his senior night.

[quote comment=”233722″][quote comment=”233682″]^ i thought that helmet originated @ princeton.[/quote]
Yup your right, the winged helmet started at Princeton, it was the idea of their coach Sterling Yost. When he left Princeton for “That School up North” (UofM) he took the winged helmet design with him. The design had something to do with being able to more easily identify teamates.[/quote]
$hit, wrong coach, oh well.

Looks like the San Jose Sharks are thinking about another link modification.

[/joke]

[quote comment=”233691″]

Oh crap! I was hoping that UK wouldn’t get involved in this whole SOD thing. Schools like Kentucky, Duke, Carolina, Indiana don’t need to drastically redesign the uniform (remember the UK denims?). They have an identity that is steeped in tradition. Schools like Oregon that are not as well known in the whole country can get away with their style BECAUSE it gives them an identity. I don’t care for Oregon’s choices, but, we do talk about them a lot. We rarely discuss Kentucky’s unis. I believe that is because the basic uni for Kentucky is classic and not in need of drastic changes.[/quote]

with the system of dress you dont need to drastically redesign the uniforms, (see north carolina). it just followed that with most of the teams who impletmented it, the change was made during the season, so a significant change in either the jersey or shorts, or both was made to identify the change.

the system of dress “system” isnt a bad thing, i actually am a big fan of it. however i would have had some other ideas when it came to the actual visual of the final product for many of the schools who now use it.

[quote comment=”233725″][quote comment=”233687″][quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

The Twins gave out bobbleheads of Walter Johnson in his Senators uniform a while back, but that is the only example I can think of where they have acknowledged their Senators roots.[/quote]
I see what you’re saying. But, in fairness, the Twins script they wore up until the change made in 1987 was a reflection of, and very similar to, the script the Senators styled in D.C.[/quote]
Give credit to the Twins for not keeping the Senators name (See Utah Jazz and LA Lakers).

[quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

Similar to the treatment current Eagles’ honchos Jeff Lurie and Joe Banner give to the franchise. They rarely acknowledged that anything happened with the team prior to 1994 when Lurie bought the Eagles. Only in the past couple of seasons have they started to openly embrace the team’s history.

[quote comment=”233723″][quote comment=”233722″][quote comment=”233682″]^ i thought that helmet originated @ princeton.[/quote]
Yup your right, the winged helmet started at Princeton, it was the idea of their coach Sterling Yost. When he left Princeton for “That School up North” (UofM) he took the winged helmet design with him. The design had something to do with being able to more easily identify teamates.[/quote]
$hit, wrong coach, oh well.[/quote]

But a good, call, it was Fritz Crisler who started that at Princeton and then brought it to the Wolverines.

Michigan would never copy BC, probably for anything. There’s no need for M to steal anything from the Outhouse on the Hill.

[quote comment=”233705″]Being from Baltimore, I can’t tell you how glad I am that Art Modell left the Browns name, colors and records with the fans of Cleveland. [/quote]

Did he do that out of the goodness of his heart? I know it was part of the settlement that kept Cleveland from suing everybody and their mother and brought the Browns back as an expansion team. I don’t know that Modell just decided to do it on his own before that or not.

[quote] It pains me to see Baltimore records being broken by Indy players.[/quote]

It shouldn’t.

Peyton Manning’s accomplishments are Peyton Manning’s and they’re great. Kudos to him. But they don’t diminish one iota what Johnny Unitas accomplished or his greatness as a player. You can take records. You can’t take memories.

Did it “pain me” to see a scumbag like Corey Dillon break Walter Payton’s single-game rushing record (since broken again)? Not so much that I’d worry about it. Didn’t diminish Walter one bit in my eyes (nor did Emmitt Smith breaking his career record). It happens. Time marches on.

[quote] Those Baltimore Colts have been very outspoken about how those records should stay in Baltimore since they never have and never will step foot in Indy.[/quote]

IIRC, Johnny Unitas had made his peace with it by the time of his passing. We should all be so magnanimous.

[quote comment=”233730″][quote comment=”233706″][quote comment=”233697″][quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

As opposed to the Braves that seem to embrace their Milwaukee days.[/quote]

the difference being the braves never changed their name…whether it was boston (and yes, they had a few different nicknames there before ultimately settling on braves) or milwaukee[/quote]

Another reason is that the Braves were very good in Milwaukee – world champs – and had great players — Henry Aaron, Warren Spahn, Eddie Matthews. Hank always had a soft spot for Milwaukee.

You can buy Milwaukee Braves hats and shirts in the stadium gift shop. Also a Boston Braves hat – where they were once know as the Boston Red Stockings.

The Braves also make the claim as the first and oldest team since the 1869 Cincinnatti Red Stockings became the Boston Red Stockings.[/quote]

The Braves actually had a few names in Boston:
Boston Braves (1941-1952)
Boston Bees (1936-1940)
Boston Braves (1912-1935)
Boston Rustlers (1911)
Boston Doves (1907-1910)
Boston Beaneaters (1883-1906)
Boston Red Stockings (1871-1882)

My link plays as the Boston Beaneaters from 1881.

