They Even Trademarked Landry’s Hat Patch

The Atlanta Braves trademark is interesting since that is the logo that the NASL’s Atlanta Chiefs used.

link

Update on the Aston Villa uniforms from yesterday. The kitman must have been busy in the 1st half because they had the Acorn logo back on their shirts for the 2nd half

That Buffalo Bills logo bears way too much resemblance to the Buffaslug.

I remember seeing that Blues wordmark, it was being used during the time the Blues had the hideous severely slanting number uniforms.

I think the red sleeves and socks give the Nats alts some pop, the all blue looks pretty bland. They definitely need the blue helmets though.

I find it odd that adidas are castigated for conspicuous stripeage on the boots when that Puma kit has an utterly unnecessary 3 jumping cat logos on the shirt, making it 6 in total on the full kit, 1 on shorts and 1 on each sock. Logo creep overload that, don’t encourage them.

The Tampa Bay Rays trademarks of 9=8 and ’09>’08 is all part of Madden’s mojo he is throwing around. Last year it was 9=8 which meant 9 players playing together for 9 innings will equal being one of the 8 playoff teams and that seemed to work last year. This year he came out with the ’09>’08 basically saying this year is gonna be better than last year which I guess he says they will win the World Series because that is about the only way it will be better.

since the Texas Texases decided to ditch their ultimate mockery of the baseball gods

I believe the plural for Texas is “Texi” as in cactus/cacti or platypus/platypi

that is all…

Was that Ryan Dempster or Don Cherry participating in the shoot the puck contest?

[quote comment=”324335″]Was that Ryan Dempster or Don Cherry participating in the shoot the puck contest?[/quote]
First off, I apologize for the crap quality of those screen grabs. I was relegated to the “B” TV last night while my wife was watching “America’s Test Kitchen” on the good one, which is technically hers.

Second, I was hoping the reporter who was on the ice with Dempster would have asked him if he was wearing the jacket in honor of Grapes. Sadly, the question was not asked (or if it was, I totally missed it.)

My rating worst-to-best of those four Mets’ white uni combos is quite different from Phil’s.

link. two-tone caps have no business being paired with pinstriped jerseys. The only exception would be a white crown with blue pinstripes and a blue brim. But that isn’t the case here.

link. Sorry. The dropshadows look absolutely horrible against the pinstripes. Take away the dropshadows and this is probably the #1 combo, but with them, the uniform is a far cry from link. The dropshadows do not make the logo pop. They just clutter things up.

link: Since I really don’t give a damn about the Mets, the black doesn’t bother me, especially since it can be justified historically by borrowing the color from the Giants. That being said, I don’t think the black trim looks particularly good.

link: Against the snow white jersey, the dropshadow actually works. It does make the logo pop a bit. Throw in the blue sleeves, caps and the occasional socks and you get a uniform that looks pretty darn good to me.

What is so hard about link, link, and if you absolutely must, link?

I don’t mind the blue and black hat as much as most other Mets fans do, then again, I do not consider myself a traditionalist. What I DO have a problem with is the Mets seemingly forsaking the all-blue in favor of the blue with black. It’s your OFFICIAL UNIFORM, guys. Also, it bears looking in to that Wikipedia lists the Mets’ official team colors as “blue, orange, BLACK, and white”.

The raven on goalpost is probably a trademark of group of local fan clubs, the Council of Raven’s Roosts and not the team itself.

link

I’m not finished about the Mets. We all saw Seaver pitching to Piazza, both sporting their period-appropriate Met jerseys, on opening night at New Shea. Who looked better? No further questions.

[quote comment=”324334″]Friday night was a step backward when they broke out the godawful black jerseys – which also means they wore the black lids, which is the worst possible of their myriad combinations.

As perverse as it is, I actually prefer the black jersey/all-black cap combo to the plain white/two-tone cap combo that has become the standard home uniform even though no one at the Mets will admit it. One reason why is that at least the cap and jersey match; the plain white/two-tone combo looks like patchwork, especially with the black socks and undersleeves (despite the black drop-shadow, blue is still the dominant color on the plain white jersey). Another reason is that I just think it’s ugly; their least-attractive, yet most-used, option.

But the main reason is that the black uniform, unlike the plain white/two-tone combo, doesn’t pretend to be something it’s not. It’s an alternate uniform, worn as an alternate uniform, and only in that combination (the black jersey is never worn with any other cap, while the whites and the pinstripes can be and have been worn with any of the 3 caps).