[quote comment=”233738″][quote comment=”233723″][quote comment=”233722″][quote comment=”233682″]^ i thought that helmet originated @ princeton.[/quote]
Yup your right, the winged helmet started at Princeton, it was the idea of their coach Sterling Yost. When he left Princeton for “That School up North” (UofM) he took the winged helmet design with him. The design had something to do with being able to more easily identify teamates.[/quote]
$hit, wrong coach, oh well.[/quote]

But a good, call, it was Fritz Crisler who started that at Princeton and then brought it to the Wolverines.

Michigan would never copy BC, probably for anything. There’s no need for M to steal anything from the Outhouse on the Hill.[/quote]
And it’s Fielding Yost, not Sterling.

Up until the Expos-Nationals move, baseball had uniformly acknowledged in all contexts the franchise continuity of the moved teams. (One of my earliest memories is of collecting the 1973 Topps set, in which the team cards featured franchise records on the back, and seeing cards for “Senators/Rangers records” and “Senators/Twins records”.)

But, as it happens, the issue of retired numbers had arisen only once before the Expos’ move, because, only the Giants had retired any numbers (Carl Hubbell’s no. 11, Mel Ott’s no. 4) at the time of their move.

Of course, the Giants didn’t change their nickname. And, since then, the Giants, Dodgers and Braves have all retired numbers for players who played only (or mainly) in their former cities. (The only other franchise which has moved while keeping the same nickname, the A’s, has retired no numbers for players who played primarily in their former locations — not even Jimmie Foxx’s no. 3.)

Among the three relocated teams before the Expos/Nationals which changed their nicknames upon their move (the two Senators franchises and the StL. Browns / Balt. Orioles), none have since retired any numbers for players primarily associated with their former locations, and only the Twins have retired a number for a player who spans both the former and current locations: Harmon Killebrew’s no. 3. (Walter Johnson played before numbers were worn.)

So this situation with the Expos’ retired numbers — where a team with retired numbers moves and changes nicknames — is truly unprecedented. And, by not recognising the Expos’ numbers, the Nationals’ management has really fallen down. This represents the first crack ever in baseball in the iron-clad acknowledgement of franchise continuity.

This comes, of course, only a few years after the legal slight-of-hand which disrupted franchise continuity in the NFL, and created the ahistorical notion that the 1950-95 Cleveland Browns are the same franchise as the current Browns. And, depressingly, we now have a generation of kiddies who don’t even know that the 1950-95 Browns are in fact (if not in law) the Ravens. So, in this environment, we shouldn’t be surprised when the the franchise continunity in baseball begins to break down.

One of the Nationals’ logos also brings to mind the word “ahistorical” — the one that says “Established 1905” (link ; not linked for fear of post-rejection). Hmm. Exactly what, by their reconing, was established in 1905?

By my strict franchise-continuity standard, I would of course want to see 1969 (the Expos’ first season) represented there. But, even if you conceive of the Nationals as a new franchise, 1905 is still wrong — by only 100 years!

Grasping at straws, if you want to consider this team the continuation of the team usually call the “original” Senators, then you’d need 1901 there, which is the founding date of the American League. If you want to consider this team the continuation of the the actual first Major League team in Washington, the Senators of the 1890s, then you’d need either 1891 (founding of the club in the American Assoc.) or 1892 (date of the club’s entry into the National League).

Oy. So, I don’t know what these guys are doing! Do they?

not so much uni, mostly apparel related, but some interesting nfl tidbits here as far as marketing/products go:

not so much uni, mostly apparel related, but some interesting nfl tidbits here as far as marketing/products go:

link

sorry for double post with no link, let me try again..

link

Regarding letters on the collars of White Sox uniforms, I point you to photos of mine link

anyone want to float me a loan to spring for this link

[quote comment=”233765″]sorry for double post with no link, let me try again..

link

ja, wow, thanks for posting this. What a bunch of crap. Nothing says, “I’m a poser-fan” like a three-thousand dollar, crystal-studded, helmet-shaped handbag. What a complete waste of money. I put this in the category of pink sports’ gear for chicks–totally unnecessary and patronizing to boot.

As for the “937” game of black-on-black jerseys, um, ok. So maybe it wouldn’t work as well logistically as I’d envisioned. It still looks good.

[quote comment=”233702″]Looking at the Yankee vendor shirt, I keep trying to find KNISH. Maybe it is on the back.

Also, seeing cigarettes and cigars —- I remeber some horibble days as a kid at the ballpark sitting behind smokers.[/quote]

I just read that the Mets have banned smoking at all locations in Shea this year. (even the ramps) They’ve also banned smoking at Citi Field starting in 2009.

[quote comment=”233738″][quote comment=”233723″][quote comment=”233722″][quote comment=”233682″]^ i thought that helmet originated @ princeton.[/quote]
Yup your right, the winged helmet started at Princeton, it was the idea of their coach Sterling Yost. When he left Princeton for “That School up North” (UofM) he took the winged helmet design with him. The design had something to do with being able to more easily identify teamates.[/quote]
$hit, wrong coach, oh well.[/quote]

But a good, call, it was Fritz Crisler who started that at Princeton and then brought it to the Wolverines.

Michigan would never copy BC, probably for anything. There’s no need for M to steal anything from the Outhouse on the Hill.[/quote]

Spoken like a true BU student/Alum, Boston Nick!

[quote comment=”233787″][quote comment=”233782″][quote comment=”233765″]sorry for double post with no link, let me try again..

link

ja, wow, thanks for posting this. What a bunch of crap. Nothing says, “I’m a poser-fan” like a three-thousand dollar, crystal-studded, helmet-shaped handbag. What a complete waste of money. I put this in the category of pink sports’ gear for chicks–totally unnecessary and patronizing to boot.

As for the “937” game of black-on-black jerseys, um, ok. So maybe it wouldn’t work as well logistically as I’d envisioned. It still looks good.[/quote]

They still have the old NFL logo:

link

Joey G., for the kind of money they want people to spend, you’d think they could update. Pikers. Though, I do like the old logo better than the new one.

[quote comment=”233731″][quote comment=”233691″]

Oh crap! I was hoping that UK wouldn’t get involved in this whole SOD thing. Schools like Kentucky, Duke, Carolina, Indiana don’t need to drastically redesign the uniform (remember the UK denims?). They have an identity that is steeped in tradition. Schools like Oregon that are not as well known in the whole country can get away with their style BECAUSE it gives them an identity. I don’t care for Oregon’s choices, but, we do talk about them a lot. We rarely discuss Kentucky’s unis. I believe that is because the basic uni for Kentucky is classic and not in need of drastic changes.[/quote]

with the system of dress you dont need to drastically redesign the uniforms, (see north carolina). it just followed that with most of the teams who impletmented it, the change was made during the season, so a significant change in either the jersey or shorts, or both was made to identify the change.

the system of dress “system” isnt a bad thing, i actually am a big fan of it. however i would have had some other ideas when it came to the actual visual of the final product for many of the schools who now use it.[/quote]

Overall, the SOD has been an improvement. Syracuse looks good. But K-State’s another good example. (Though that black used at KU must go!) The Wildcats’ new link are simple yet distinctive and a definite upgrade. Go Cats!

[quote comment=”233708″][quote comment=”233698″][quote comment=”233668″]It shouldn’t really matter if the team changes names and identities when moving, in my opinion. Just because they aren’t the Washington Expos doesn’t mean the Montreal years didn’t happen. Plus I doubt Montreal is in line to get an MLB franchise any time soon.[/quote]

No one’s saying those years didn’t happen. I mean, I see your point, a franchise is a franchise, even with all the [Aykroyd]hopping from city to city with the frequency of a cheap ham radio[/Aykroyd] that goes on these days.

But part (not all) of the notion of retiring a number is for the fans of that team (as well as, obviously, to say “Well done” to a player). The fans in Washington likely have very little idea what Le Grande Orange meant in Montreal, nor should they be expected to.

Of course, you could make the point that today’s White Sox fans don’t have a big connection to Luke Appling, and that’s a valid point.

It gets dicey when teams move. #19 belongs more to Baltimore than it does to Indianapolis, but it is what it is.[/quote]
I see it more as honoring (or honouring for our Canadian friends) the player who wore the number. It’s a slap in the face to those guys.

Great SNL reference, BTW.[/quote]
Confound it, people! That’s it! All this talk about the Montreal Expos and the number 10…now you’ve done it. link. Notice how the batting helmets were solid colored and, if you look closely, the caps were the classic three-colored variety. Oh, and try not to drool over the stirrups.

[quote comment=”233622″]Not much of a throwback for Sweden, just 3 insted of 2 stripes. I’m not sure what it is about the link, but they always make me smile, love em. One of the most recognizable unis in all of International sports, IMO.[/quote]

All hail the Swedes – not only for the classic Volvo but for their commitment to a classic hockey jersey! The banana-yellow “tre kronor” has never been my favorite, but I give them high marks for sticking with their standard look for over a half-century now.

Not a gamer either but shouldn’t that picture of Shea have a mostly completed Citi Field rising beyond the outfield fence ?

[quote comment=”233797″][quote comment=”233731″][quote comment=”233691″]

Oh crap! I was hoping that UK wouldn’t get involved in this whole SOD thing. Schools like Kentucky, Duke, Carolina, Indiana don’t need to drastically redesign the uniform (remember the UK denims?). They have an identity that is steeped in tradition. Schools like Oregon that are not as well known in the whole country can get away with their style BECAUSE it gives them an identity. I don’t care for Oregon’s choices, but, we do talk about them a lot. We rarely discuss Kentucky’s unis. I believe that is because the basic uni for Kentucky is classic and not in need of drastic changes.[/quote]

with the system of dress you dont need to drastically redesign the uniforms, (see north carolina). it just followed that with most of the teams who impletmented it, the change was made during the season, so a significant change in either the jersey or shorts, or both was made to identify the change.

the system of dress “system” isnt a bad thing, i actually am a big fan of it. however i would have had some other ideas when it came to the actual visual of the final product for many of the schools who now use it.[/quote]

Overall, the SOD has been an improvement. Syracuse looks good. But K-State’s another good example. (Though that black used at KU must go!) The Wildcats’ new link are simple yet distinctive and a definite upgrade. Go Cats![/quote]

I dunno, there’s just something about the SOD that I just don’t like very much. I think it may be the lack of stripes on the side of the jerseys. They look too much like … well … plain undershirts.