Let’s make it simple for Charlie and the gang: The two-tone cap should NEVER be worn at home. If they insist on keeping all these alternates and keeping black in the color scheme, at least until they link and link, then pair the blue cap with BOTH white uniforms, the two-tone cap with the greys, and the black with the black.[/quote]

Regarding the Mets in 1993 and 1994 — remember, they also changed their blue to a slightly darker one. Thing is, these two jerseys are impossible to find, even on eBay.

[quote comment=”324352″]Regarding the Mets in 1993 and 1994 — remember, they also changed their blue to a slightly darker one. Thing is, these two jerseys are impossible to find, even on eBay.[/quote]

Interestingly enough I saw someone at Citifield yesterday wearing one of the 93-94 jerseys.

The underline never really bothered me (sort of gave it an old-school feel) but it always ticked me off that they messed up the “M” in “Mets”. Look at that “M” and then look at the one in the standard “Mets” i.e. sans underline script. The “M” on the underlined script just looks off.

…..Indians just scored again.

coupla quick thoughts — i don’t mind (in fact, almost prefer) the snow whites with the blue caps and sleeves — the problem is that uniform is technically an alternate, and it should NOT under any circumstances be worn more often than the official home uniform (and they DON’T NEED an alternate, but at least it’s white);

also, i never said i prefer the dropshadowed “METS” to the non — only that were they to ditch the rest of the black accoutrements and have that solely as the black on their uniform, i could live with it

and i do agree with JTH in that the black dropshadow on the pins (in reality, not a computer 2D representation — great point giancarlo), does NOT look as good as it does on the snow whites — it looks BETTER on the snow whites, but that doesn’t mean they should keep the snow whites over the pins …had the mets originally had the snow whites as their official uniform, it would rank even higher in my estimation

i could live with an alternate, if (1) it was used ONLY on sundays and (2) they ditch the rest of the black (caps, socks, sleeves)

[quote comment=”324355″]The Mets looked beautiful in that combo at Yankee Stadium last year (the result of the game was not beautiful but that’s another tangent for another day) and they should consider making that their official road uniform.[/quote]

Well the result of the game was beautiful if you were a Mets fan.

In any case, I think that we’re not going to see the black eliminated anytime soon. Would a return to the blue caps on the road be awesome? Absolutely. But seeing as how it’s not going to happen for the foreseeable future (and since all the “why do the Mets need to wear the black” comments have gotten beyond tiring at this point), the best compromise would be for the Mets to do what they’re supposed to be doing “officially”: Wearing pinstripes and blue caps at home, gray and black/blue caps on the road, and using the snow whites and black tops as alternates. That would probably go a long way in placating the Mets’ fanbase (aside from dropping the black entirely, of course).

[quote comment=”324361″]At first glance, I thought link was rocking Chuck Taylors. Must have been the white laces and toes and obscured logo on the left foot. The old school Little League look would suit that amateurish shoulder patch.[/quote]

I think that one there is the Met’s best look.

AND THEY’RE IN THE PINS & BLUE CAPS TODAY

/that is all

[quote comment=”324365″][quote comment=”324364″]AND THEY’RE IN THE PINS & BLUE CAPS TODAY

/that is all[/quote]

Charlie must have been reading the blog this morning.

Let’s go Mets!!!![/quote]

Last few years, haven’t they tended to go with pins and blues on Sundays?

Oddly enough, when you think of it that way, the pins and blues are almost a Sunday alternate.

This column is quite intesting and I try to keep up with it as often as possible. Just a couple of notes here.

I covered major college and pro sports for about 15 years, and over that time learned that superstition can rule above all else.

For example, with daily uniform combinations, many major league teams have long left it up to that day’s starting pitcher to choose which one will be used on a given day, as long as it falls within the guidelines of what’s available at home versus on the road — it’s kind of like an added incentive to stay in a rotation. My guess is that’s probably the case with the Mets (the White Sox follow that policy too, I believe) — which is why you see combinations changing from day to day with certain teams.