[quote comment=”233806″][quote comment=”233782″] I put this in the category of pink sports’ gear for chicks–totally unnecessary and patronizing to boot.[/quote]

But link.[/quote]

KT, to me, the pin-up hockey chicks that Rob Ullman draws are infinitely hotter than Jessica Simpson in anything–or nothing at all. Then again, I’m not a guy.

[quote comment=”233853″][quote comment=”233806″][quote comment=”233782″] I put this in the category of pink sports’ gear for chicks–totally unnecessary and patronizing to boot.[/quote]

But link.[/quote]

KT, to me, the pin-up hockey chicks that Rob Ullman draws are infinitely hotter than Jessica Simpson in anything–or nothing at all. Then again, I’m not a guy.[/quote]

Well, that’s fine. I wasn’t making a comparison. But a pink jersey can be hot. She was just the first pink jersey-wearer that came to mind.

As a Washington area resident who goes to a handful of games each year, it has been very obvious that they’ve completely ignored the Expos roots of the franchise, instead hoping to tie into the former Senators (and to a lesser extent, the Homestead Grays) roots.

I think I’ve noted in the comments for this blog before that the Nationals have ignored the numbers retired by the Expos, they’ve been doing it since they moved to Washington. On their current roster they have active players listed under all 3 numbers that the franchise has retired over the years (not including the league-wide retired 42). And it’s not a recent thing, their first year in Washington Mike Stanton wore 30 (previously retired by the Expos for Tim Raines).

In my opinion, it’s a black mark on baseball, a sport that prides itself on it’s traditions of history going back a century.

[quote comment=”233867″]In my opinion, it’s a black mark on baseball, a sport that prides itself on it’s traditions of history going back a century.[/quote]

I can see your point.

Let us not forget, however, that from 1903-1953, there were no relocations in baseball (those dates are correct, aren’t they?). Much of the game’s tradition congealed during that time and the things that happened then went a long way towards writing The Gospel According to The Purists.

Since that time, the game has changed and it might not be a bad idea to consider re-thinking some of the things we have long held to be true and right and virtuous.

It might be sacrilegious, but, let’s be honest here: there’s no connection between Rusty Staub, Andre Dawson and Tim Raines and Washington, DC. None. I know you can follow the DNA strands of the franchise back to Parc Jarry and all that. But, seriously…who are we kidding?

Did you think you’d take your kid to Nationals Stadium (which will have some other name before too long) and marvel at the #10 flying from the flag pole and when Jimmy looks at you with those big 10-year-old eyes, waiting to get some of Dad’s Wisdom TM, and asks, “What’s the #10 for?” that you’d tell him that Rusty Staub was part of the long and storied history of the…Montreal Expos? That he was a favorite of the Francophones? Would you be surprised if his ten-year-old simplistic take on things (which is often common sense uncluttered by all the crap that we old timers carry around) was “Who are the Montreal Expos and what does that have to do with the Nationals?”

In a way, you’re almost forced to say, “Well, son, he doesn’t really have anything to do with the Nationals, but that team moved here because nobody wanted them, and because I’m a baseball fan I’m honor-bound to invoke stirrups and eight-team leagues and no DH and complete games and stuff like that.”

In a way, we’re being choked by history rather than embracing it.

I mean no disrespect to The Hawk, Rusty or Raines. All terrific players who meant a lot to their teams and to their fans.

I’m just sayin’….their fans were in Montreal. Maybe it’s not the end of the world.

[quote comment=”233700″][quote comment=”233697″][quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

As opposed to the Braves that seem to embrace their Milwaukee days.[/quote]

Not surprising that a team which changes its entire identity would choose not to look back, while a team which retains its identity incorporates all its stops along the way. The New York Yankees don’t feel compelled to incorporate their Baltimore Oriole years into the official history.

OTOH, the Brewers regularly do Seattle Pilots throwback days.

But do the Orioles recognize their Milwaukee Brewer history?[/quote]

I think it was ’03 or ’04 that the Orioles played an interleague game against the Cardinals, and both teams wore their 1944 jerseys.

[quote comment=”233872″][quote comment=”233867″]
Did you think you’d take your kid to Nationals Stadium (which will have some other name before too long) and marvel at the #10 flying from the flag pole and when Jimmy looks at you with those big 10-year-old eyes, waiting to get some of Dad’s Wisdom TM, and asks, “What’s the #10 for?” that you’d tell him that Rusty Staub was part of the long and storied history of the…Montreal Expos? That he was a favorite of the Francophones? Would you be surprised if his ten-year-old simplistic take on things (which is often common sense uncluttered by all the crap that we old timers carry around) was “Who are the Montreal Expos and what does that have to do with the Nationals?”

In a way, you’re almost forced to say, “Well, son, he doesn’t really have anything to do with the Nationals, but that team moved here because nobody wanted them, and because I’m a baseball fan I’m honor-bound to invoke stirrups and eight-team leagues and no DH and complete games and stuff like that.”

In a way, we’re being choked by history rather than embracing it.

Maybe it’s not the end of the world.[/quote]

I think there can be a balance. Nobody saying the Nats have to hang banners to honor these players, but it seems as if they are making a conscious effort to ignore it. They could obviously take the numbers out of circulation. Make an exception if they acquire a HOF type player who wears it.

A section of the media guide could be dedication to club records of Montreal and that would really do it. Heck for the first several years, the Royals media guide included KC A’s records under the heading of “Kansas City Baseball Records”.

Point is, it can be done, respectfully and painlessly.

[quote comment=”233881″][quote comment=”233700″][quote comment=”233697″][quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

As opposed to the Braves that seem to embrace their Milwaukee days.[/quote]

Not surprising that a team which changes its entire identity would choose not to look back, while a team which retains its identity incorporates all its stops along the way. The New York Yankees don’t feel compelled to incorporate their Baltimore Oriole years into the official history.

OTOH, the Brewers regularly do Seattle Pilots throwback days.

But do the Orioles recognize their Milwaukee Brewer history

—

Do you mean “do the Orioles recognize their StL Browns history”

BTW, do the Yankees recognize their Orioles history?

Finally read today’s post, and missed most of the comments…but some of those IIHF throwbacks are awesome. I can’t wait to see Finland’s jersey live.

[quote comment=”233660″][quote comment=”233648″]Are the images of the video game from MLB 08, or MLB 2K8? Paul, you refer to it one way in your intro, and then Will says otherwise in his. Not much of a gamer myself…[/quote]

2K8, it seems.

TakeTwo Interactive is starting to ramp up its coverage for their latest installment in the MLB 2K Baseball franchise. [/quote]

Yeah, Paul named it wrong. The game is 2K8. Funnily enough, Paul didnt even get the other game right either as it called MLB 08: The Show.

It’s okay though Paul.

[quote comment=”233679″]What is the deal with the “Giants-Packers” ticker at the bottom of the spike-cleaner screen shot from the video game?[/quote]

My guess is that they were testing the game on XBOX Live on the day of the game.

In most (if not all) sports games these days, being connected to the internet will get you a real life ticker on the bottom.

Pretty cool really.

Extra cool because we all know the outcome of that. Who knew that Corey Webster would end Brett Farve’s career.

Oh and that is just some boasting about the Giants, nothing against Brett. Great guy, Great QB.

[quote comment=”233894″][quote comment=”233888″]Shoot…messed up the quote:

I think there can be a balance. Nobody saying the Nats have to hang banners to honor these players, but it seems as if they are making a conscious effort to ignore it. They could obviously take the numbers out of circulation. Make an exception if they acquire a HOF type player who wears it.

A section of the media guide could be dedication to club records of Montreal and that would really do it. Heck for the first several years, the Royals media guide included KC A’s records under the heading of “Kansas City Baseball Records”.

Point is, it can be done, respectfully and painlessly.[/quote]

Oh, no question. I wasn’t specifically referring to “A conscious effort to ignore everything that came before,” and I applaud those clubs that make the effort to recognize the past.

I was only speaking specifically of the number retirement thing. And I have no idea if the Nats do or do not include Montreal records in their media guide, though someone above, I think, alluded to the notion that they don’t. Not that those types of things (media guides) have mass appeal to the fans, which, is, let’s be honest, the reason you do these types of things. That’s like doing it, but putting it on a plaque behind Section 315 on the back side.

When the Ravens first started, I believe their media guide included “Baltimore football records” (but conveniently left out the 1985 USFL Stars, which is a topic for another day), which makes sense on a couple of levels: one, it recognizes the rich history of the market and, two, without it, their media guide would be about 35 pages long.

And I don’t think taking numbers out of circulation does any more than having them on a banner does. It surely doesn’t honor those players if there’s no tangible, visible recognition of their accomplishments. I can’t for the life of me imagine Rusty Staub being overly concerned whether or not no Washington Nationals player ever wears #10 again. Maybe he is concerned about it, I don’t know. Maybe he should have gotten a FORMAL LEGAL DOCUMENT stipulating his number could NEVER BE UNRETIRED FOR ANY REASON, EVER. :)[/quote]

These are compromise gestures. A balance between, being tied to a past and ignoring it. If you weren’t “specifically referring” to conscious effort to ignore everything that came before, then what would you actually do that would accomplish that goal?

[quote comment=”233684″]The full Xbox 360 version of MLB2K8 definitely has the base coaches wearing helmets.[/quote]

It certainly does. And they are proper about it… No flaps.

You can also chose to have players wear helmets with no flaps. It just looks so odd now though.

[quote comment=”233902″]
These are compromise gestures. A balance between, being tied to a past and ignoring it. [/quote]

True, but I’m not sure that even your compromise gesture is required in every case.