As for the Nationals’ unis. I grew up in the D.C. area during the 60’s and 70’s (I now live in Chicago, tho), and red was the primary color of the old Senators’ uniforms for much of that time. They only made the switch to primary blue (and a lighter shade, at that) after moving to Texas to become the Rangers. The only blue you ever saw then was in the trim. While it might be nice to have balance, color-wise, I don’t think it’s as essential as it would be to go from block lettering on the jersey fronts to script, to match the “curly W” — as they call it — on their caps.

However, perhaps the worst abomination I ever recall was the very first road uniform of the Capitals — red jerseys and socks with WHITE pants. Luckily, that didn’t last an entire season before they switched to blue.

[quote comment=”324368″]For example, with daily uniform combinations, many major league teams have long left it up to that day’s starting pitcher to choose which one will be used on a given day, as long as it falls within the guidelines of what’s available at home versus on the road — it’s kind of like an added incentive to stay in a rotation. My guess is that’s probably the case with the Mets (the White Sox follow that policy too, I believe) — which is why you see combinations changing from day to day with certain teams.[/quote]

I don’t believe the Mets follow that. Equipment Manager Charlie Samuels has final say on game day uniforms.

So as opposed to a guy like Carlos Zambrano who will ALWAYS wear blue tops for his starts, if you look at the Mets pitchers there’s no one guy who wears one uniform more than any other.

Well, maybe snow whites and black/blue caps, but we know why THAT is….

[quote comment=”324352″][quote comment=”324334″]Friday night was a step backward when they broke out the godawful black jerseys – which also means they wore the black lids, which is the worst possible of their myriad combinations.

As perverse as it is, I actually prefer the black jersey/all-black cap combo to the plain white/two-tone cap combo that has become the standard home uniform even though no one at the Mets will admit it. One reason why is that at least the cap and jersey match; the plain white/two-tone combo looks like patchwork, especially with the black socks and undersleeves (despite the black drop-shadow, blue is still the dominant color on the plain white jersey). Another reason is that I just think it’s ugly; their least-attractive, yet most-used, option.

But the main reason is that the black uniform, unlike the plain white/two-tone combo, doesn’t pretend to be something it’s not. It’s an alternate uniform, worn as an alternate uniform, and only in that combination (the black jersey is never worn with any other cap, while the whites and the pinstripes can be and have been worn with any of the 3 caps).

Let’s make it simple for Charlie and the gang: The two-tone cap should NEVER be worn at home. If they insist on keeping all these alternates and keeping black in the color scheme, at least until they link and link, then pair the blue cap with BOTH white uniforms, the two-tone cap with the greys, and the black with the black.[/quote]

Regarding the Mets in 1993 and 1994 — remember, they also changed their blue to a slightly darker one. Thing is, these two jerseys are impossible to find, even on eBay.[/quote]

The ones I’m looking for, and linked here, are the 1995-97 uniforms. Still, even the 1993-94 version, with the tail, script “New York” on the greys and slightly darker blue, were better than the plain-white/two-tone cap combo they wear in 9 out of 10 home games now.

That oddball NHL logo was located on the rear hemline on the jerseys back in the mid-late 1990s. Its on the Carolina Hurricanes jersey I own from their first year in the league as well as my brother’s John LeClair Flyers jersey from around the same time.

I’m fairly certain thats the only place those logos showed up.

My apologies for posting 3 times in a row…

That puck-shaped logo was also included within the link and link Conference logos from 1993 until the end of the 2005 lockout.

[quote comment=”324335″]Was that Ryan Dempster or Don Cherry participating in the shoot the puck contest?[/quote]
That coat is a little too sedated to be in Grapes’ collection.

watch link to see how he gets his suits made.

[quote comment=”324377″][quote comment=”324376″]That oddball NHL logo was located on the rear hemline on the jerseys back in the mid-late 1990s. Its on the Carolina Hurricanes jersey I own from their first year in the league as well as my brother’s John LeClair Flyers jersey from around the same time.

I’m fairly certain thats the only place those logos showed up.[/quote]
The puck-shaped logo, that is… not the weird mechanical looking one…[/quote]

Its on the hem of my Flames replica jersey as well (bought in 2004).

As far as the conference logos go, I wasn’t aware until now that the conferences even had logos. I think I’m still blocking out “East” and “West” in the hope they’ll come to their senses and rename them “Wales” and “Campbell”.

The Natinals can’t stay out of the news.

link

What is the team nickname that plays in the fictional “Harry Dean Stadium” in a movie?