No reason a club can’t leave its history behind when it moves, for a future club in that city to adopt.

just to add my $.02 on teams and city names…

my dad was born and bred in brooklyn, and was a lifelong dodger fan…until 1958, that is…like many other brooklynites, when the dodgers left, so too did a part of all of them…it wasn’t until 1962 that the NL replaced the two departed franchises, at which time, dad became, and remains, a lifelong metropolitan fan

the records set by players wearing dodger and giant uniforms while those teams played in new york are still dodger and giant records (those that remain anyway) and IMHO should remain with the franchise, wherever it relocates

even if you had stripped the NY Giants of the name, the new franchise which came to queens in 1962 (despite their obvious ATTEMPT to connect with previous teams–giants interlocking “NY” in orange, dodger blue, yankee pinstripes), was still a new franchise…it’s nice if the mets want to salute former new york greats, but they really, IMHO, have NO business honoring them (just as i don’t believe the new nationals have any business honoring the orignial big hurt or the big train)…any records set by the former franchise (like by le grand orange, hawk or raines) belong to the current washington franchise, despite the obvious disconnect a ten year old fan will have to those players…now, if you want to tell me they (nats) shouldn’t keep numbers retired for former expos, i won’t give you an argument…but to ignore any of those records or achievements is to do a disservice to the franchise

it’s a nice gesture and all what cleveland did with it’s browns…but in the long run, from an historical perspective, i think their new franchise should NOT have been named the browns

[quote comment=”233913″][quote comment=”233902″]
These are compromise gestures. A balance between, being tied to a past and ignoring it. [/quote]

True, but I’m not sure that even your compromise gesture is required in every case.

No reason a club can’t leave its history behind when it moves, for a future club in that city to adopt.[/quote]

There is not reason the must, either. So when they do what they are doing, it seems that they feel they must. Otherwise, why not make a couple simple gestures to do so.

[quote comment=”233889″][quote comment=”233881″][quote comment=”233700″][quote comment=”233697″][quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

As opposed to the Braves that seem to embrace their Milwaukee days.[/quote]

Not surprising that a team which changes its entire identity would choose not to look back, while a team which retains its identity incorporates all its stops along the way. The New York Yankees don’t feel compelled to incorporate their Baltimore Oriole years into the official history.

OTOH, the Brewers regularly do Seattle Pilots throwback days.

But do the Orioles recognize their Milwaukee Brewer history

—

Do you mean “do the Orioles recognize their StL Browns history”

BTW, do the Yankees recognize their Orioles history?[/quote]

The Milwaukee Brewers moved to St. Louis in like 1902 and took the name Browns. They played poorly for 49 of their 50 seasons in St. Louis and then moved to Baltimore to become the Orioles.

[quote comment=”233903″][quote comment=”233739″]
LA Dodgers — those trolleys were 3000 miles away.[/quote]
Is there a better way to dodge them?[/quote]

Clever, clever!

As for the SOD revolution:

I’ve been an avid reader and poster on this site for about three months now. From the thousands of posts that I have read here, it seems that the prevailing attitude towards unis is: the simpler and more traditional, the better they are.

I am beginning to agree more and more. For years, I have loved everything Clemson, because of the brash combination of colors, and what I thouight to be innovative designs by their supplier Nike.

However, as I learn more about uniform design form the learned people here, the less inclined I am in blindly loving their cookie cutter designs.

Same thing goes for Oregon. I am known as being the guy who like the Ducks, mainly for their incredibly unique gear as well as their history with Nike. They too have begun to become too busy at times for me.

Then comes the SOD uniforms, and the lions share of UWers don’t like them. This surprises me. To me, they are crisp, clean and very flattering. The tops are quite plain, but I consider them to be quite tasteful and more than aesthetically pleasing.

I agree, K-State, TOSU, UNC, and Maryland look OUTSTANDING. Unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed with Oregon and especially Syracuse.
The silver/grey 3M is so underwhelming for a school whose all sports unis I have always loved!

By the way, look what is now up on Eastbay:
1. link
2. link
3. link

link

[quote comment=”233933″][quote comment=”233927″]I’m watching the Twins/Yankees spring training game on ESPN. Both teams are in Navy jerseys. You have to look at the pants (white vs. grey) to determine who is the home and away teams.[/quote]

The president of the Florida State League (Class A) implemented a rule prohibiting the use of colored jersey by two clubs in the same game.[/quote]

At least somebody is thinking. The Navy vs. Navy look is not good.

[quote comment=”233948″][quote comment=”233924″][quote comment=”233905″][quote comment=”233684″]The full Xbox 360 version of MLB2K8 definitely has the base coaches wearing helmets.[/quote]

It certainly does. And they are proper about it… No flaps.

You can also chose to have players wear helmets with no flaps. It just looks so odd now though.[/quote]

Can you have the “Mark Bellhorn special” with the double earflaps?[/quote]

Yup. And all helmet options (Normal flap, no flap, double flap) come in both the new Airflow helmets and the old school ones.

You can even wear a hat under the helmet.[/quote]

What about a durag under the helmet?

link

link

Can’t say anything about 2KSports, but I did pick up MLB: The Show 08 for my PS3. Here are a couple observations:

The Red Sox still have the wrong font for the jerseys. They are shwon with the fat one instead of the correct narrower version.

The numbers on the back of the Sox’ uniforms are much lower than necessary, overcompensating for the space where the nameplate would be.

All letters and numbers (on all teams I’ve seen) look very glossy and pick up the shine from the lights and sun. They look silkscreened instead of sewn on. It’s just poor porgramming from the graphics department.