[quote comment=”324388″]What is the team nickname that plays in the fictional “Harry Dean Stadium” in a movie?[/quote]

I think this is from “not another teen movie”

I don’t know if anyone explained it here, but the Rays 9=8 thing was a mantra about if they played 9 innings they’d be one of the 8 in the playoffs last year. I would assume the ’09>’08 is a play off that and a goal to be better this year than last.

The Mets just don’t need snow whites, period. Pinstripes at home, grays on the road, royal blue alternates (if necessary). For an alt cap, make the brim orange.

And, if they need an accent color, I’d like to see them try midnight blue…still within the realm of their official colors and just as effective as black without being black.

[quote comment=\”324358\”]coupla quick thoughts — i don\’t mind (in fact, almost prefer) the snow whites with the blue caps and sleeves — the problem is that uniform is technically an alternate, and it should NOT under any circumstances be worn more often than the official home uniform (and they DON\’T NEED an alternate, but at least it\’s white);

also, i never said i prefer the dropshadowed \”METS\” to the non — only that were they to ditch the rest of the black accoutrements and have that solely as the black on their uniform, i could live with it

and i do agree with JTH in that the black dropshadow on the pins (in reality, not a computer 2D representation — great point giancarlo), does NOT look as good as it does on the snow whites — it looks BETTER on the snow whites, but that doesn\’t mean they should keep the snow whites over the pins …had the mets originally had the snow whites as their official uniform, it would rank even higher in my estimation

i could live with an alternate, if (1) it was used ONLY on sundays and (2) they ditch the rest of the black (caps, socks, sleeves)[/quote]

Oddly, the black drop-shadow is a lot less noticeable when they wear the blue caps, socks and undersleeves. That\’s for both the plain whites and the pinstripes. As I said earlier, blue is still the dominant color on those jerseys; the blue accessories help bring it out, while the black accessories try to hide it, which is why the result is such an eyesore.

[quote comment=”324396″][quote comment=\”324358\”]coupla quick thoughts — i don\’t mind (in fact, almost prefer) the snow whites with the blue caps and sleeves — the problem is that uniform is technically an alternate, and it should NOT under any circumstances be worn more often than the official home uniform (and they DON\’T NEED an alternate, but at least it\’s white);

also, i never said i prefer the dropshadowed \”METS\” to the non — only that were they to ditch the rest of the black accoutrements and have that solely as the black on their uniform, i could live with it

and i do agree with JTH in that the black dropshadow on the pins (in reality, not a computer 2D representation — great point giancarlo), does NOT look as good as it does on the snow whites — it looks BETTER on the snow whites, but that doesn\’t mean they should keep the snow whites over the pins …had the mets originally had the snow whites as their official uniform, it would rank even higher in my estimation

i could live with an alternate, if (1) it was used ONLY on sundays and (2) they ditch the rest of the black (caps, socks, sleeves)[/quote]

Oddly, the black drop-shadow is a lot less noticeable when they wear the blue caps, socks and undersleeves. That\’s for both the plain whites and the pinstripes. As I said earlier, blue is still the dominant color on those jerseys; the blue accessories help bring it out, while the black accessories try to hide it, which is why the result is such an eyesore.[/quote]
Amen. Last year, when the Mets wore blue and gray at Yankee Stadium, the blue jersey piping resonated so deeply. It was a rich detail on my not-so-high-def hotel TV. (I was in Florida at the time.) It looked awesome. And it made the stupid black sleeves look even stupider and more out of place on the road.

The Buffalo Bills logo was going to be their new helmet logo, to go with the additions of navy blue and silver to the uniform colors of red and royal blue. When the logo registration was discovered online, then-Bills President Tom Donohoe said it would be a secondary logo, similar to the Bengals “striped B” logo. Then, it just disappeared.

I did buy a Reebok hat with the logo of the silver and navy bison and the red and blue “B” – this is the only item I’ve ever seen with the mystery logo.

link

Here’s a scan of the Bills hat logo. There was a lot of uproar about the fact that fans spent a lot of money of clothing and souvenirs with the charging Bills logo in Super Bowl years and it was going to be replaced by THIS. Personally, I think they should have changed the logo to go with the awful uniform change. This way, the last few seasons of mediocrity in the standings would’ve matched their outfits.

link

[quote comment=\”324369\”]Well, the Brewers are doing anything and everything to break out of their funk. Hopefully they do it today, even though the Mets look awesome!