[quote comment=”233926″][quote comment=”233913″][quote comment=”233902″]
These are compromise gestures. A balance between, being tied to a past and ignoring it. [/quote]

True, but I’m not sure that even your compromise gesture is required in every case.

No reason a club can’t leave its history behind when it moves, for a future club in that city to adopt.[/quote]

There is not reason the must, either. So when they do what they are doing, it seems that they feel they must. Otherwise, why not make a couple simple gestures to do so.[/quote]

Nothing indicates they “feel they must” start fresh. Perhaps in some cases teams simply choose to do so?

That is a legitimate choice. And once made, there’s no need for even “a couple simple gestures”.

Each team that moves should decide for itself what serves the franchise best.

[quote comment=”233915″]Has this link for the Pistons ever been noted? Saw it on ESPN2, but couldn’t find game action photo.[/quote]

that photo has never been noted, (it might need to go in flickr account) however isiah’s fnob is archived…
link

Re: nats/’Spos talk….

Don;t feel bad for Le Grand Orange, The Kid, Hawk and Rock (Staub, Carter, Dawson and Raines) about having their numbers unretired – they’re still honoured in Montreal in one of the greatest ways possible – by having their numbers hoisted to the rafters of the Bell Centre…

Picture

[quote comment=”233932″][quote comment=”233903″][quote comment=”233739″]
LA Dodgers — those trolleys were 3000 miles away.[/quote]
Is there a better way to dodge them?[/quote]

Clever, clever!

As for the SOD revolution:

I’ve been an avid reader and poster on this site for about three months now. From the thousands of posts that I have read here, it seems that the prevailing attitude towards unis is: the simpler and more traditional, the better they are.

I am beginning to agree more and more. For years, I have loved everything Clemson, because of the brash combination of colors, and what I thouight to be innovative designs by their supplier Nike.

However, as I learn more about uniform design form the learned people here, the less inclined I am in blindly loving their cookie cutter designs.

Same thing goes for Oregon. I am known as being the guy who like the Ducks, mainly for their incredibly unique gear as well as their history with Nike. They too have begun to become too busy at times for me.

Then comes the SOD uniforms, and the lions share of UWers don’t like them. This surprises me. To me, they are crisp, clean and very flattering. The tops are quite plain, but I consider them to be quite tasteful and more than aesthetically pleasing.

I agree, K-State, TOSU, UNC, and Maryland look OUTSTANDING. Unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed with Oregon and especially Syracuse.
The silver/grey 3M is so underwhelming for a school whose all sports unis I have always loved!

By the way, look what is now up on Eastbay:
1. link
2. link
3. link

link[/quote]

I love the tighter fitting tops, the way the top look more like shirts w/out sleeves than tank tops Also, many of the new stripe designs they’re using with the SOD unis. But I still can’t get over the ridiculously huge shorts, someone has to wise up and see how crazy they look. There’s 7-footers out there that look like preschoolers, swiming in their clothes. Basically scale back the shorts sizes, A LOT, and I’m a fan. I can’t wait til Illinois adopts it, I can’t stand their surrent version of the Nike-horns.

I was watching the video of Bret Favre’s voice mail to Chris Mortensen and noticed that the jersey that Favre was wearing had a Reebok logo underneath the NFL equipment logo on it. Anyone know anything about that? link

[quote comment=”233785″][quote comment=”233702″]Looking at the Yankee vendor shirt, I keep trying to find KNISH. Maybe it is on the back.

Also, seeing cigarettes and cigars —- I remeber some horibble days as a kid at the ballpark sitting behind smokers.[/quote]

I just read that the Mets have banned smoking at all locations in Shea this year.

(even the ramps)

They’ve also banned smoking at Citi Field starting in 2009.[/quote]

But have they banned the KNISH???

[quote comment=”233985″][quote comment=”233932″][quote comment=”233903″][quote comment=”233739″]

I agree, K-State, TOSU, UNC, and Maryland look OUTSTANDING. Unfortunately, I was extremely disappointed with Oregon and especially Syracuse.
The silver/grey 3M is so underwhelming for a school whose all sports unis I have always loved!

By the way, look what is now up on Eastbay:
1. link
2. link
3. link

link[/quote]
You missed link[/quote]

Wow … actual nuggets on a jersey.

it wasn’t just the link who went dark on dark…link did it too

[quote comment=”233927″]I’m watching the Twins/Yankees spring training game on ESPN. Both teams are in Navy jerseys. You have to look at the pants (white vs. grey) to determine who is the home and away teams.[/quote]

I saw the same thing and MY GOODNESS when did the NYY start using BP jerseys with white panels? I thought they wore the reg season unis all the time. May be behind the curve on this one, tho.

I have no problem with two teams wearing color tops in spring training, the regular season, or even the playoffs, as long as the colors don’t clash.

[quote comment=”234006″]Check out these striped shorts at a community college:

link

They’re probably warm-up pants similar to what Indiana wears and what Tennessee has broken out a few times this season!

Another link pic over on Shorpy. Lots to love for the uni inclined… the dark Sox unis and caps, spiffy ump and the street clothed batboy on the field.

I really hope Russia replaces that CCCP with Rossiya on that 1956 jersey…

[quote comment=”234054″]Could it be possible that the “10” could stand for “The 10th Man” in likelyhood?[/quote]
Of course it does.

[quote comment=”234054″]Could it be possible that the “10” could stand for “The 10th Man” in likelyhood?[/quote]

i believe that is the general idea

[quote comment=”234015″]Local news showed the Yanks today taking BP and someone (I presume to be Graig Nettles) hitting fungos wearing #9. I know Nettles was a very good player, but if the number is retired to honor another player (Maris), it seem strange that they would in effect “un-retire” it to give it back to Nettles.[/quote]
Why is it strange? It WAS his number. He famously refused to hand it to Reggie when he came from Baltimore, and he was a solid contributor on the late 70’s teams.
It would be weirder if Nettles having his old #9 would have resulted in a duplicate number on the field.

^Agree. That would be like the PR of Vietnam wearing throwback Diem era ones…if they played ice hockey in Vietnam…which they don’t.

Interesting link being worn by AS Roma’s link (#10) and link (#30) today in their Champion’s League clash.

link

[quote comment=”233610″]The Nats seem to ignore the Montreal days. The Twins and Orioles don’t really acknowledge their Senators and Browns history either.[/quote]

I’d have to think that most clubs, after moving to a new city, wouldn’t want to spend too much – if any – time/energy/resources/money acknowledging a city they left behind, for whatever reason it may have been.

I know the SF Giants have “NY” instead of a number on some of their retired numbers, but I don’t recall seeing the A’s pay a lot of homage to either Philadelphia or Kansas City.

[quote comment=”234058″]Two notes:

1. Why didn’t the USA team pick the 1980 unis for the IIHF Worlds?

2. Shouldn’t that be in the Orange Bowl pic “1937” instead of “937”?[/quote]
Actually, I kinda prefer this link throwback.

[quote comment=”234062″][quote comment=”234060″][quote comment=”234015″]Local news showed the Yanks today taking BP and someone (I presume to be Graig Nettles) hitting fungos wearing #9. I know Nettles was a very good player, but if the number is retired to honor another player (Maris), it seem strange that they would in effect “un-retire” it to give it back to Nettles.[/quote]
Why is it strange? It WAS his number. He famously refused to hand it to Reggie when he came from Baltimore, and he was a solid contributor on the late 70’s teams.
It would be weirder if Nettles having his old #9 would have resulted in a duplicate number on the field.[/quote]

if they had worried about nettles wearing a retired number, they should have retired it before 1984…long after nettles yankee heroics were over

interesting note on the link…check out the cap yogi is wearing…[/quote]

The history behind retiring #9 was that it was done at the behest of George Steinbrenner in order to right what was perceived to be a wrong done to Roger Maris. Also, he was a fine ballplayer as well. Chris Chambliss was certainly in the class of a guy like Nettles, yet his stints on the Yankees staff he never wore the #10 he wore as a player. Before we get into a great debate over whether Nettles was that much better than Chambliss, the point is, the number is RETIRED for Maris. What exactly does retired mean??

I just watched the Badgers claim at least a share of the Big Ten basketball title, but at the awards ceremony I noticed that the link and link are made by Majestic.

Is this normal? Why would Majestic be making stuff for the Big Ten? Just kind of weird I thought since I never see their apparel on the basketball court, or anywhere but MLB for that matter.

[quote comment=”234058″]Two notes:

1. Why didn’t the USA team pick the 1980 unis for the IIHF Worlds?
[/quote]

It’s probably because everyone knows about the 1980 Gold Medal team and the 1960 Gold Medal team is rather lost in history and this is a chance to educate people about their accomplishment that is seriously overlooked.

Personally, I was hoping for the return of the 1996 World Cup jersey from a strictly selfish point of view since they are so hard to find. Anyone got a blue one of these they want to part with?

Seriously.

I didn’t have the chance to read through all the comments, so I don’t know if this has been mentioned. If you go through the Nats gallery, pic 12 says that the last “match” will be played on… When did it become match and not a game? I didn’t realize this was soccer.

[quote comment=”233625″][quote comment=”233613″]Anyone notice that the link shirt over at Obamaofdreams.com has been redesigned? I know there was some discussion about possible legal issues here.[/quote]

I hadn’t, but now that I go to the page I see that the front page says “ObamaOfDreams is offline. We can be reached with any questions at link.” and there doesn’t seem to be any way to order. Did MLB or the Obama campaign put a stop to this?[/quote]
I noticed that the St. Louis design had been changed, and a lot of them had been removed (The Yankees design comes to mind). It seemed like the ones that were removed were the ones with distinguishable logos like the birds on the bat and the Yankee logo (though last I looked the White Sox retro-logo was still up). Probably some kind of copyright infringement issue.

I’m not a big hockey fan, but I do know that the Phoenix Coyotes fully embrace their Winnepeg Jets history.
In fact they have Jets numbers retired at their arena.
link

By the way, I just have to mention that I am the Public Address Announcer at Scottsdale Stadium (Spring home of the SF Giants)and it’s been a pleasure to watch the Giants starting pitchers wearing stirrups this spring.