Brewers color their hair… one looks like a former president:
link

The Brewers are being punished by the baseball gods for running around last year after a win and untucking their jerseys and looking like slobs.

I know about that one player doing it as a tribute to his Dad or something, well…OK (everybody can find an excuse to do a \”tribute\”), but the rest, they just looked like slobs.

[quote comment=”324323″]The Atlanta Braves trademark is interesting since that is the logo that the NASL’s Atlanta Chiefs used.

link

What was the Atlanta Chiefs has had quite an evolution – one of the A-T-L players returned to South Africa and became founder of the Kaizer Chiefs, they’re now perhaps the best known side in that nation. One of their top players ended up with Leeds United – he was known as ‘The Chief’

Finally, a band forms whose members were fans of Leeds United – they named their group link (spelled differently I guess to avoid copyright infringment)

Speaking of not-so-alternate uniforms, the White Sox have played 6 road games so far and they have not worn their “primary” road jerseys yet. The closest they came was on Jackie Robinson Day, but that doesn’t count in my book.

For the record:
Detroit – 4/13: black “alts”, 4/14: rained out, 4/15: Jackie Robinsonized grays
St. Pete – 4/16 thru 4/19: black “alts”

link. Anything on the back, sir? link.

Is it really still link?

Did Brendan Ryan get into the game? link. Reed Johnson? link.

Surely that’s link.

Bought a ticket for a baseball game and got to see a link.

Are link link wearing Snuggies?

The Bleachers are even link now.

I believe link, madam.

link? We got link in the house?

WGN? Budweiser? Bud Light? link.

link

Rangers = 3-0 at home in day games wearing Red jerseys and red caps.

From the NBA playoffs…

The coaches are wearing a lapel pin with the initials CD.

Cavs coach: link

Doc Rivers: link

Vinny Del Negro: link

Did a quick Google search. The NBCA have decided to dedicate this year’s playoffs to Chuck Dailey, former coach who was diagnosed with cancer.
link

[quote comment=”324422″]From the NBA playoffs…

The coaches are wearing a lapel pin with the initials CD.

Cavs coach: link

Doc Rivers: link

Vinny Del Negro: link

Did a quick Google search. The NBCA have decided to dedicate this year’s playoffs to Chuck Dailey, former coach who was diagnosed with cancer.
link
Interesting that they’re naming the award after a guy who’s still alive, especially considering that there is a link during this past season. I wonder how often something like that happens. It seems like awards are almost always named after those who are no longer with us.

Mike Schmidt crying: I don’t know if Phil is being sarcastic or not, but Schmidt famously cried (about his “two bad knees”) when he retired and the clip was played for years on Howard Stern’s radio show.

[quote]I don’t know if Phil is being sarcastic or not[/quote]

generally, if you have to ask that question…the answer is yes

I believe the reason that they dedicated this year’s postseason to Chuck Daly is that his prognosis is not at all good, and this would be a chance to honor him before he was gone.

[quote comment=”324425″]Phil,

I give you a lot of good-natured jabs but I have to applaud your work as bench-coach. The level of work you put into the weekend posts is mind-boggling!

I am truly amazed.

Now on to unis:

link

I LOVE the pins, but the Snow Whites are growing on me.

The solid blue socks are WAY too much though.

Even if ther were stirrups, the solid color needs to be broken up, maybe horizontal stripes ala the Csrdinals or even the NY logo like the Twin CIty socks.[/quote]

I disagree – I like the solid color socks. There are teams which look good in striped socks, but al teams look good in solids. Provided, of course, that the socks are the correct color.

In fact, aside from that preposterous patch, that picture right there is my Platonic ideal of a Mets uni. Let the pinstripes stay on the other side of the Triborough Bridge – that uniform is so damn near perfect.

Not sure if anyone is tracking Cleveland’s unis this year but does anyone know if they’ve gotten rid of the road alternates- the blue with red piping and “Cleveland” on them?

They seem to be wearing their old home blue “Indians” alternates (white piping) with the script “I” caps on the road (goes against the nickname at home, city on the road convention).

Did this start last year with the throwbacks being the new home alternate? I always liked the “Cleveland” jerseys- both grey and blue.

[quote comment=”324437″][quote comment=”324434″]There are teams which look good in striped socks[/quote]
link[/quote]

c’mon james…you gotta post the obligatory yaz pic too

[quote comment=”324436″]Not sure if anyone is tracking Cleveland’s unis this year but does anyone know if they’ve gotten rid of the road alternates- the blue with red piping and “Cleveland” on them?

They seem to be wearing their old home blue “Indians” alternates (white piping) with the script “I” caps on the road (goes against the nickname at home, city on the road convention).

Did this start last year with the throwbacks being the new home alternate? I always liked the “Cleveland” jerseys- both grey and blue.[/quote]

Didn’t the blue “Cleveland” road uniforms get taken out of circulation last year, when the team introduced the new throwback-style home jerseys?

I might get banned from HBIC for this, but I just took another look at those Team Canada unis and they are really damn sharp looking.

I don’t know if it’s just the lighting in the arena, but it appears that they went with a crimson/cardinal red rather than the typical scarlet-type color we’re used to seeing on a Canadian uniform. I like that. And I really like the way the maple leaf crest stands out against the solid black. The socks look great, too.

The only problem I can see is that the sleeve patches are overkill. Even with them, the jersey is a hell of a lot better than link.

[quote comment=”324438″][quote comment=”324437″][quote comment=”324434″]There are teams which look good in striped socks[/quote]
link[/quote]

c’mon james…you gotta post the obligatory yaz pic too[/quote]
OK, I’ll oblige. But I really don’t know what link has to do with striped socks.

Or did you mean link?

link…

[quote comment=”324427″]hey matt…

did yer dog just link?

why do you have a cards cap, anyway?[/quote]

When I snapped the original pics, the dog jumped up on the picnic table and grabbed one of the shoes…I then gave chase thus losing my cap.

I actually collect MLB caps.

[quote comment=”324442″]I might get banned from HBIC for this, but I just took another look at those Team Canada unis and they are really damn sharp looking.

I don’t know if it’s just the lighting in the arena, but it appears that they went with a crimson/cardinal red rather than the typical scarlet-type color we’re used to seeing on a Canadian uniform. I like that. And I really like the way the maple leaf crest stands out against the solid black. The socks look great, too.

The only problem I can see is that the sleeve patches are overkill. Even with them, the jersey is a hell of a lot better than link.[/quote]

Canada’s new flag colours are officially, in terms of usage on sports teams: black, red, gray, and white.

Hockey Canada’s colours are red, white, and black, but Hockey Canada had nothing to do with the tournament whatsoever. This was simply BFBS. The only other team that had a red road jersey was Russia. The four countries outside of Canada went with their traditional colours.

And you won’t be banned, JTH. I have never banned anyone, and it surely won’t be over your appreciation of a black uniform. :o)

[quote comment=”324416″]
Surely that’s link.[/quote]

This has always nagged me about the out of town board at Wrigley: the numbers used in the pitcher column are always wrong; there is a #12 displayed for the Yankees but that is for Cody Ransom, a 3B . The side for the relief pitcher shows a #13 but that is for A-Rod, who is obviously still rehabbing in Tampa.

And Fausto Carmona doesn’t wear #2…

[quote comment=”324450″][quote comment=”324416″]
Surely that’s link.[/quote]

This has always nagged me about the out of town board at Wrigley: the numbers used in the pitcher column are always wrong; there is a #12 displayed for the Yankees but that is for Cody Ransom, a 3B . The side for the relief pitcher shows a #13 but that is for A-Rod, who is obviously still rehabbing in Tampa.

And Fausto Carmona doesn’t wear #2…[/quote]

i thought he was referring to the 14 “hits” and no runs

/should have been 14 runs (in the second)

Guys, I acknowledge it’s your site so you do with it what you want.

But, Jesus Maria, can you give it rest with the daily Mets check-in? We get it.

[quote comment=”324452″][quote comment=”324450″][quote comment=”324416″]
Surely that’s link.[/quote]

This has always nagged me about the out of town board at Wrigley: the numbers used in the pitcher column are always wrong; there is a #12 displayed for the Yankees but that is for Cody Ransom, a 3B . The side for the relief pitcher shows a #13 but that is for A-Rod, who is obviously still rehabbing in Tampa.

And Fausto Carmona doesn’t wear #2…[/quote]

i thought he was referring to the 14 “hits” and no runs

/should have been 14 runs (in the second)[/quote]
No, I was referring to the “two touchdowns” the Indians put on the board in the 2nd.

And they haven’t always shown the stupid fake pitcher numbers on the scoreboard. I remember when I was a kid that they would put up the real numbers. I think they switched to the current numbering system about the time the Tribune took over.

I always assumed that it was a ploy to sell more programs, because if you pick one up, there is a cross-reference so you can figure out who’s really pitching.

[quote] I was referring to the “two touchdowns” the Indians put on the board in the 2nd.[/quote]

christ…that’ll teach me to post before looking more closely…duh

how did i not realize the wrigley boards are done by inning (denoted by the handy dandy tic tac toe demarcators to mark 3 inning increments) — at first quick glance i thought looking at a listing R-H-E

/my bad (but hey, at least i knew it was the “14” to which you were referring ;) )

[quote comment=”324368″]the White Sox follow that policy too, I believe[/quote]
Generally, the Sox will wear the same jersey they wore the previous game until they lose while wearing it. Obviously, this only applies to the standard-vs-alternate, as they can’t very well wear their home pinstripes on the road – the black alt is worn with either set. They’ve been doing this for several years now, although I don’t think it’s an official policy.

[quote comment=”324456″]
And they haven’t always shown the stupid fake pitcher numbers on the scoreboard. I remember when I was a kid that they would put up the real numbers. I think they switched to the current numbering system about the time the Tribune took over.

I always assumed that it was a ploy to sell more programs, because if you pick one up, there is a cross-reference so you can figure out who’s really pitching.[/quote]

Interesting. The only part of the board that shows the real numbers is the section that shows the score for the Cubs game, heh.

How do they determine which games are displayed on the board, since the scoreboard cannot fit every game in both leagues?

re: Harry Kalas

Ex-Phil and current ESPNer John Kruk is wearing the HK memorial patch on his suit lapel during Baseball Tonight. Seeing it on civvies threw me for a loop at first, but I suppose it’s not so different from the traditional black armband. I do wish he’d oriented the patch appropriately. It wouldn’t look so cramped if it were moved to the thicker portion of the lapel, and the letters need to be leveled horizontally.

I decided to post this as a passing curiosity, but it actually opens a whole can of worms. Will Kruk wear the patch throughout the season? If so, will the patch be sewn onto a number of jackets, or temporarily applied to each night’s suit? Is the patch actually a patch, or just a sticker? Will ESPN be forced to hire an equipment manager? (Let’s hope so. The more I look at that shoddy, slanted application, the more it bugs me.)

By the way, you can find the Kruk footage at espn.go.com. Look for the “April Surprises/BBTN” video in the Top Stories window.

[quote comment=”324509″]First time poster here, although an avid reader for a couple of years, the Mets thread has compelled me to post. Yep, ditch the black.

From what I read, the black was introduced as part of a focus group study…we all know how the Wilpons are slaves to those studies!

Up until ’77, the Mets jerseys were great, until they switched to those cheesy two-button softball tops. The racing stripes of the 80’s actually didn’t bother me, more so the inclusion of the blue v-neck collar was a bummer.

The return to the almost classical look in ’95 was great, although I noticed the home Mets logo was outlined in white which made it look anemic.

Maybe the Mets should just go back to the 60’s and 70’s style, just make the Mets logo wider instead of worrying about shadowing….heck, maybe they can bring back the 7 button (3 @ the top) front again!?![/quote]

Ooops, my bad…it should be “up until ’78”.

The Pittsburgh Penguins logo shown was actually from an advertising campaign in the mid to late 80’s. I remember the team discussing using that logo prior to them going with the “pigeon” logo.

I’m solidly in the ditch-the-black school. It’s long seemed to me that the designers of the drop-shadow jersey and the two-tone cap focused too much on how the jerseys would look up close (on a store rack, say), and not enough on how they would look on television and from the stands. From anything more than a few feet, the blue NY on the black background with the thin orange outline looks like an indistinct smudge. And although the drop-shadowing on the jersey isn’t as appallingly awful, to my eyes it doesn’t “pop”; it just makes the logo look heavy and, again, indistinct. Surprisingly, for whatever reason, the drop-shadowing actually works okay on the away jersey–I just wish they’d wear it with blue sleeves, blue socks, and blue caps.

I have found the Natinal’s missing ‘O’. It is link